Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Carry On series on screen and stage/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 10:01, 2 August 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]
Carry On series on screen and stage (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
The Carry On series (1958–78) was a long-running, low-budget British sequence of comedy films produced between 1958 and 1992. The series relied largely on innuendo and double entendre, and consisted of 31 films, one television series including three Christmas specials, and three West End and provincial stage plays. Next to the James Bond films, the Carry Ons comprise the largest number of films of any British series and are the second-longest continually-running UK film series (with a fourteen-year hiatus between 1978 and 1992). I have spent the last few weeks compiling this list ably assisted by my glamorous assistant SchroCat, and we believe that it now meets all the relevant criteria for it to be considered a featured list. -- CassiantoTalk 21:30, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This may be beyond the scope of this nomination, but is it possible to have the individual films/tv shows referenced in this list wiki-linked to this page? I checked the first two films and neither linked to this list. If it will become featured, it surely will benefit from the traffic from the individual pages. Mattximus (talk) 00:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]Edit On further inspection, it appears none of the pages link to this list, it's essentially an orphaned article, this needs to be fixed before being promoted. Mattximus (talk) 00:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean listing this article in a "See also" section in each film article? -- CassiantoTalk 07:56, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]- I know what you mean. I'll get onto it now. -- CassiantoTalk 08:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Just about beat you to it Cass! Now done. - SchroCat (talk) 08:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Query - the article states that there were "numerous West End and provincial stage plays", yet only three are listed.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Changed. -- CassiantoTalk 08:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk) |
---|
====Comments from Crisco 1492====
|
- Support on prose. Solid work, guys (sorry took me so long, I thought you were still on the Call Me a Cab, but it seems you've gotten that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:50, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- No, it was me who dragged their heels on this one Crisco. You will now find the itals restored for the scripts and the Call Me a Cab farce now corrected. Thank you for the review and the much appreciated support. -- CassiantoTalk 18:56, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, even later to the party, having been to one of those bits of Britain where they have yet to discover mobile signals! Many thanks for your thoughts here: much appreciated! - SchroCat (talk) 21:32, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-counting comment from Soapfan12 |
---|
Comment
Comment: Archive all online sources with webcitation.org. You can use this page (step-by-step instructions there) to manually archive all online references which will guarantee they remain accessible even if the site goes down. After this has been resolved, I would be happy to support! SoapFan12 11:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support: Great job on meeting every single criteria for FL, espicially on the prose!
SoapFan12 16:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for your support. -- CassiantoTalk 11:27, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Lemonade51 (talk) 12:09, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
Thank you very much for the review Lemonade51. I will spend the day going through each and every reference to check for their accuracy. I must admit that it leaves element of doubt when there are inconsistencies in referencing, and that the others may follow suit. I will post my responses later. -- CassiantoTalk 06:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
- Thanks for your thoughts Lemonade: much appreciated - SchroCat (talk) 12:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – A fine list. Lemonade51 (talk) 16:24, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. I gave the page a light copy-editing earlier this month, but have not contributed anything of substance. I know an unreasonable amount about this gloriously dreadful series, and I think the nominators have boiled the constituent films down very skilfully here. As an overview of the series I don't see how this could be bettered. – Tim riley (talk) 00:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you Tim! -- CassiantoTalk 11:02, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Ditto! All the best - SchroCat (talk) 12:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support although I suggest you change the following: "Production lasted from March to May 1958, and was released in August of that year" - production was not released in August, so you need to add something like "the film" before "was released". In a similar vein, "Rothwell wrote a script called "Carry On Courting" but was re-titled by Rogers to Carry On Loving" needs changing - Rothwell was not re-titled so you need to add in "it" or similar..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:55, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Many thanks Chris: your two suggestions both now implemented. Thanks for your comments and time. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:35, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 18:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.