Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mercy Point/archive1

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 via FACBot (talk) 09:58, 9 August 2017 [1].

Mercy Point

Nominator(s):
Aoba47 (talk) 23:13, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Hello everyone. This is an article about an American

United Paramount Network (UPN) from October 6, 1998, to July 15, 1999. With an ensemble cast led by: Joe Morton, Maria del Mar, Alexandra Wilson, Brian McNamara, Salli Richardson, Julia Pennington, Gay Thomas, Jordan Lund, and Joe Spano
, the series takes place in a 23rd-century hospital space station located in deep space and revolves around its doctors and nurses. Initially focused on ethical and medical cases, the storylines gradually shifted toward focusing on the characters' personal relationships to better fit UPN's primarily teen demographic.

This is my third nomination of an article on a UPN series, following the successful promotions of

Aoba47 (talk) 23:13, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Resolved comments by Mymis
Comments by Mymis
  • "Running time: 60 minutes" -> I'm sure it's around 42 minutes?
  • Revised.
    Aoba47 (talk) 20:33, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • You mention the names of the production companies twice within in intro.
Just remove "The series was produced by Mandalay Television and Columbia TriStar Television". You state it again in the next paragraph anyway ("deal between Mandalay Television and Columbia TriStar Television"). Mymis (talk) 20:41, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Makes sense to me; it has been removed.
    Aoba47 (talk) 20:44, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Not sure if UPN template is necessary at the bottom of the article.
  • "Callaway has stated that he had the potential..." -> "has" is redundant.

Mymis (talk) 20:26, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Following its decision to expand its..." -> Two "its" is bit repetitive. Maybe replace first one with "a" or "the" (not sure which one is grammatically correct).
  • "Dan Snierson reported that Mercy Point faced tough" -> maybe "noted" instead of "reported".
  • "While Mercy Point was envisioned as a companion to Star Trek: Voyager.." -> You mention this fact few times throughout the article. But who exactly envisioned it? The network? The creator?
  • When you talk about Joal Ryan's opinion, you could include a quote.

Mymis (talk) 19:10, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for your comments; I believe that I have addressed all of them.
    Aoba47 (talk) 19:37, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • In the "Concept and development" section, it is still unclear who imagined it, especially when you have a quote (a "companion piece"). Whose quote is that?
  • "part of a $3 million deal" -> The number should be spelled out, to be consistent with the rest of the article.
  • "while casting each role. During the casting process, he focused" -> "Casting" sounds a bit repetitive. Maybe "During the proces, ..."
  • "episodes of the series, which is considered a "half-season's worth"." -> I'd say "was" instead of "is".
  • "appeared in the 1998–1999 television season" -> Maybe link "1998–1999 television season"?

Mymis (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you!
    Aoba47 (talk) 15:55, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Comments from Argento Surfer

  • I don't think the colon is necessary before the cast listing in the lead.
  • The lead says the show was put on hiatus after two episodes, but the air dates in the episode table show the hiatus starting after the third episode. The broadcast history section seems to support it being third. I think the hiatus was announced after two, but took effect after three. For clarity, I think the lead should be changed to say "three", and first part of the second paragraph in Broadcast history be rewritten to clarify the order of events.
  • Is the show available through Netflix or other streaming services? That might be useful to include with the bit about it not being on DVD or Bluray.
  • Thank you for your edits; they have improved the article a great deal. I have also addressed all of your comments above. Thank you again for your help.
    Aoba47 (talk) 19:24, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Thanks for the quick replies. I can support this. Argento Surfer (talk) 19:27, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you!
    Aoba47 (talk) 19:29, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Comments by Moisejp

Hi Aoba. Just the lead so far. I'll get to the rest soon.

  • "three million dollar deal": seems similar to some of the examples requiring hyphens in MOS:HYPHEN but I'm not confident.
  • "Director Joe Napolitano had praised the show for its use of a complete set to allow for more intricate directing." I haven't gotten as far as the main body of the article yet, but is "had praised" correct? "Has praised" seems much more likely.
  • "The show suffered from low viewership, with an average of two million viewers." If it can't be helped, it can't be helped, but it sounds a bit repetitive having "viewership" and "viewers" in such close proximity. Is there possibly a way to reword the sentence to avoid the repetition?

Hi Aoba. I will finish this review really soon, hopefully this weekend. Thanks for your patience. Moisejp (talk) 06:15, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for your update, and no worries. Take as much time as you need.
    Aoba47 (talk) 15:46, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Lead:

  • I have attempted to revise the sentence to be more clear.
    Aoba47 (talk) 13:54, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Makes sense to me; I have revised it.
    Aoba47 (talk) 13:54, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Casting and filming

  • "Lund had to sit through several hours of prosthetic makeup to get into character." I think it's the application of the makeup, not the makeup itself, that he had to sit through several hours of? Also, I believe "get into character" is usually used slightly differently than how I interpret it here. Usually it means, adopts the mannerisms, etc. of the character. But I'm not confident it couldn't refer to the appearance too—I'm just not used to seeing it used that way. How about something like "The application of Lund's prosthetic makeup required several hours each day that he was filmed."
Revised.
Aoba47 (talk) 15:05, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Cancellation and unproduced episodes

  • Removed reported that.
    Aoba47 (talk) 15:05, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

I originally thought it was important to mention how Callaway changed his views on the show after it was cancelled, and viewed it more as a limited-run series than a regular show. However, I do agree it does not seem as relevant anymore so I have deleted it.

Aoba47 (talk) 13:11, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

  • It should be Grote so I have revised it.
    Aoba47 (talk) 13:11, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Critical response

  • Is the first paragraph supposed to be all about appraisal the show got at the time of its debut (no later appraisal)? If so, I strongly suggest "Mercy Point received" instead of "Mercy Point has received". But if it's not supposed to be only at the time of its debut then "following its debut" is confusing and should be removed.
  • "David Bianculli of The New York Daily News praised Mercy Point as an improvement over "UPN's watch-me-please gimmick shows", commending its focus on its characters and medical cases while "relegating the futuristic elements to the background"." Here "commending" modifies Bianculli but "relegating" is meant to modify Mercy Point. The reader probably expects the _ing/_ing to be a parallel structure modifying the same subject, but it doesn't, which is confusing.
  • Changed to "his list".
    Aoba47 (talk) 13:11, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • "he advised the audience to "change this bedpan fast". The series was heavily panned" The repetition in close proximity of "pan" / "panned" jumps out at the ear. Maybe rearrange the sentences so that these two don't direct follow each other?

Those are all of my comments. Thanks. Moisejp (talk) 05:24, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Epicgenius

I don't see any issues, grammatically or otherwise, since these were all already fixed. I support this nomination. epicgenius (talk) 02:18, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you!
    Aoba47 (talk) 03:12, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Image review from Adityavagarwal

  • There are two images in the article. Appropriately placed, have description template well present, and no issues anywhere. Good to go; it is a pass!
  • Thank you. The title card for the series is very clever, and the photograph of Steve Johnson is actually a really good picture.
    Aoba47 (talk) 15:23, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Support from Freikorp

I previously commented on the FAC for Love Inc. I must say I really admire the amount of effort you put into articles on unpopular TV shows. Seriously. I took a film I was indifferent about to GA once, mainly because it was terribly written and since the film was unpopular I figured nobody else would ever improve it, but that was about as far as I wanted to go with it. It's admirable that you've been willing to put this much effort into a series that you couldn't actually watch. I find it hard enough to bring things I'm passionate about to FAC level. While I do support this, I do have a couple optional things I'd like to point out.

  • "According to Napolitano, Lund had to...", this isn't a controversial or outrageous statement, so personally I wouldn't feel the need to attribute it to anyone, but up to you.
  • Makes sense; I think that I added the attribution just in case, but I agree that it is not necessary so I have removed it.
    Aoba47 (talk) 14:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • "It was never released on DVD or Blu-ray" - I know it's kind of impossible to find a source that it was never released in any format, but as this statement only clarifies the formats it wasn't released in, it raises the question of where one can view it today. From your FAC intro I gather it can't be viewed anywhere; it's a shame this probably can't be sourced. Personally I'd add the information that it can't be viewed today
    into the prose anyway
    but it might be a smarter idea to wait until the FAC is closed to do that :).
  • What is "advance containment"? Can you find an appropriate wikilink?

Best wishes.

talk) 13:34, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Comments by 1989

  • I would replace the word disappointing with poor in the lead and the Production section.
  • Would it be better to have the state of art hospital part replace facility on the 2nd sentence, and facility replace the state of art hospital on the fourth sentence? (reverse the phrases)
  • Did you intend to have it as "state-of-the-art hospital" instead of "state-of-the-art" hospital? (italics are used for clarification)
  • "In their book Science Fiction Television Series, 1990–2004, Frank Garcia and Mark Phillips" I would reverse their with the author's.
  • "Its setting and filming style" How about "The series' setting and filming style"? I thought it was talking about the book for a moment.
  • "extremely efficient and attractive,"
  • "circular hub with offices and rooms radiating outward,"
  • "Lund had to sit through several hours of prosthetic makeup to get into his characters." Character?
  • "Napolitano said that he found this to a challenge to the production schedule" You're missing a word.
  • "work necessary for the character depending on the scene" What character?
  • into the "Sahartic Divide" Is the phrase quoted a place or an episode title? If a place, replace into with to.
  • "Dru Breslaur joins the hospital as a new resident and is forced to confront her past with her older sister Haylen Breslauer, and a romance with C. J. Jurado." and a romance?
  • "UPN ordered six original series" How about brought up instead of ordered?
  • "television shows picked up UPN" You're missing a word.
  • "competition from other shows in the same time slot, Just Shoot Me!, Spin City, and Felicity." You're missing a word.
  • "The series carried a TV-Y parental rating, meaning that it was judged as "unsuitable for young children"." Are you correct about that? TV-Y means it's suitable for all ages. If your right, the sentence sounds weird.
  • "UPN's watch-me-please gimmick shows,"
  • "The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's" You mean The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's?

When you address my concerns, I'll check back. -- 1989 19:42, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Paparazzzi

  • "the series was promoted as 'ER in space'..." and "'ER'-in-space mess..." Shouldn't "ER" be in italics?
I actually did not find any other mistake here. Since it is only a comment, I Support this nomination. If it's possible, could you look at my FAC? Thanks, and have a nice day.--Paparazzzi (talk) 07:02, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for your comment. I have addressed it and made the appropriate revisions in the article. I would be more than happy to help with your FAC, and will most likely put comments up this weekend when I have the time to really read through the article thoroughly. I hope that is okay with you. Have a great rest of your day!
    Aoba47 (talk) 14:50, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Source review

Every single url is archived and the sources appear to be reliable. Maybe "Teevee.org" could be retitled simply "Teevee" but that's nitpicking. As a resut I think this article passes its source review. Good luck.Tintor2 (talk) 23:41, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for the source review. I have changed Teevee.org to Teevee as requested. Have a wonderful rest of your day.
    Aoba47 (talk) 01:12, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Mercy_Point/archive1&oldid=794776366"