Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Doctor Who (series 4)/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates | Doctor Who (series 4)
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 not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:01, 11 September 2008 [1].

Doctor Who (series 4)

edit

After two false starts to the FLC, I am now confident enough that it passes the featured list criteria. I am deciding to submit as a list as I feel it is more of a list than an article; it is more evocative of Lost (season 4) (an influence) than Smallville (season 1). Although the Christmas special has not yet been named, I do not think this should cause opposition: I employ a two-out-of-three rule when creating episode pages and episode sections on lists: if a television episode has two sourced aspects of: a title, an airdate, and a plot summary; I will include it. Removal would compromise the comprehensiveness of the article. See List of Desperate Housewives episodes#Season 5: 2008–2009 for a comparison with a featured list. The list itself needs no changes beyond small improvement, apart from updating the title when announced and including the AI and viewing figures when release. Sceptre (talk) 18:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Otherwise sources look okay. Links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator has been blocked indefinitely. Don't know whether it's worth withdrawing this for the time being. D.M.N. (talk) 16:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sceptre asked if I would be willing to address any concerns, so we can keep it open for the time being. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 17:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to keep the nomination live as long as comments are addressed in a timely fashion. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will also help address concerns. –thedemonhog talk • edits 05:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments
    • Another "Christmas Special" in the infobox.
    • No. of episodes in the infobox is 15 + 2 supplemental, so 17 total. The lead does not back this up.
    • No source information for the fair use image.
    • "(Blocks 2, 5 and 7)" - why is Block a proper noun?
    • Is series capitalised or not? Be consistent.
    • Order citations numerically unless there's a good reason not to.
    • Episode(s) and Writer(s) should be used as col headings because a lot of the rows have only one entry.
    • premièred is now an English word without the accent grave. It's used again in the last story synopsis.
    • "announced that in a partnership with Carlton Screen Advertising a " commas missing after "that" and "Advertising".
    • "on TV" - television and, presumably, "British television"?
    • Avoid overlinking the episode names.
    • Merge first two paras of "Guest stars" - single sentence paras should be avoided.
    • "Doctor Who's format of stand-alone episodes allows a greater flexibility in story telling. " says who? is this your opinion?
    • "Like the previous three series" then "Unlike the previous three series" - reads awkwardly to me.
    • What is PC in the table? You just called it Code in the previous table.
    • Why is Doctor relinked in story 194's synopsis?
    • " CAL (Eve Newton) - a computer-linked child "- why not just a comma here instead of a hyphen?
    • Chino links to a disambiguation page.
    • " works with Doctor" - the Doctor?
    • " It will feature a new mutant Cyberman called Cybershade[44] on Earth in Victorian England[45][46][47][48] " - missing punctuation and do you need to link England? And do you really need four citations for this?
    • Doctor Who Prom is linked twice in quick succession. Avoid.
    • " the former in Block 4; the latter in Block 10." - this information is already in the first table. And why is Block proper noun once again?
    • Why didn't the other supplemental episode have a production code?
    • Why all the bold in the references?
    • ref 49 needs fixing.
    • Check all references use en-dash, not hyphen for page, date ranges etc. (e.g. ref 20, ref 50 etc).
  • The Rambling Man (talk) 10:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I fixed most of the above issues, minus some points; the bold refs are caused by the {{cite journal}} template, so cannot be fixed; Hyphens are acceptable practice; and there is no production code for "Music of the Spheres" because none has been published. — Edokter • Talk • 13:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Should indicate it's a television series in the opening sentence, not just a series
  • "a regular series of thirteen episodes was aired"
  • Could it say which channel the series aired on?
  • Can we attempt to counter the Systemic bias, and provide a worldwide view, by stating which networks the series appeared on in other countries, especially those such as US, Canada, Aus and NZ?
  • "Doctor Who had been was recommissioned"
  • "The tenth production block — consisting of the 2008 Christmas special and the BBC Proms "cutaway" scene "Music of the Spheres" — completed recording on 3 May." Per WP:DASH, em-dashes shouldn't be spaced, but spaced en-dashes can be used instead.
  • The table for the production block could be removed, with an extra "Block" column added to the main episode table. What's the point in repeating five columns' worth of information?
  • Some dates are linked, while others aren't.
  • The casting section is a distracting sea of blue links. Consider unlinking the episode titles, since they're linked in the episode table anyway
  • Expand "Code" to "Production code" in the episode table
  • Unlink character names in the episode summaries, and remove actors names, as it's all repetition of the Cast section
  • {{citation}} is being used in conjunction with {{cite web}}, cite video and cite news. WP:CITET says only one version ({{citation}} or {{cite xxx'}}) should be used because of the different markup.
  • I'm not a wiz with image use, but the DVD image seems to fail WP:NFCC, since it doesn't illustrate what it says it does (ie, a DVD cover, but no mention of the DVD in the article). But as I said, I'm not very knowledgeable on images and fair-use stuff.

That's all I have. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Doctor_Who_(series_4)/archive1&oldid=1049172663"