Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Austin Nichols

Austin Nichols

I have submitted to both peer review and Biography peer review, and I think it's time to elevate it. To pre-empt already points raised: No, I cannot add any more to this article with getting into the realms of WP:OR, besides which, there are shorter articles than this one; and No, I cannot acquire a free image of him. I have contacted his agents but no reply, and the fansite doesn't have any images they can give. Besides that, it's a great article! Dev920 15:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support since I took care of some prose problems. I will though take your word that nothing can be added to this article since it feels very short. - Tutmosis 02:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. My prosewriting still sucks, but I'm starting to improve I think. It's not that I don't want to add to the article, it's that I can't find any more information for him (having gone through the first ten pages of his google search and austinnicholsfan.com with a fine tooth comb). Dev920 (Mind voting here?) 07:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I contributed to the peer review and think it meets all the criteria now. Trebor 07:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support, because it is short. But it is nice.--Yannismarou 09:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Qjuad 10:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support, per above. The articles is short but informative.--Palestine48 09:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support but suggest adding a few more pics. Good job! --Aminz 11:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice one, have let myself correct a the and an an here and there. Bit short though, and two or three extra photos (that, I'd say, would not be screenshots from movies or shows) would not hurt (but if you say you tried and came up empty then the matter's closed). --Ouro 14:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Am I allowed to do that under fair use? Dev920 (Please peer review here.) 19:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You mean, whether you can use fair use images to illustrate an article? If they have a good rationale to use them and are not used excessively, yes (I believe), although it's not the best solution. See Ghirla's and follow-up comments at the Angelina Jolie FAC discussion and Wikipedia:Fair use. --Ouro 19:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. The only place that seems best to put a photo without seeming like the place is being cluttered is in the personal section: would this photo, of Austin with Jake Gyllenhaal at the Casanova film premiere, be good? I was thinking this one because it covers two of the personal life paragraphs, friendship with Jake and interest in films. Dev920 (Please peer review here.) 19:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you ask me, although it's a shame his face is not shown clearly, and this kinda reduces the image's value. Please don't rely solely on my judgement in this matter. --Ouro 20:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, OK. Would this one be better? Dev920 (Please peer review here.) 21:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say yes, it would. --Ouro 22:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added it: does it look alright? Dev920 (Please peer review here.) 00:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, not really :) What would you think about moving at least one of the last two images to the right (looks nicer when the images are not bound to one margin but alternate). Also, the right table (with his television roles) overlaps with the references, but I do not know how to fix this (I use Firefox at 1024x768 for your reference). Perhaps if you switched the tables around so that the longer one is on the left would help.

I'd also suggest consulting a copyright status expert on the images (have only now looked at them closely), there seems to be a dispute as to the fair use status of one of them. This might not be acceptable in an FA. --Ouro 07:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hav rearranged the images. The dispute was that the editor concerned felt that a free image could be found and thus I couldn't use AustinNichols.JPG. Hoever, I pointed out on her talkpage that I had tried and failed to acquire an image, and she dropped it. I am now using a different computer and can see your problem with the tables, but I have tried swapping them and that doesn't work. I don't know what to do now. Dev920 (Please peer review here.) 10:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is a great article now. I feel articles like this one, where information on the the subject matter is limited because in this case he`s a young actor who hasnt found his breakout roll yet and hasnt had much media exposure, should be considered for featured article because at this moment in time I doubt you`ll find a better biography of Nichols on the net. I dont think the article could say much more until Nichols does something else.Stevenscollege 00:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support (not like you need it at this point, though) Great to see an FA about a relatively unknown actor. And you avoided the mistake of including unreliable sources like the IMDB and other trivia sites. Kudos! Mad Jack 08:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]