Trapped in the Closet (South Park) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 15, 2008.
Article milestones Date Process Result October 16, 2006 Good article nominee Listed October 21, 2006 Peer review Reviewed March 26, 2007 Peer review Reviewed October 23, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted March 15, 2008 Today's featured article Main Page February 15, 2024 Featured article review Demoted Current status: Former featured article

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Animation: American / Television / Computer / South Park Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Animated television work group (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Computer animation work group. This article is supported by the South Park task force (assessed as High-importance). More information: /  This article has been selected for use on the Animation portal. This article has been selected for use on the Television portal. This article has been selected for use on the Comedy portal. California: Los Angeles Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force. Comedy Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion: New religious movements Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as Mid-importance). Scientology Low‑importance This article is supported by WikiProject Scientology, a collaborative effort to help develop and improve Wikipedia's coverage of Scientology. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on Scientology-related topics. See WikiProject Scientology and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.ScientologyWikipedia:WikiProject ScientologyTemplate:WikiProject ScientologyScientology Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Television: Episode coverage Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as High-importance). United States: Animation / Television / Colorado Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Animation - American animation work group. This article is supported by American television task force. This article is supported by WikiProject Colorado, our collaboration to create, improve, and update Wikipedia articles about the U.S. State of Colorado. To comment about this article, select the Add topic tab above. For questions about, or to make suggestions for Colorado articles, go to our project's talk page. We invite you to join us!

As part of the ongoing drive to reevaluate old FAs according to modern norms, I took at look at this article, and have some comments on issues I think stand in the way of it being a featured-quality article:

• The article seems very unbalanced in terms of what it covers. I get that the controversy around scientology was a big part of the discussion around the episode, but the "controversy" section both seems like a bad place to cover a lot of it (it's weird Hayes' departure gets mentioned after the discussion in production about why they chose to do the episode and its direct relevance) and also feels like it really could use a pass for summary style (some of the information is plain trivia, like "hey they referenced this in a cover illustration years after the fact" at the end. Why does a joke at Tom Cruise's sexuality merit a four-sentence quote from Entertainment Weekly with no followup? etc.) From an organization perspective, a lot of the stuff is better put in development, release, etc, instead of a "controversy" section.
• The reception section seems pretty spare. There's very little actual critical reception from publications at the time, the analysis section doesn't actually say much at present, and the legacy section is mostly just a rebranded "in popular culture" trivia section. From a quick search of academic databases and Google Books, there's newer scholarship that should be reflected in the article (e.g., ; the article at present basically doesn't cover anything in the last decade-plus.
• File:South Park Xenu.jpg needs a better fair use rationale, and I don't think there's much justification for File:Cmonjews.jpg and especially File:South Park Scientology grafitti.jpg; they're not the subject of critical commentary and they're mostly illustrative.

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 19:07, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@David Fuchs: I see that the article has not had significant edits since you posted this review above. Do you still agree with the assessment above, and if so would you be willing to nominate this to WP:FAR? Z1720 (talk) 23:48, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'll probably get to it early next year. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 13:14, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]