Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/May 2010

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 Dabomb87 23:23, 11 May 2010 [1].

---

1973 NBA Draft

Nominator(s): —Chris!_c/t 20:26, 10 April 2010 (UTC), User:Martin tamb

We are nominating this for featured list because it's up to FL standard.—Chris!_c/t 20:26, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

• Comment To begin with I would both make it clear that the underclassmen are rare (lead the sentence in a way like "While most of those drafted were upperclassmen...", and a footnote (or another sentence) explaining the "hardship" rule. Staxringold _talk^contribs 04:28, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I've rephrased and added more information on the eligibility for the draft. — Martin tamb (talk) 13:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments – "The Philadelphia 76ers were awarded an extra first-round draft pick as a compensation when the Seattle SuperSonics signed John Brisker." I think "a" should be removed from here. Tense conflict here: "A player who had played college basketball for four years were eligible for selection." "which earned them the rights to start earning their living by starting their professional career earlier." Should "rights" be singular instead? And should "career" be plural? Took a second look at this and it still bothers me. I think that's because it has repetition of "earned" and "earning". Try changing one of them and the whole sentence will look better. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:07, 30 April 2010 (UTC) I changed the first "earned" into "granted". — Martin tamb (talk) 07:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC) Try not to start a sentence with a number, like in "22nd pick George McGinnis...". "Brewer, Washington and E. C. Coleman are also the only players who have been selected to the All-Defensive Team." Remove "also"; it's usually an unneeded word, and in Coleman's case it has no relevance at all. More later. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC) All fixed by User:Martin tamb—Chris!c/t 02:09, 25 April 2010 (UTC) Took a look at the rest and found some serious prose issues in the one paragraph that was left. I'm concerned, to say the least. "McGinnis have already played in the American Basketball Association prior to the draft." "have" → "has". "He had one ABA Most Valuable Players Award". "Players" should be singular. "He spent three seasons in the NBA before finally joined the NBA...". "joined" → "joining". "He have been selected...". Another sentence starting with a numeral: "76th pick M. L. Carr...". "before he became the Celtics' head coach for two seasons in the 1990s. and Carr who coached the Celtics for two seasons." Serious copy-editing needed here. Commas needed after the three coaches in the last sentence. In addition, the "coached X teams, most recently with Y" structures could use some work. I eliminated the problem by simplifying.—Chris!c/t 22:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC) Also from that sentence: "Four other players drafted also went on to have a coaching career". So why are only three listed?

• What makes http://www.thedraftreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=854&Itemid=103 a reliable source? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I think this can be removed. There are enough refs to support the list.—Chris!_c/t 22:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I know that it is not considered a reliable source, but every time I expanded the older draft articles, I always used this website together with NBA.com, APBR and basketball-reference. This website has some information that are not found in the other three main references, but I always support their info with another external references (see ref #7 and #17 which support the info from thedraftreview about 22nd and 31st pick). I know it shouldn't be listed as a reference but I just want to give the website credits for their information. However, if it should be removed, then I wouldn't oppose the removal. — Martin tamb (talk) 07:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I just removed it. So, hopefully everyone is satisfied.—Chris!_c/t 01:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

• Comment: First thing I noticed was that there is nothing about the draft's legacy. Was it considered a good or a bad one? (Doesn't look like it was good from what I could see but maybe there's something written) Doesn't have to be much but I'm sure there's a couple sentences written somewhere. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:31, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think anything can be added. This year seems to be an average draft.—Chris!_c/t 22:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. What I would like to see added though is a note of the NBA Draft's delay to the 24th as a result of the John Brisker conflict.[2] Looks like it happened more than once that year so perhaps only the delay itself needs a mention rather than each time it happened. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 23:07, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I added a footnote.—Chris!_c/t 02:19, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Support. I found no serious problems with this list. Ruslik_Zero 18:46, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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 Dabomb87 23:23, 11 May 2010 [3].

---

FIP World Heavyweight Championship

Nominator(s): --WillC 12:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... I worked on it about a year ago. Decided to try and raise it to FL status since it is long enough now. I completely re-did the article and I'm still looking for extra refs to add. I'm apart of the wikicup. Also, if anyone would like a list reviewed, just bring it up here or on my talk page and I'll find time to review it.--WillC 12:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

This was once nominated before, but when it was in list form as List of FIP World Heavyweight Champions. It is long enough now that the problems from it are no longer problems. See Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of FIP World Heavyweight Champions/archive1 for more info.--WillC 15:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments –

• Should be a hyphen in "ROH promoted", I believe.
  • Done--WillC 06:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
• "A new champion is to be determined on April 17, 2010 at FIP's Southern Stampede event." It's now April 19. Surely an update of some kind is required?
  • Yeah, I just recently updated the article. FIP had yet to update their site and no site has reviewed the event yet since it hasn't been released on DVD at this time. New champion has been added.--WillC 06:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
• Footnote 1: Remove apostrophe from second "wrestler's". Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Done--WillC 06:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments Emergence: Part Two - worth putting this in quotes I think because the sentence reads a bit strangely. Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) "then–champion" hyphen, not en-dash. Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) Again Fifth Year Festival: Liverpool could use quotes. Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) "It has changed hands..." reiterate "The title has..." because you've talked about something different in the meantime. Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) "in the finals of a two-night tournament on September 25, 2004 " two nights but one date? Fixed--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) "has the least amount of total days" - "fewest total days" Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) " Masaaki Mochizuki's only reign, Moxley's only reign, and Richards's second reign are tied for the least successful defenses, with zero." not good either. Re-worded slightly.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) "Mochizuki and Moxley have the least combined defenses of all reigns, with zero." ditto. Perhaps "Neither Mochizuki nor Moxley have successfully defended their titles" or similar. Re-worded slightly.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) "He defeated Roderick Strong .." why suddenly start repeating his first name? To idenify this as the same Strong as eariler.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) "Wrestlers" col heading should be just "Wrestler" Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) I would expect the vacated row to sort by # in chronological order i.e. between 11 and 12. Ref col should be Ref(s). Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) "With 26 successful defenses, Strong's first reign had the most during a single reign" not good at all. repeat of reign, and "had the most" what? I'm blank on what to change it too. Reads fine to me as is. Any ideas?--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) How about "Strong made 26 successful defences during his first reign, the most in a single reign"? Still repetitive but clears up my issue with the ambiguity of what "the most" means. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC) Done--WillC 07:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC) What makes solie.org a WP:RS? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC) Gets its information from wrestling corporations and books. Been regraded as reliable in other FLs plus GAs and FAs.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC) Can you show me where it says this? I'm sure it is used in other FAs, GAs etc, but I'm not trying to be deliberately difficult but I can't easily see how it meets WP:RS. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC) Their main page explains people and promotions that it gets its information from plus talks about the wrestling titles book that it also gets its information from.--WillC 07:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

• "Being a professional wrestling championship, the title is won as a result of a predetermined outcome of a wrestling match. " do you have a ref for this?
  • Pretty much common sense in wrestling, but placed in since it is significant to the title. I could find a ref if needed, but it has never really been a problem before with any other article with explanations of this sort.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
    • Common sense to you I agree. It's not like any other "professional ... championship" though, is it? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
      • Well it is like all other pro wrestling titles, but sports titles that would be a no. I'll start looking for a reference. Though the majority seem to know pro wrestling is scripted, so I would think it would be obvious.--WillC 07:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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 Dabomb87 23:23, 11 May 2010 [4].

---

List of Case Closed episodes (season 17)

Nominator(s): DragonZero (talk · contribs) 03:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list so I could use this page as a base for other seasons of the anime. As for the web cite archives, they are currently down since they're changing servers. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 03:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

• Transcluded Dabomb87 (talk) 04:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from haha169 (talk) 03:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Support Episode lists generally have Production and Reception sections. Check out this list for FL episode/season lists for which to use as templates. I usually find that helpful. Use {{infobox television season}}. There should be a bold phrase somewhere in the lead that reiterates the main point of the list. This isn't a requirement for FLs. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC) Are you sure? WP:FL?'s #2 links to WP:LEAD, and that guideline has the bold policy. --haha169 (talk) 01:24, 22 April 2010 (UTC) Yes, I'm quite sure; check recent FLs. When the the title is descriptive a verbatim, bolded repetition of the title is not necessary. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC) Okay then. This seems to be a relatively recent development then. Sorry for the confusion. --haha169 (talk) 02:33, 22 April 2010 (UTC) This is something that I tend to have problems with, although it hasn't caused some lists to fail the FL process. But I think that some of the episode descriptions may be too descriptive and on the wordy side of things.--haha169 (talk) 03:48, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Support --haha169 (talk) 03:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment None of those are requirements for an anime episode list as seen here List of Bleach episodes (season 10). DragonZero (talk · contribs) 05:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

That is curious. I'm not much of an anime fan and haven't looked at those lists. But cartoons like The Simpsons, Family Guy, and Avatar all have such information on them, as do sitcoms and other television shows. But since it seems that anime shows don't, I'll strike that out. I have also crossed out the infobox note, since it seems that anime lists don't use that either. I would have thought that all episode lists would be uniform. In any case, the rest of the list seems fine so I'm giving my support.--haha169 (talk) 01:24, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments

• Sources, my word, just one or two third-party sources in English out of 50. This is a problem as it's impossible for 99.9% of us to verify the information in this list.

The series is only in Japanese and thus has only Japanese sources which are the most reliable. This has not impacted whether an anime could be featured list or not. Sides, the Japanese sources mostly consists of episode number, kanji titles, and dates. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 08:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

FL standards change, so no need to refer to other FLs. How do I verify the synopses? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

• And I'm uncertain as to how you can use Wikipedia for references 3 to 6 inclusive."

From the anime and manga project group, I learned that the episodes themselves can be used to source the theme music. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 08:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how you can use Wikipedia to verify Wikipedia, regardless of what the project group says. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

If you want, I could unlink the links to the episodes,. I'm trying to show that the source is first party from the episode themselves. Other Featured anime lists also follow that. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 08:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't get it really. Whether other lists use this approach or not is not particularly relevant here. What's wrong with a wikilink? Why have a reference that I have to scroll down to find which then takes me back up to the list to an episode? And I find it odd that those references have Detective Conan as the work, some directors mentioned, and yet still link to Wikipedia. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

The cite episode templates have the directors, the reference have Detective Conan as the work since the English adapation, Case Closed, follow a different numbering than its original counterpart, Detective Conan, and I wanted to avoid original research. I could change it to Case Closed if prefered. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 08:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

• Half the lead talks about theme music. I'd rather know about the series, the characters, the stories etc.
• "Notes and References" should be "Notes and references".

Fixed. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 08:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

• As I said before as I can verify the content of the list, I don't really think there's much point in me reviewing the episode synopses because they could be inaccurate.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

• • This essentially means the large majority of WP:FLs from WP:ANIME should be delisted due to an almost complete lack of of English sources and a general lack of Japanese online sources that come from reliable sources. Disregarding my own personal beliefs in this, am I correct in assuming this? ɳOCTURNEɳOIR _{talk // contribs} 18:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
    • Well that's for the community to decide. If a list has virtually no English sources, I'd like to know how I can verify its contents. A reasonable request, no? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
      • Get Japanese editors to verify them for you? I realize this is a tad unlikely, but Japanese sources shouldn't outright rejected. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR _{talk // contribs} 19:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
        • I'm not rejecting anything, outright or not, I'm simply stating that this is English Wikipedia, and to have featured material which is utterly unverifiable to English readers seems a little strange. Also, see WP:RSUE... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
          • Only logical. I'll have to reconsider this myself. Cheers, ɳOCTURNEɳOIR _{talk // contribs} 19:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
            • Well the information is unavailable in English. You could go ahead and oppose if you like, I won't be able to fix it. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 08:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
              • Well please note that I'm not the consensus, just a single person suggesting that a list almost entirely referenced in a foreign language doesn't meet our guidelines. If others are happy and support then so be it. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:43, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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 The Rambling Man 19:19, 10 May 2010 [5].

---

List of Avatar: The Last Airbender characters

Nominator(s): haha169 (talk) 03:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list. It has grown greatly since several years ago and I believe that it now matches the WP:FL? criteria for featured list. I have used List of Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow and Dawn of Sorrow characters, another FL, as the main template for this list because there is very little precedent for character-related featured lists.

This list is well cited. It has an engaging lead and is written in prose. All images are tagged with rationales. Let's begin the nitpicking. --haha169 (talk) 03:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from DragonZero (talk · contribs) 03:46, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments Some of the sites seem sort of unreliable. The one linking to avatarthelastairbender.org seems quite suspicious to me. Done I have removed that ref. There was another supporting ref for that setence. By the way, I went through the rest of the links and didn't find anything that seemed suspicious to me.--haha169 (talk) 03:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC) Some of the refs might benefit from episode link, such as adding |episodelink=Avatar: The Last Airbender (season 1)#ep1 to the cite episode template. I was not aware that you could link directly to an object in a list. I thought it was only possible to go to subsections. Could you possible provide an example? Thanks. --haha169 (talk) 03:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC) List_of_Case_Closed_episodes_(season_14)#ep425, this links to season 14 episode 425. I set up a link to the first episode of Avatar in my example. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 05:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC) Done --haha169 (talk) 03:29, 24 April 2010 (UTC) The reference dates of retrieval should be in month, day, year. I will do that so each reference will be uniform. But I was not aware that it had to be m,d,y. Some FAs definitely use y,m,d. --haha169 (talk) 03:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC) Done --haha169 (talk) 03:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC) From my experience, characters mentioned in a characters section should be interlinked. Interlinked? How so? --haha169 (talk) 03:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC) I mean section linked like in the Aang section, you can link to Katare by going [[#Katara|Katara]].DragonZero (talk · contribs) 05:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC) I think I know what you mean. You want me to link the characters. However, I thought it was common practice to not re-link things that have already appeared previously in the article? Also, each character has its own article so section linking isn't necessary. --haha169 (talk) 02:49, 24 April 2010 (UTC) All I have for now. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 05:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Note: This reviewer doesn't seem to be returning to address my updates and has not responded to my request to reconsider ([6]) within 48 hours as asked on the top of the FLC page even though his contributions show that he is still active elsewhere on Wikipedia. --haha169 (talk) 03:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from DragonZero (talk · contribs) 03:46, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments 2 Minor things. In the conception section, 85 would look better as eighty-five. Done --haha169 (talk) 06:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC) It would be nice if you can find a more reiable site than Internet Movie Database (reference 20). IMDB is one of the most reliable sites that we use on Wikipedia. --haha169 (talk) 06:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC) Fixed Sorry; I got this confused with something else. --haha169 (talk) 06:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC) I think there's too many un-needed quotation marks such as in Katara's section; "Water Whip" and "Blood bend" It would reduce in-universe if the abilities were explained instead of having names attached to them. Done --haha169 (talk) 06:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC) Earthbending links back to the Avatar series but that doesn't help. Done; linked all other similar bending terms to Avatar:_The_Last_Airbender#Elements. --haha169 (talk) 06:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC) For Zuko, "anti-hero and tragic hero and", too many ands, replace the midddle one with a comma. Done--haha169 (talk) 06:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC) Azula does not need quotations on friends. Done --haha169 (talk) 06:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC) The recurring character sections may have un-needed characters and should be organized by appearance/impact on the plot instead of alphabetized. I personally feel that since most of hte recurring characters have similar impacts on the series, alphabetical order is the best organizational form. I do agree that two of the characters seems unneeded, and have removed them. --haha169 (talk) 06:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC) Casting controversy should begin by explaining its the cast for the live action film. Cast listed. There really isn't much to "explain" at the moment. --haha169 (talk) 06:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC) I feel that overall it needs a copy-edit to be more stoic, just me though. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 04:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC) I did a major copyedit to the recurring character section, where I thought it was most needed. --haha169 (talk) 06:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC) Thank you for your comments. :) --haha169 (talk) 06:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Support

Not much left to say, references look good and a few more copy edits to make it more stoic would make me support it strongly. Looking at List of Naruto characters might help you there and may provide more suggestions. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 06:40, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 15:04, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments We don't start lists with "This is a list..." any more. Check out some of the recently promoted lists for examples of what we do do... Done, I checked out the recently promoted Olympics medals list. Am I right to assume that it is similar to how articles begin, a brief summary of the topic?--haha169 (talk) 02:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC) Correct. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "The series deals with a war that was started by the Fire Nation as an attempt to conquer the world, due to the absence of the Avatar, who alone holds the power to counter Fire Nation aggression and balance it with the other three countries, the Air Nomads, Earth Kingdom, and the Water Tribes, to create peace." this is a single sentence, and whoa, it needs some work. I'd suggest splitting it up a bit. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) If you wish to link antagonist, do it on the first instance. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "included a flying bison. His partner, Michael Dante DiMartino" whose partner? The flying bison? Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "bending" just links to the main Avatar article. Done - the article seems to have been deleted. --haha169 (talk) 02:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC) I think it's worth a brief note to actually say what "bending" is in this context. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC) Is it "Jing" or "jing"? By itself, it is Jing but if it is mentioned following an adjective (ie. neutral) then it is lower-case. --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "portrayed by Noah Ringer in" ref? All the live action portrayals need refs... Done Refs added. --haha169 (talk) 03:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "group;[32] " comma, not semi-colon. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "15 year old" hyphenate. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) Do we really need to link warrior or leader? Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) Also think linking blind is over the top. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "short power " what is this? Done, added a definition in parenthesis. --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "direct, brutally frank" aren't these synonymous? Done. Yes, I removed the latter. --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "firebenders.. [27] " one too many periods, and there should be no space before the ref. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "is voiced by Mako for two seasons until his death" whose death? it reads unclearly. Done Until Mako's, but I've just removed "until his death" for simplicity's sake. --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) The recurring characters have the actors named. Are these the actors in the original series or the live action film or both or what? Done, I made it more clear as to who played in which version of the franchise. --haha169 (talk) 03:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "of Ba Sing Se - eventually" should be a comma. or a spaced en-dash. Certainly not a spaced hyphen. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "voices against the casting. When asked about casting a white cast to portray" cast x3 reads repetitively. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) "and Shyamalan go out of their way to " suddenly Shyamalan is introduced. What does he have to do with anything? Done His name was added to the lead. --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) Ref 71 needs en-dashes not spaced hyphens. Check others (e.g. 68) Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) Ref 33 has pp. despite only referring to a single page. Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) Los Angeles Times has no "The". Done --haha169 (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC) You have a completely empty "External links" section. Removed --haha169 (talk) 02:59, 24 April 2010 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 08:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

• Comment There is a dead link; please check the toolbox. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
  • The cite template requires the original dead link when providing an archived link. That particular dead link has an archived equivalent. --haha169 (talk) 03:42, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
    • Sorry, Syfy seems to be removing its articles lately for some reason, and I confused this with another Syfy article which I had found an archive of. I have removed that cite since there was no archive on Wayback Machine and it wasn't seemingly necessary. --haha169 (talk) 04:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.