# Talk:Alvin Kersh

The conceptual history section of this article has no conceptual history. It just talks about the casting and how good of an actor the guy is. Ophois (talk) 19:17, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not finished! --TIAYN (talk) 21:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alvin Kersh/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: JulieSpaulding (talk) 14:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I'm going to be reviewing this article, and I'll base my review off the Good Article criteria.
A good article is:
1. Well-written.
(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; and,
(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.
Reasonably. However, I have these points to make:

In the lead section, the word 'alien' is capitalized. However, when the same word appears in the third paragraph of the 'character arc' section, it is not capitalized. This should be fixed: I would say choose the lower-case version but I don't know if 'Alien' has any special meaning here.
In the second paragraph of 'character arc', the word 'federal' is capitalized. Is this necessary? I'm not actually sure.
I think there might be a bit of tautology in the last paragraph of 'character arc'. The second sentence reads like this: "In the end... series finale..." So, you're basically saying the same thing twice. I would recommend getting rid of "In the end".
The third paragraph of 'conceptual history' is just one great sentence that seems a little long. Maybe you should break it up into two or three sentences?
This sentence: "Salon writer Aaron Kinner when writing a review for the ninth season, noted that he was the first black character since "X" in season four." may need some punctuation before the first comma. I would suggest "Salon writer Aaron Kinner, when writing a review for the ninth season, noted that Kersh was the first black character since "X" in season four."
Everything that is said in the lead section must be said somewhere else in the article. The following isn't mentioned anywhere else: 'he was re-introduced in the season eight opener, "Within"'
There needs to be a timeline to the character arc. A good real-life biography would not be complete without dates, and a good character description would not be complete without at least references to which episode an event occurred in. For example, "When Mulder returned, Kersh refused to assign him to the X-Files, keeping Doggett in that position." When did Mulder return? Which episode?
Numbers under ten should be spelled out in full (6 should read six, etc.). An example I see where this is not followed is "Mulder consults with the FBI 6 years later."
Ampersands should not be used unless you are discussing a name, like Marks & Spencer. "Chris Carter & Frank Spotnitz" should be changed to "Chris Carter and Frank Spotnitz".
I think these two sentences need to be merged into one (taking into account what I said earlier about the first sentence of the pair): "Salon writer Aaron Kinner when writing a review for the ninth season, noted that he was the first black character since "X" in season four. While not positive towards the characters development during the ninth season and the season overall."
I believe that this article does meet the last five criteria (although I'm not too sure about using only one web source that I can verify right now!).
Final decision:

I'm really sorry, but I don't think I can pass an article with these prose problems at the moment. If you get them fixed up soon, drop me a note on my user talk page and I'll swing by to review the article again so you don't have to wait forever at WP:GAN. JulieSpaulding (talk) 14:50, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

When Alvin Kersh was first introduced in the X-Files series, he explained he was a military pilot in the Vietnam War.  Prior to and after this was stated I noticed a United States Air Force Academy sabre display mounted on his wall in his office.  I could see underneath that there was a United States Air Force Academy class shield within the display (I graduated there).  This leads me to believe he was an Air Force pilot and not a Navy pilot.  I couldn't tell what aircraft he displayed on the wall was, Air Force or Navy.  If it was a Navy jet then this was a rift in the story line.  I don't think many USAFA graduates back then went to the Navy.  Don't ask me how I caught this.  I couldn't believe I saw the class shield in the first place.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alvin Kersh/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Eshlare (talk · contribs) 23:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
I will review this soon. Eshlare (talk) 23:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Comments:
Image:
I think a closer crop would look better. Or perhaps this image from the same source. A full body shot doesn't add anything, and doesn't look as tidy, especially since the costume isn't notable. That's just a personal aesthetic view and not a criticism.

I've removed the image for now as I'm not entirely sure it's necessary; I can add a different one if you think an image of some sort is necessary though. GRAPPLE X 23:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Lead:

Mention who portrays him in the first sentence. The image is after all the first thing someone coming to the article will see.
"ad later being promoted to the post of deputy director" -> "and is later promoted to the post of deputy director"
"an antagonist, bureaucratically preventing" -> "an antagonist who bureaucratically prevents"
When you state first appeared in series six and then "returning as a recurring character" does this infer a change in cast status between appearances? You might want to specify "Kersh first appeared as a guest character in several episodes".
I think the second paragraph needs expansion. As an overview, some production information is needed: maybe gloss that the character was introduced because the production team wanted a character to put pressure on others and that they returned because they liked Kersh as an actor.
Flesh out the critical response. The impression I got was that Pickens Jr's performances/presence in the series was more favourably recieved than the use of his character later on.
End with his award nomination. Specify that it was for being part of an ensemble too-the current wording is slightly misleading.
Done. GRAPPLE X 23:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Character Arc

Rename Appearances.
This section needs re-writing and restructuring as it's slightly too in-universe.
Everything needs to be put in order of when it is revealed to the audience, not its in-universe timeline.If an episode reveals something about his childhood/education war experience it should not be mentioned at the start of the section if it was not in the first episode. As it stands the first sentence should be later in the section, as it is not the first information the audience recieves about the character. See Jack Harkness#Television, which is a good example of an Appearances section.
Mention the episode title and year of his first episode.
Link big events for the character to the episodes in which they occurred.
For a character who spans 3+ series of a show, a good structure is one paragraph per series.
To be honest, I would disagree with this approach; the section is intended to be a brief character biography rather than a recap of episode events as they're seen. I can rewrite it to include more real-world reference to events occurring in episodes as opposed to just occurring in a timeline; but I think it would flow poorly if it took asides here and there to explain backstory in the middle of plotline events—the military history stuff is gotten out of the way chronologically so it doesn't distract from what happens in the relatively briefer timeframe of the rest of the section. GRAPPLE X 23:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
RE Appearances: there was a basic outline of what a fictional character outline should look like at Wikipedia:WikiProject Fictional characters/Style guide, which supports that the section should be titled Appearances unless the character is confined to a single book/film. Character biographies are also discouraged in MOSF#The_problem_with_in-universe_perspective. It's particularly noticeable in Star Wars articles like Jabba the Hut and Palpatine where chronologically "earlier" appearances are described later as they were released later. To use the title "character arc" suggests to me a storytelling arc rather than an overview of his narrative role. The problem with the character biography approach is that it assumes that the character was always a military man, when that could have been something the writers thought up years after his first appearance. A biographical article is also impossible for some characters such as "Homer Simpson". The three articles I've linked to are Featured Articles.
From looking at the episode reference for the Navy information you've provided it seems that his Navy background became emphasised after Doggett joined the series. Was it mentioned in his series six appearances? If the Navy information does not seem integral to a specific storyline I  suggest moving it to the conceptual history section, where it would compliment Patrick's comment on the Doggett/Kersh comparison. That way the appearances section maintains narrative order and you don't need to worry about the character "background" disrupting the flow. I'm happy with everything else in the Appearances section now, with the exception of the first two sentences. Everything else looks great too. Eshlare (talk) 00:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, limited internet time and I was putting some priority to an FAC in progress, but I should be able to finish things up here now. I've moved the Navy stuff down to the production section, trimming it down to be an aside after the mention of Patrick's comparison of his character and Kersh. The rest of the section is now in broadcast order, and has had a few inclusions of terms like episode names and season numbers here and there to maintain more of a real-world stance. I would, though, prefer to keep the "Character arc" heading rather than appearances as it would maintain consistency with other character articles in the project (X (The X-Files), Marita Covarrubias, Deep Throat (The X-Files), etc, use this heading and I'm eventually gearing towards a GTC with them so internal consistency would be nice but it's not essential if you do insist on changing it). GRAPPLE X 13:20, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
It look fine. The section name isn't too big an issue compared to the structure of the section. Kurt Hummel and Susan Mayer are examples of articles where the heading is different to conform to their respective wikiprojects. (Although again, the out of-universe chronology is stressed). I'm still not sure if character arc is the best banner title as to me it suggests a consciously plotted arc for the character from the beginning rather than storylines that are subject to other developments within the series, but it's a minor quibble. Eshlare (talk) 14:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Production

Who's Frank Spotnitz?
"When casting" -> "Reflecting on the casting of"
"for this role" is redundant.
Merge paragraphs three and four.
A bit more on the writing/character direction, especially in series eight and nine, would be beneficial (Why did the writers have the character behave in the way he did?), if a source exists. Not essential though.
I'll see if there's anything else I can dig out but I've addressed the first four points here. GRAPPLE X 23:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Reception

Mention who protrayed Scott Blevins.
What year and what series was "Via Negativa" broadcast?
Link Robert Shearman and Lars Pearson.
Refs 18 & 19 are thrity pages apart. I don't have the source text but a more logical approach would seem to be to add a full stop before #18, and introduce the following sentence as a seperate concern of the writers.
Done. GRAPPLE X 23:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
On Hold
Aside from the concerns raised, this article is adequately written and has the required layout, format and structure of an article about an element of fiction. It's on hold for seven days, which I am happy to extend if progress is being made.
Eshlare (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I think I've addressed everything now. Thanks for taking the time to review this one for me. I really do need to get back and review a few articles myself so feel free to bombard me with requests. GRAPPLE X 13:20, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Happy to pass this article, it meets the Manual of Style requirements and is a good example of a well-written article about an element of fiction. It provides a comprehensive enough overview of the subject and is both of sound quality and accessible to those without a detailed knowledge of the series.
Pass  Eshlare (talk) 14:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Alvin Kersh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090502025325/http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/tv/feature/2002/05/17/x_files/index.html to http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/tv/feature/2002/05/17/x_files/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:46, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Alvin Kersh/GA1 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 8 § Alvin Kersh/GA1 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Regards, SONIC678 01:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)