Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Seasons of 30 Rock
Seasons of 30 Rock edit
| Main page | Articles |
 Seasons of 30 Rock
|
30 Rock (season 1) - 30 Rock (season 2)
|
I have submitted this for featured topic because alot of work has gone into these articles to get them to featured list status and I believe all three articles, as a collection, meet the criteria for featured topic. -- Jɑɱǐε Jcɑ 22:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
- Support, though I would like to note that the topic will be in a retention period starting October 30 (1.5 months away) for three months to get a series 3 article made and looked at, and again for 3 months after the series finishes to get the article up to FL. As the season has not started, the article does not exist and is only a section in the main article; therefore, the topic as it stands right now meets all criteria. --PresN (talk) 18:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- Support and PresN is right too. Also, I cannot see anything that could be added - rst20xx (talk) 18:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- Support - Meets featured topic criteria. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:37, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Support - All of them are featured, so it meets the featured topic criteria. ~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 19:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose - In this case, I'd have to oppose because we know there will be a third season (at least a partial one), and that page will be created. At that point, we'd have a season page that wasn't FL yet, and per the criteria we would have to delist this as a featured topic until that season became FL. Then, if 30 Rock continues, we'd have to re-discuss, re-promote, and re-demote continually until all the seasons pages had been created and promoted to FL status. I mean, unlike with episode articles, we already know that there will be a season page for season three (and any subsequent seasons that air). It won't be as easy as promoting it to FL as soon as the season starts. We won't be able to at least get it partially ready until the third seasons ends, and then we'd have to get in all the the appropriate ratings, awards, and reception info in place. By then, we'd know if there was going to be a fourth seasons, in which case we'd be right back where we started in the waiting room. To point out, if there were no more seasons going to air, I would certainly support this topic. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- This is a spectacularly invalid oppose. The way it works Bignole is that when the season 3 page is created, it will have 3 months to go through a peer review, and then added to the topic, where it will sit as an audited article of limited subject matter until the season ends, at which point it will have 3 months to get featured. PresN actually spelt this out above!!! rst20xx (talk) 01:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- First, is there a reason you are yelling at me? Second, my point is not just the season three article, but the fact that the show doesn't appear to show signs that it is going to get cancelled, in which case we'd be repeating the same thing every time. I've not seen a featured topic that was going to be in clear expansion for some time. Unlike where they may never be an article on a topic, here we have clear evidence of future articles going to occur (at least one). It seems odd that a featured topic that has to be in limbo for so long because of the constant additional pages that keep having to be popped up as the series goes into its new seasons. In other words, the topic would be in retention for as long as it took to get the third season to FL status, in which case the retention would happen again right away with a fourth season most likely. Hence, why I think it should wait until it is clear how many seasons there will be to avoid this constantly hassle of being in "limbo" until it is all caught up. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- ...There are already two "Seasons of" featured topics, as well as several videogame topics - that's why I'm yelling at you! Yes, such topics will be in retention for up to six months a year (TV seasons are annual), which is a bit of a hassle, but this is a fairer way of doing things than saying "you can't have a FT until 6 years time when the show has finished", and Jamie jca assured us above that he would meet any retention criteria - rst20xx (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well, my opinion still stands - I think it should wait till at least the season three article is FL status, to see where the future of the show is. As, the season won't start for 1.5 months, but since seasons don't end until May of 2009, it couldn't be FL status until at least June 2009. The reason being is that it could not even convincingly claim comprehensiveness with the season still on going. Now, that being said, your gross incivility (which I have noticed other editors have commented about on other pages) has forced me to leave this discussion altogether. Maybe one day you'll learn a little more tact and address your fellow Wikipedians with a bit more respect. Good day, sir. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- I apologise, you're right, I'm a little stressed about that one other discussion you're referring to, which is only taking place in the first place due to incivility on the part of another editor. However, you still don't seem to me to understand that, contrary to what you say, the season 3 article will be included while the season is ongoing, as an audited article of inherent instability, and hence the topic will be comprehensive from as soon after the date of the creation of the season 3 article as is reasonably possible. See Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Seasons of Lost for another example of this - rst20xx (talk) 17:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well, my opinion still stands - I think it should wait till at least the season three article is FL status, to see where the future of the show is. As, the season won't start for 1.5 months, but since seasons don't end until May of 2009, it couldn't be FL status until at least June 2009. The reason being is that it could not even convincingly claim comprehensiveness with the season still on going. Now, that being said, your gross incivility (which I have noticed other editors have commented about on other pages) has forced me to leave this discussion altogether. Maybe one day you'll learn a little more tact and address your fellow Wikipedians with a bit more respect. Good day, sir. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- ...There are already two "Seasons of" featured topics, as well as several videogame topics - that's why I'm yelling at you! Yes, such topics will be in retention for up to six months a year (TV seasons are annual), which is a bit of a hassle, but this is a fairer way of doing things than saying "you can't have a FT until 6 years time when the show has finished", and Jamie jca assured us above that he would meet any retention criteria - rst20xx (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- First, is there a reason you are yelling at me? Second, my point is not just the season three article, but the fact that the show doesn't appear to show signs that it is going to get cancelled, in which case we'd be repeating the same thing every time. I've not seen a featured topic that was going to be in clear expansion for some time. Unlike where they may never be an article on a topic, here we have clear evidence of future articles going to occur (at least one). It seems odd that a featured topic that has to be in limbo for so long because of the constant additional pages that keep having to be popped up as the series goes into its new seasons. In other words, the topic would be in retention for as long as it took to get the third season to FL status, in which case the retention would happen again right away with a fourth season most likely. Hence, why I think it should wait until it is clear how many seasons there will be to avoid this constantly hassle of being in "limbo" until it is all caught up. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- This is a spectacularly invalid oppose. The way it works Bignole is that when the season 3 page is created, it will have 3 months to go through a peer review, and then added to the topic, where it will sit as an audited article of limited subject matter until the season ends, at which point it will have 3 months to get featured. PresN actually spelt this out above!!! rst20xx (talk) 01:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- I don't want to get into a "yelling" match with anyone, but I have to agree with Rst20xx in that the existence of a third season is not in itself enough to fail this nomination. The grace period for updating the topic will last at least until after the end of the third season so that editors can actually write the article about it. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 03:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- Support. - Per PresN (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Support - everything appears to work. Zginder 2008-08-19T13:41Z (UTC)
- Support per PresN and rst20xx. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
- Support and "the show doesn't appear to show signs that it is going to get cancelled" (Bignole) is not entirely true. ;) –thedemonhog talk • edits 16:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- Close as consensus to promote --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 17:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)