Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Terms of Endearment (The X-Files)/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 02:33, 16 November 2012 [1].

Terms of Endearment (The X-Files)[edit]

Nominator(s): Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:57, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Terms of Endearment" is a later series episode of the X-Files, featuring a guest appearance by a cult b-movie actor. Hopefully another article in a long series of featured material from the X-Files wikiproject, I believe the article meets the criteria for an FA. The article is a current GA, has been image reviewed, was promoted to an A-Class article, underwent a peer review and has been under seen by about a dozen editors now and has been copy-edited. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:57, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Edits and improvements look really good!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 05:38, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support on all criteria, per the numerous copy-edits made to it. TBr and ley 15:40, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: While I appreciate that this article has been peer reviewed and had an A-Class review, I'm a little concerned by the lack of comment given to this article for the two supports. To be fair, Gen. Quon commented at the A-Class review (a link to this would be nice), but two supports with no other comments seems cursory. I've noticed this on a couple of X-Files articles at FAC, and I think a little more is needed to be honest. This is not to detract from the articles, which are usually of a high standard, nor to criticise the nominators. But I think the articles deserve better; it is the fussy little comments that make them as good as possible and add the final polish. Just from looking at the lead of this one, I spotted several such issues. Nothing major, but things that should really have been picked up. Having said all that, I think this is a pretty decent article which is just about there. Here are my fussy little comments, and I look forward to supporting. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, nitpicking is welcomed by me if it helps to improve the article. This is an FA after all. I only wish that every editor has such an enthusiasm for getting into the dirt of an article. Thank you for the time. For reference, the A-class nomination can be found in the talk page and both current supporters have copy-edited the article beforehand. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sarastro1, if your talking about me, I actually did comment on all of the articles first featured article candidate. So, thank you. TBr and ley 23:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

The 2nd, 3rd and 4th sentences of the lead all begin "The episode…" Some more variety needed, I think.

Changed second occurrence to "it", "the episode..." is now only used twice, non-consecutively, same amount as the title of the episode itself. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The episode received mixed to positive reviews from critics; while the performance given by guest actor Bruce Campbell attracted positive comments, the episode's plot was criticized for various reasons.": Long sentence. I would suggest a new sentence after "critics" rather than a semi-colon. Also, we have two "episodes" in the sentence, and "critics…criticized".

Split up and rephrased. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The episode received mixed to positive reviews from critics": And still on that sentence, "mixed to positive reviews" sounds like a cop-out. Mixed to positive basically means mixed, unless you are making your own judgement on the overall picture given by the reviews.

Changed to mixed. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Mulder is a believer in the paranormal, while the skeptical Scully has been assigned to debunk his work.": Nit-picky, but I'm not convinced that "while" is the best conjunction to use here as it suggests "at the same time" (which may be correct, but is lacking a little something) or "contrast". I'm not quite convinced that either of these works comfortably, but this is just my opinion and you may freely dismiss this one!

"an unborn child is abducted from the mother's womb": Maybe "its mother's womb" or "a mother's womb".

Changed to the former. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"After the FBI dismisses the case as irrelevant to the X-Files, Mulder and Scully steal the case and investigate the creature. While looking into the case": Case … case … case.

Valid point, changed to synonyms such as "assignment" and "report". Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Amann was inspired to write a story that was an inversion of the 1968 film Rosemary's Baby.": Maybe just "Amann wrote a story…"

Done. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Many of the special effects used in the episode were created in a simplistic manner not requiring elaborate computer-generated effects.": Perhaps "Many of the episode's special effects were created without elaborate computer-generated effects".

Done. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The episode has attracted commentary on its unique representation of its antagonist": Not quite sure what this means.

"Attracted commentary" does not really say much, and we have "its … its". Maybe "Critics have commented/complemented/discussed the episode's unique representation of its antagonist"?

"has been noted": Similarly, a bit bland.

Changed the whole line to "Critics have complimented the episode's unique representation of its antagonist, who has been classified as a sympathetic villain." Better wording? More direct and distinct IMO. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

"and his pregnant wife, Laura,": Do we need commas here at all?
"While the police, who believe that the case may be an illegal abortion, are investigating, they find the remains of the baby in the garden furnace.": Is "they" the police? Also, some redundancy. Perhaps "The police, who suspect an illegal abortion, find the remains of the baby in the garden furnace.

Both done. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Betsy has a similar dream, except she recognizes the dream-demon as her husband." Surely Weinsider, not Betsy's (unnamed?) husband? Actually, reading on, I'm lost as to who Weinsider is married to. The first part names Laura as his wife, the second part names Betsy.

The first line of the plot section states "Wayne Weinsider and his pregnant wife Laura". After Laura goes to jail, Weinsider has an affair with Betsy. Betsy and him were not married however, so I just changed it to "recognizes the dream-demon as Weinsider" to clarify. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"They have a short conversation before he is shot by the sheriff.": Maybe "After a short conversation, he is shot by the sheriff", but where has the sheriff come from?

Clarified. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"After investigating what it was Weinsider was digging for, Mulder and Scully discover the remains of normal human babies in Betsy's yard.": Perhaps "Mulder and Scully discover remains of normal human babies in Betsy's yard where Weinsider was digging."

Changed. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Production

"who gave him the green-light to write the rest of the episode": Green-light is a little jargony perhaps; what about "commissioned"?

Changed. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"This draft also called for the devil to unsuccessfully seek a human baby, leading to the murder of his wife.": I don't quite follow how these two events are connected. And I really hate split infinitives ("to unsuccessfully follow") although I know some people are fine with them, and they are arguably OK to use.

Clarified and re-worded to "his draft also called for the devil to seek a human baby, resulting in the sacrifice of his wife". I think its easier to see how the two things are now connected. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"During the filming of "Terms of Endearment", a cast member had to withdraw mid-production for religious reasons when the mother of the baby who was to be used withdrew her child from the cast during the final run-through of the "cursed-birth" scene.": Horribly long sentence which needs splitting to make it easier to follow. Maybe split after "religious reasons".

Simple enough, done. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'Despite her being a fan of the show, as a devout Catholic she did not want to allow her child to represent a demon because it conflicted with her faith.": Maybe just "Although a fan of the show…". And I'm unaware of anything in Catholicism about not representing demons, so maybe this could be rephrased. Maybe something along the lines of her being uncomfortable owing to her faith?

Done. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"pranking the crew members with "farting contests"": Do we really need to know in this much detail what the pranks were? In fact, I would cut the prank part altogether as unencyclopedic, but feel free to disagree on that one.

Good point; removed "farting contests", (although I was just going with what the reference said, weirdly enough) but left the more general information. It adds detail to Campbell's comment and offers a view of what went on in the set, no matter how immature. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On my browser, the filming sub-heading is shoved out of place by the Duchovny photo.

Fixed (on my browser at least). Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"which had been downgraded from a BMW Z3 in the rewrite process. ": Is this relevant?

Removed. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Several of the special effects used in the episode were created in a "low-stress" manner that did not rely wholly on special effects.": This does not quite make sense, as it effectively says that the special effects did not require special effects!

Just changed to CGI. "Computer-generated effects" is already used in the lead and otherwise there would be two instances of "effects" in the sentence. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"set a distance away from a fire-proof bed": Are the qualities of the bed relevant?

Adds detail about the dream sequence. It was the most intricate effect of the episode featured during one of the most notable scenes, so I would presume so personally. There are four sentences dedicated to the effect, plus the lead image. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Themes

"The episode has been described as an inversion of the 1968 horror film Rosemary's Baby": Described by who?

Donearoo. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"flipping the general way that villains are often portrayed in the genre.": I think we need a better word than flipping, and I think we could lose "general" from the sentence.

Removed general, changed "flipping" to "subverted" (since it has to do with a horror trope). Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Broadcast and reception

"Years following the episode's original broadcast…": Does this not need to begin "In the…"?
"Cinefantastique later named a scene from "Terms of Endearment" as the ninth scariest moment in The X-Files.": I think it's worth saying which scene this was.
"Although a positive impression left by Campbell, the character was later portrayed by actor Robert Patrick.": I don't think the two parts of this sentence are connected. Maybe cut everything before "the character was…".

All done. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Impact

Maybe make it clear that the photograph of Robert Patrick shows him, and not Campbell, as both are mentioned in the caption but it is not indicated who the photographs portrays. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have altered the article as per your comments. If there are additional things that need to be changed in your view, simply let me know and I'll continue to apply any additional fixes. Bruce Campbell (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More comments: I've done some copyediting, but please feel free to revert anything I mess up or which you aren't happy with. I think we're nearly there. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:32, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The lead states that Mulder and Scully steal the case, the main body states that (only) Mulder "salvages the case". Which is correct?

Mulder salvages the case, but both him and Scully investigate it. Would something like "After the FBI dismisses the assignment as irrelevant to the X-Files, Mulder steals the case and investigates the creature with Scully." be better or it is too needlessly wordy? Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That phrasing seems fine, my question was more a case of: did he/they literally 'steal the case, as in the lead, or just take it after someone else had discarded it. The two accounts seem to contradict each other slightly. From what you say here, maybe change "steal" in the lead. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:00, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The husband quickly confesses to destroying the evidence after he found his wife had aborted the child in a trance-like state.": Not too sure here, a bit wordy. A little ambiguous about who is in a trance-like state; did he confess after finding his wife, or destroy evidence after finding his wife. Needs a little work.

The wife aborts the child while in a trance (supported bellow with "what Laura Weinsider was to have said while "in a trance""). Changed to be clearer. Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the plot section, would names work better than repeatedly using "the husband" or "the wife"?
"Mulder deduces that this wife...": Some confusion over wives again?
"recognize her husband as a demon in her dream" and "to frame her demon husband": More husband/wife confusion?

Changed where appropriate; reads clearer again (this wife to Betsy, his wife to Laura, etc). Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"This draft also called for the devil to seek a human baby, resulting in the sacrifice of his wife.": Whose wife?

It was just a draft, I presume characters didn't have names at that point. Considering why he's called "the devil" and not Wayne at that point, it wasn't established by the writer at that current point. Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"was composed by Mark Snow": If memory serves, he was the regular composer. Worth a mention?

Added.

"The quote "Zazas, zazas, nasatanada zazas"—supposedly what Laura Weinsider was to have said while "in a trance"—": Not quite clear. Did she say it or not? And maybe no need for "supposedly"

She did say it, the "supposedly" doesn't refer to whether or not she actually said it, but that "Zazas, zazas, nasatanada zazas" is "supposedly" what she said. Since incoherent mumbling all kinda sounds the same unless its a reference to something. Removed "supposedly". Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In which case, maybe just switch to "what Laura Weinsider said while "in a trance"." Sarastro1 (talk) 22:00, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do we need to state in two separate sentences that the production and filming took place in California?
"noting that it undermines the character's degree from Oxford in psychology.": Not sure that the line can undermine the degree; maybe something along the lines of undermining established continuity within the series that Mulder had a degree, etc.

Both simple enough suggestions, applied I believe. Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article had too many instances of "episode". I've reworded quite a lot, but check for others. Also watch out for instances of close repetition of the same word, as I've changed a few things there too. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:32, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Changed some around, with "installment", "entry", etc where appropriate, however "episode" is the most clear word in most of the instances. I removed 16 instances of the word nontheless, which I think is much more reasonable. Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, btw, for your copy-editing, I just moved a thing or two around plus applied responses to your changes and otherwise I think it all works. I assume it reads just as fine to someone who has never seen the show. Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Provisional support~~: The last changes look fine, although don't go overboard with synonyms for "episode": some of them may be a bit much. I think this pretty much meets the criteria; certainly in terms of comprehensiveness and clarity. And judging by previous reviews, it is fine from the viewpoint of subject matter. My one remaining hesitancy is regarding prose. I think it's just about OK now, but it may stand further tightening in places. ~~I would feel happier if someone else had a look at it as well before I switch to full support.~~ Sarastro1 (talk) 21:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I've gone through it myself, tweaking the prose here and there. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 16:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say that's very appreciated! Thank you for taking the time. Bruce Campbell (talk) 18:38, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support: OK, happy to switch to full support now. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment: CGI and Rob Bowman are both DAB links. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:28, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed at the speed of light. Bruce Campbell (talk) 04:42, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I supported this one last time on the strength of its scope and presentation (MOS, neutrality etc etc), and now that the prose has been improved to match it I see no reason to support again. GRAPPLE X 18:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image check -- appear unproblematic. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:24, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.