Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Abby (TV series)/archive1

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) 08:01, 22 July 2018 [1].

Abby (TV series)

Nominator(s): Aoba47 (talk) 23:25, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone. The above article is about an American television sitcom created by Nat Bernstein and Michael Katlin, which originally aired for one season on United Paramount Network (UPN) from January 6, 2003, to March 4, 2003. The show revolves around television producer Abigail "Abby" Walker (Sydney Tamiia Poitier) and her relationship with her ex-boyfriend Will Jeffries (Kadeem Hardison). After they break-up in the pilot episode, they agree to live together as friends in their rent controlled San Francisco apartment. The supporting cast includes Randy J. Goodwin, Tangie Ambrose, and Sean O'Bryan. Critics classified Abby as a sex comedy and a romantic comedy. Commentators often criticized its reliance on sexual humor, though Poitier's acting was praised by critics.

This is my sixth FAC nomination for a UPN television show, with the other five being Love, Inc., Eve, Mercy Point, Chains of Love, and All Souls. It is part of my interest in working on short-lived television series and hopefully, it will inspire other users/contributors to work on more obscure subject matters. If anyone is interested, this is what the article looked like before I started working on it. I believe that everything for this article meets the FAC criteria, but I would greatly appreciate any feedback on how to improve it further. Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 23:25, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SarahSV

Comment. Hi Aoba, I've just started reading this. The first thing that jumps out is that there's too much quoting. There are nine quotes in the first two paragraphs of the first section. I would go through it and reserve quoting for wording that's distinctive in some important way. SarahSV ^(talk) 22:12, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comment. I will go through the article either tonight or tomorrow to cut down on the quotes. Aoba47 (talk) 22:57, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looking at one quote, "open book", it isn't the actor who is saying that. That's the writer's summary of the actor's words. Maybe the actor did in fact use those words, but we don't know that from the source. SarahSV ^(talk) 23:10, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed some of the quotes; please let me know if more quotes should be paraphrased. Aoba47 (talk) 00:22, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's better, but there are still a few that aren't needed. Some other issues:

"Max and her 'feisty' sister Joanne 'Jo' Walker": that sounds like Max is a woman. "Feisty" has a sexist ring to it. See "Feisty, flounce and bossy: the words used to put women down", The Guardian.

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"She uses him as a way to make Will jealous, and employs 'aggressively suggestive remarks and sounds as weapons'." It isn't clear what the words in quotes mean. What is an aggressively suggestive sound, and how would it be used as a weapon?

I have actually not watched the series (it is not available online to the best of my knowledge), but my best guess would be that they are referencing the show's use of sexual comedy. I have removed it as I am not entirely sure what is meant by it either on further inspection. Aoba47 (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Abby has difficulty with her chauvinistic boss Roger Tomkins": comma needed after boss if Roger is the only boss. Similarly, comma needed after boyfriend in "Abby breaks up with her boyfriend Will Jeffries" (I've added that one), and in any similar construction. If you leave out the comma, it means she has more than one boss or boyfriend.

Added. I have never actually heard of this rule before. Aoba47 (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"appear in a recurring capacity": I would find another way to write that.

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"there was something special, which we picked up on immediately": I would leave that out. They always say there was something special about the script, actors, director, characters, and they always pick up on it immediately.

True true. I had the same thoughts too. Aoba47 (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"the show's focus on a biracial woman and her dates with white men reflected United Paramount Network (UPN)'s trend of adding white characters to its 'urban-flavored programming'." I think that needs to be explained some more.

Revised. The sentence is just about how the show was part of a trend of the network (UPN) adding more white characters to its shows (which had mostly black casts). Aoba47 (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will add more later. SarahSV ^(talk) 01:32, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help with this review. I believe that I have addressed everything so far. Aoba47 (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A few more issues:

"She is one of the few women working for the show.[4] Even though she works for a sports show": try to rewrite to remove the repetition.

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 02:26, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Max and Abby's sister, Joanne 'Jo' Walker": at first glance that looks as though Joanne is Max's sister too. You could try: "Max and Joanne 'Jo' Walker, Abby's sister, are both supportive of Abby" or "Max is supportive of Abby, as is Joanne etc".

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 02:26, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of sentences with the same subject–verb–object structure. "The executive producers of Abby were Nat Bernstein and Michael Katlin; it was produced by CBS Productions and Katlin/Bernstein Productions.[13][14] Bernstein and Katlin also served as the series' display artists and writers.[5][14] Gilda Stratton and Dava White cast the show.[14] It was filmed in Los Angeles.[14] Leonard R. Garner Jr. was a director ..." Try mixing things up a bit, e.g. "Filmed in Los Angeles, the show was directed by Leonard etc".

Revised, but let me know if further work is required. Aoba47 (talk) 02:26, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's too close to the sources in places, and the quoting needs to be reduced. It sometimes looks as though you're following the sources line by line, and quoting or slightly changing them. For example:

Wikipedia: Discussing the original concept, Katlin said: "We had wanted to have an interracial relationship, but not make the show about an interracial relationship." However, a common question from the pilot's test audience was: "Why aren't you dealing with it?"

Source: The series' creator, Mitchel Katlin, explained the switch in an earlier interview. "We had wanted to have an interracial relationship, but not make the show about an interracial relationship," he said. Katlin added that "the test audience for the original pilot asked, 'Why aren't you dealing with it?

That is strange as it was clearly not my intention. I have revised it, but I believe that both quotes are important to keep. Aoba47 (talk) 02:33, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph starting "UPN promoted the series" is unclear, including:

"Scott D. Pierce of The Deseret News wrote the network was placed a majority of its attention on the sitcom": wrote that ... had placed most of its attention? But even so I'm not sure what it means.
"Poitier was uncertain of the audience's possible response": not clearly meaningful.

I believe the rest of the sentence makes it meaningful; she did not agree with the network's move to have sitcoms/dramas on the same night. Aoba47 (talk) 02:33, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"She explained the network": explained that.

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 02:33, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The series did garner some positive critical comments": but the first example is another negative one.

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Johnson criticized Poitier's performance writing that": needs comma before "writing".

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"David responded positively": I assume that's Davis?

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When adding Google Books links, you can remove everything after the page number. So the link for ref name="Journal1" can be written as https://books.google.com/books?id=Fr4DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA58

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to add "via Google Books" to the citation.

Makes sense. Thank you for the help as I have always been confused about that. Aoba47 (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Terrace (2008), p.1 4", do you mean "pp. 1, 4"? I can see an entry about the show on p. 4 but not on p. 1 or p. 14.

Revised. Apologies for the typo Aoba47 (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The image underneath the infobox is causing problems with white space, because of {{clear}}, when I widen my browser window. Perhaps move her to Production and Hardison to Broadcast history?

I have removed the image of Poitier. It did not add much beyond aesthetics. I never view Wikipedia articles in a large/wide browser so I missed that. I do not believe an image would be necessary in the "Broadcast history" section as it would not really tie into any of the information being presented there. Of course, please let me know if you have a suggestion. A little ironic considering that I first started researching this show due to my interest in the actress. Aoba47 (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SarahSV ^(talk) 01:35, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for your help; apologies for the silly mistakes made in the article >< lol. I believe that I have addressed everything so far. Have a wonderful rest of your day and/or night! Aoba47 (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article does need the image of her, because she's playing the main character. The problem is that the image looks into the text, so it's hard to move it to the left. But I tried it and it's not so bad, because there's a cameraman on the left who is looking into the text, so that saves the image. Try it on preview and see what you think (the original image positions, but left for Poitier and right for Hardison). SarahSV ^(talk) 05:49, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 06:17, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I found the lead briefly confusing—the sentence about O'Byran being Will originally but that changing because of the interracial aspect. Then I realized it was because O'Bryan was white. Should that be added? "The supporting cast includes Randy J. Goodwin, Tangie Ambrose, and Sean O'Bryan. O'Bryan, a white actor, was originally announced to play Will. Executive producers Nat Bernstein and Michael Katlin had intended the series to feature Abby and Will as an interracial couple, but they recast the role of Will after a negative response from test audiences." SarahSV ^(talk) 15:44, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that you addressed this part in your c/e. Aoba47 (talk) 18:17, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm doing some copy editing. Please revert anything you don't like. SarahSV ^(talk) 16:59, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Apologies for not getting to this earlier. Aoba47 (talk) 18:17, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's no rush. I think the biggest problem is the subject–verb–object sentence structure throughout. I've copy-edited to remove some of it. I think you should do some rewriting with that in mind. Also, look out for awkward phrases, such as "Abby is not portrayed as invested in any type of sport". By the way, you said it wasn't available online. I found a few episodes on YouTube, so it might be worth watching those to get a feel for it. Search for Abby Poitier. SarahSV ^(talk) 22:27, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have attempted to revise it further. I do not have as much of an issue with the subject–verb–object sentence structure as I do not want to force a particular sentence structure and have it detract from the content itself. When writing the article, I opted for a more simplistic structure to convey the information. Aoba47 (talk) 23:19, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The writing is currently an obstacle to my supporting promotion, but it probably doesn't need that much work. You just need to introduce better flow and remove awkward sentences. For example: "Following responses from test audiences, the role changed from O'Bryan with Hardison due to their common question ("Why aren't you dealing with it?") in response to the pilot episode's treatment of Will and Abby's interracial relationship." Try to imagine you're describing the show to one reader who has never heard of it, and you need to make everything clear for her. You should also make clear how much the show was criticized. SarahSV ^(talk) 23:52, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can definitely read through the article again to check for flow and awkward sentence construction; however, I would argue that is a separate issue entirely from varying SOV sentence construction. I am also not sure what you mean by this comment (i.e. You should also make clear how much the show was criticized). There is already a sentence in the lead that the show received primarily negative reviews and a paragraph in the "Critical reception" section covering the negative reviews so I am not sure how it could be made clearer? Aoba47 (talk) 00:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This page gives advice about how to vary sentence structure. Regarding criticism, a couple of the sources are very negative indeed, and having watched parts of two episodes, I can see why. But if you believe that what's there is a fair overview of all the sources, that's fine. SarahSV ^(talk) 00:26, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the link; I will look through the article further today and tomorrow. It is difficult as I have been looking at it for so long. If possible, could you identify any particular paragraphs that you feel have the most issues with prose? Every time that I revise, I feel like I am just making it more unnecessarily convoluted. Sorry for all of the messages, and thank you again for all of your help. Aoba47 (talk) 00:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and I'm sorry that it's creating extra work for you. Have a look at that link, which explains why repeating the same sentence structure is a problem, then read through the article again, looking out for it. For example: "Abby was commercially unsuccessful and ranked last on the list of 146 shows tracked by the Nielsen Holdings. It attracted an average of 1.7 million viewers per week. The series was canceled after a nine-episode season was broadcast. The final episode aired on March 4, 2003." SarahSV ^(talk) 00:42, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It helps me with making the article stronger so I appreciate the input. Thank you for clarifying it; for some reason, I was having difficulty. If it is alright with you, I will message you again on this thread when I am done with the edits (probably tomorrow night). Aoba47 (talk) 00:50, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have revised the article with flow and sentence structure in mind. Please let me know if you think that the prose needs further work. I hope you are having a wonderful start to your week! I always enjoy working on these articles about very obscure topics for some reason lol. Aoba47 (talk) 04:52, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47, I hope your improvements will continue. The writing is still list-like in places; see the Production section in particular. Ask yourself whether every bit of information is necessary, and whether it could be presented differently. I'm also wondering about the sources. There are often several sources after what appears to be a simple point. For example, "Episodes were filmed in Los Angeles,[14] with Leonard R. Garner Jr. being one of the directors.[14][15] Are two sources needed to show that Garner was a director? Were there other directors? Also, "with ... being" is not a good construction; see User:Tony1/How to improve your writing and search for "With as an additive link". SarahSV ^(talk) 00:24, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SlimVirgin: I have removed certain unnecessary information from the production section. I believe that it is important to include Leonard R. Garner Jr. (who directed the pilot) as he is notable name that sources have covered. Sources did not discuss any of the other directors so I do not believe that information should be added to the article. I have removed one of the sources; I used two to just support the information present. I also believe that it is important to keep Rick Marotta as he is another notable name attached to the series. I have completed my revisions. If there are still issues with the prose, I do not believe there is much else that I can do at this point; I have revised it to the best of my abilities. Thank you for the review again. Aoba47 (talk) 02:26, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

The lead image, File:AbbyTVSeriesTitleCard.jpg, is a title card with an appropriate tag and non-free rationale. The other two, File:Sydney Tamiia Poitier.jpg and File:Kadeem Hardison 2013.jpg, are appropriately licensed and tagged. SarahSV ^(talk) 15:28, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. Aoba47 (talk) 18:17, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Freikorp

You introduce Buffy the Vampire Slayer as a 'supernatural drama' and Girlfriends as a 'sitcom', yet in the proceeding sentence the show Haunted (TV series) isn't given any introduction. Also consider mentioning why Haunted was replaced.

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 04:35, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Girlfriends (2000 TV series) is wikilinked twice, 'sitcom' is wikilinked three times.

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 04:35, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I found, though happy to support as is. Fantastic work as always. :) 04:12, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the review and support! Aoba47 (talk) 04:35, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Krimuk

Intriguing article! I commend you (once again) for writing about a little-known show with limited literature available on it. I'm happy to lend my support after you address or respond to my few comments/queries:

The lead says that O'Brien was cast in a "supportive role". It's not necessarily incorrect, but "supporting role" is the more preferred word, isn't it?

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the premise and character's section, there's a sudden shift to critical analysis when you say, "Abby's concept and tone received comparisons to the sitcoms Three's Company and Will & Grace. Rob Owen referred to the series as a sex comedy, though other critics felt it was a romantic comedy." Is there a reason why this is here and not in the reception section?

I would argue that they are more neutral critical commentary; none of the sources are praising or panning Abby in comparison to Three's Company and Will & Grace and their descriptions of the show as a sex comedy or a romantic comedy is not necessarily an example of a critical review. I put this information in the "Premise and characters" section as I felt that it would help to explain the overall tone of the series. I can move it to the reception section if you feel that is the best course of action though. Aoba47 (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that makes sense. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:11, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the broadcast section you say that the show was "aired against Frasier, 24, The Guardian, and Smallville during a "competitive" time". It might not be immediately apparent what "competitive" refers to. Is there any way you could elaborate on this just a little? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:52, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It means that the show aired at the same time as popular and already established programs, which would lower the chances of people turning away from them in favor of something new. I have removed the sentence altogether though as it is quite trivial and not entirely necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't think that it was trivial. I just thought that a brief explanation that it was up against these established shows would have been better. Anyway, I'll leave this to your discretion. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:11, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added it back. Aoba47 (talk) 09:16, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk2.0: Thank you for your comments and your kind words! I believe that I have addressed everything. I enjoy working on these very obscure shows for some reason. I hope that you are having a wonderful week so far! Aoba47 (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Good job, as usual. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:11, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 09:16, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Damian Vo

Support Looks good to me. Damian Vo (talk) 08:49, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 18:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Argento Surfer

"Abby follows its lead character Abigail "Abby" Walker" - this is redundant. It won't follow a supporting character.

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"overshares details about her love life with Max Ellis" - to avoid ambiguity here, I suggest "overshares details about her love life with her best friend, Max Ellis (Randy J. Goodwin), who is also the program's anchorman. On my first read, I thought her love life was with Max, not the sharing.

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did Abby and Will break up because of Will's selfishness? If so, I think it should be more clear in the prose. If not (or if you're not sure), then it's fine as is.

Unfortunately, the sources do not explicit state why Abby broke up with Will. Aoba47 (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Roger gives Abby tickets to a Kenny Lattimore concert, but she discovers that he has a hidden agenda." This is the only episode summary that plays coy. Do we know what the agenda is? I'm guessing Will has tickets for seats next to Abby...

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's all from me for now. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:35, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review! Aoba47 (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to support the prose. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:08, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I greatly appreciate your help. Aoba47 (talk) 20:12, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

Good work with the article. Doing the source review. All the urls seem to be linked, archived and reliable based on the work and checking them. However, "Book sources" has no links. Is it because the publisher of the books are not well known. Remember to ping me in the reply.Tintor2 (talk) 15:33, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tintor2: Thank you for the review. I have linked the publishers for the book sources. Aoba47 (talk) 15:47, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Passes the review.Tintor2 (talk) 15:56, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for a status update

@Ian Rose:, @Laser brain:, and @Sarastro1: Could I have a status update for this as I believe that it is ready for promotion? Thank you in advance, and have a great rest of your day! Aoba47 (talk) 16:26, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support from theJoebro64

(edit conflict) The only thing I noticed from a thorough read was that the first "Abby" in the "Critical response" section is not italicized. Other than that, this article is very polished, well-sourced, and well-written. Support. JOE BRO 64 16:27, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comment and the support. I have fixed the title. I am not sure how I missed that one lol. Have a great rest of your day. Aoba47 (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Paparazzzi

they gave the role instead to Hardison and cast O'Bryan in a supporting role, along... repetition

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 23:00, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's the only thing I found; overall, I think this is ready for promotion, so I support this nomination. Congratulations, @Aoba47:. Regards, --Paparazzzi (talk) 22:38, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the support! Aoba47 (talk) 23:00, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 08:01, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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