User:Parent5446 Bot/Task Lists/WikiProject Television
Featured article candidates
There are no candidates at this time.
Featured article review
There are no candidates at this time.
Featured list candidates
- 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 User:The Rambling Man 14:08, 4 July 2008 [2].
A few days ago, I saw that this list of one of my favorite TV shows wasn't in very good shape. It wasn't terrible but it definitely needed some sprucing. So I got some sources and expanded the list and even included a cover and detailed synopses for each season. Looking at it now, it does seem a lot better, even if do say so myself! So review the list and tell me whether it seemed like "a damn fine cup of coffee" or not. Thanks! (SUDUSER)85 15:31, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- Quick comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- No bold links in the opening section of the lead please.
- Place citations per WP:CITE, i.e. immediately after punctuation where possible.
- " To date, both seasons of Twin Peaks have been released on..." why To date? Won't this always be the case from now on?
- Why are the number of episodes (in total and each series) in bold?
Done rmv for individual seasons, but I thought it's supposed to be there in the lead, that's the case for lists like List of Seinfeld episodes and List of The Sopranos episodes. (SUDUSER)85 13:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- " spanning two seasons of 30 episodes, until its cancellation" - no, it still spans two seasons of 30 episodes. Subsequently it was cancelled.
- Last sentence of lead not cited.
- Done Fortunately I had the book Lynch on Lynch (SUDUSER)85 13:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- "1990–91" rather than "1990 – 1991", or at least axe the spaces.
- What makes episode world a reliable source?
- Second general reference and third external link are essentially identical, probably lose the ext. link.
The Rambling Man (talk) 15:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Done all suggestions by The Rambling Man have been addressed by (SUDUSER)85. (SUDUSER)85 13:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Comments (edit conflicted with Rambling Man above)
- Remove links from any bold text, or remove the bold, per WP:LEAD.
- Publishers in references only need to be italicized if they are publications and follow MOS:TITLE.
- "released October 30, 2007[3]." – reference goes after all punctuation marks per WP:FOOTNOTE
Gary King (talk) 16:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Done all suggestions by Gary King have been addressed by (SUDUSER)85. (SUDUSER)85 13:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Gary King (talk) 17:58, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Comments
- Need references for the writers and directors.
- Done The episode numbering in season two don't match. --Gman124 talk 21:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Done all suggestions by User:Gman124 have been addressed by (SUDUSER)85. (SUDUSER)85 13:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
now Support --Gman124 talk 04:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Done Don't split the bold text in the intro sentence. Even better though, think of a more artistic way to introduce the article, instead of a repetition of the article's title
- I think it's okay now. Take a look if you want to. (SUDUSER)85 14:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- Take a look at today's main page article, Tiridates I of Armenia. It doesn't begin with "This is a comprehensive article about Tiridates I." It jumps straight in and tells the reader that he was King of Armenia in AD 53. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs •email) 15:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- I think it's okay now. Take a look if you want to. (SUDUSER)85 14:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- Done "Subsequently it was cancelled on June 10, 1991." No need for "subsequently". Who cancelled it? The network, or the producers decided to end it?
- Done Use the
prodcode=field in {{episode list}}, and alsoAltTitle=for the Pilot's alternative title. - Done Extra space at "Washington ."
- Done Are the episodes half-hour or an hour long? Either way some of the summaries are a bit too short. Five lines is good, but two lines isn't.
- I have included the length in the lead, though I think that the summaries are quite okay, I mean look at other articles like List of The Unit episodes and List of Desperate Housewives episodes. What is your take on this? (SUDUSER)85 06:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'd prefer them to be longer. At least a sentence per "act" (by which I mean between each commercial break.
- I have included the length in the lead, though I think that the summaries are quite okay, I mean look at other articles like List of The Unit episodes and List of Desperate Housewives episodes. What is your take on this? (SUDUSER)85 06:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:49, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Done Is the link to watch full episodes on CBS a reference? It's not much help to anyone outside the US. Stick it in the External links and say US-based IPs only.
- Done What is reference 4? A book? If so the title needs itallics
- Done Rationale for the boxset is wrong. It says it's a logo, but there's one specifically for DVD covers. {{Non-free video cover}}.
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Done Everything suggested by Matthewedwards has been fixed by (SUDUSER)85 14:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC) on 14:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)Comment
- I did a quick review. I would like to support this because the list is appropriately structured and sourced, and the article has a good lead. However, I see a need for copy-editing of the season and episode descriptions. I have fixed one sentence whose wording really bothered me and a second sentence that was awkward, but I still see other opportunities for improvement. For example, I am bothered by trite verbosity such as "...expose Twin Peaks as the disturbed, unsettling town that it is" and the numerous sentences that are strung together by "and"s and commas. Skimming the article, I also detect a few misspellings. --Orlady (talk) 00:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Malachirality appears to be inactive at the moment. So I've approached Golbez instead. (SUDUSER)85 15:07, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- I've done some of the needed copy-editing, but I continue to think that more is needed. I am not a particularly good candidate for this job because I think the writing style used in these and other episode descriptions is horrifying. Having said that, here are some examples of items that I think are particularly important to fix:
- Done One piece of awkward wording that has me stymied is "Leo's battered housewife Shelly decides to get revenge." The noun "housewife" is not normally preceded by a possessive. Is Shelly the wife of Leo? In that case, perhaps she should be called "Leo's battered wife." Is it important to call her "housewife" instead of "wife"?
- Done In the sentence fragment "Cooper has a vision of a mysterious giant, as he lies bleeding from a serious gunshot wound," am I correct in thinking that Cooper is the one who lies bleeding and not the mysterious giant (which is what the word order implies)?
- In the sentence fragment "Josie returns from Seattle, bearing her 'cousin' Jonathan from Hong Kong in tow," is there a literal meaning to the words "bearing" and "in tow" (that is, was she carrying and/or towing him?) or are these words merely being used as idiomatic expressions meaning "with"?
- --Orlady (talk) 16:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- I've done some of the needed copy-editing, but I continue to think that more is needed. I am not a particularly good candidate for this job because I think the writing style used in these and other episode descriptions is horrifying. Having said that, here are some examples of items that I think are particularly important to fix:
- Malachirality appears to be inactive at the moment. So I've approached Golbez instead. (SUDUSER)85 15:07, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Done All fixed. (SUDUSER)85 06:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Featured topic candidates
There are no candidates at this time.
Featured list removals
Good article nominations
GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:CSI: Crime Scene Investigation/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hello. I'll be doing the Good Article review for this article. Here are some suggestions for improvement:
- The image of the logo in the infobox is not low resolution, so it needs to be scaled down.
- Done.
- For the lead, I think the first two paragraphs should be combined, as they deal with the same basic topic. Then, some more points of the article should be added in a new paragraph. Some points to consider adding might include small notes on characters, awards, DVD releases, style/music, and maybe the number of episodes thus far.
- What makes this a reliable website?
- On their about section they state that Television Heaven is a factual work and not a work of fiction. Pretty ambiguous I know, but its not like the site is being used as a source for exceptional claims.
- Image:CSI season 1 cast.jpg is not low resolution either.
- Done.
- The last paragraph of the reception section needs some citations for the ratings.
- These sentences "This campaign was reminiscent to CBS's Jericho fans' reaction over the show being canceled. On that occasion, fans sent over 20 tons of nuts to CBS headquarters." from the public reaction section don't really add anything, so I think the article would be better off without them.
- Trivia removed.
- Ref #50 is dead. Can a replacement be found?
- Maybe the CSI Effect section would be better as a sub-section under criticism, add the info from currently in that section to it. Then, it won't have to be mentioned twice.
- The rating figures for the 7th and 8th seasons need sources.
- There are a couple of things cited by the IMDB that need a more reliable source. For example, "Anthony E. Zuiker chose to set the series in Las Vegas because—as mentioned in the pilot —that city's crime lab is the second most active in the United States, after the Federal Bureau of Investigation lab in Quantico, Virginia."
The article could also use a really good copyedit, but I'm willing to do that if everything else gets sorted out. The article will be on hold for seven days to allow for improvements. Nikki311 18:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Some of the stuff that need better sources are on the DVD's extras, I'll try and find transcripts or locate the info on the DVDs.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 09:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Dinner Party (The Office)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Well done.
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- In the lead, it would be best to add (NBC) after "National Broadcasting Company". In the Production section, it would best to link "November 5, 2007" once, per here.
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
- Does Reference 13 cover all this ---> "If not for the writers strike, this episode would have completed filming successfully during the week of November 5, 2007. Also, a Christmas episode would have been produced and aired, but that script was discarded as the strike lasted past the 2007 holiday season, the time of year when the potential episode would have aired"?
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- If the above statement can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered.
- Pass or Fail:
GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:No Such Thing as Vampires/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Pretty good. Here are some suggestions for improvement.
- In the lead, I would put the last two sentences in the beginning of the second paragraph instead, as they are more related to actors and storyline, then writing.
- The plot could use some wikilinks. Link any character/actor not linked in the lead (Caroline, Ellis) and some terms (flashbacks, eulogy, and anything else that someone might need more info on).
- It's --> it is (spell out all contractions unless they are in a quote)
- "This episode established that Mick does not bite anyone; sleeps in a freezer, not a coffin; cannot turn into a bat; daylight's not good, but it does not cause him to burst into flames; and garlic, holy water and crucifixes do not work on him." - there is a lot going on in this sentence, and it might be better split into two separate ones
- Is upfront a proper noun? I think it should not be cap.
- Watch the overlinking in the reception section. Angel is linked several times.
Not too much to change. The article will be on hold for a week. Nikki311 21:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
- All the points have been taken care of, except for the "it's" because it is in a quote. Corn.u.co.pia ♥ Disc.us.sion 07:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- It is in a quote! :) All these reviews must be making me lose my mind. Great work as always. Pass. Nikki311 02:36, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review! :-) Corn.u.co.pia ♥ Disc.us.sion 03:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
- It is in a quote! :) All these reviews must be making me lose my mind. Great work as always. Pass. Nikki311 02:36, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Peer reviews
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have attempted to source this article up and improve it as much as I can. Now I need outside comments in order to prepare the article for its GAN, which I plan to start after fixing the problems given in this PR. Any comments are welcome. Thanks, — Parent5446 ☯ (message email) 12:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article. Here are some suggestions for improvement:
- The lead needs to be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way - now there is no mention of Reception or DVD in the lead. Please see WP:LEAD
- There seems to be too much empahsis in the lead on the plot - see WP:WEIGHT
- A model article is useful for ideas on structure, refs, style, etc. I note that Smallville (season 1) is a FA and should be a good model.
- Some of the episode summaries are much longer than others - I think they generally should be about the same length.
- Article needs a copyedit, for example In addition, Mae and Ty Lee, are introduced as antagonists who help Azula to capture Aang. could be something like In addition, two other characters, Mae and Ty Lee, are introduced as antagonists who help Azula capture Aang. or The group escapes along with the Earth King and Bosco, where Katara heals Aang. where implies a location has been given, but it does not say where they escaped to, either include that or just drop "where" and replace it with "later" or even "and"
- Be careful to provide context for the reader - not everyone who reads this will have seen the show or know what it is about, so giving some brief context and background is helpful - see WP:PCR
- Since this is a work of fiction, make sure things are written from an out of universe perspective - see WP:IN-U
I've listed this article for peer review because it was recently listed as a good article and I now wish to receive feedback on what can be revised to bring it up to FA standards as I begin to revise.
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've now included a title of episode titles, per Ruhrfisch's RFC suggestion. Now that the series finale has aired in Germany, I wonder if we're all ready for the triple crown yet?
See also this FLC page to see what went wrong last time, and tell me what still needs to be worked on.
Thanks, Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 11:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: OK, here we go. I am going to go through each section and make comments.
- I think a copyedit is the most pressing need. I don't really do copyedits on other's work, but the problem I see here is that some of the phrases are so unclear that it would have to be an interactive process - the copyeditor would ask you what was meant, you would reply, and the copyeditor would make the needed changes. The FLC highlights a number of these unclear places.
- Copyeditors can be found by asking at WP:PRV or by asking one of the people listed at WP:LOCE directly.
- A co-production between France and Canada, it is based on the Beechwood Bunny Tales books by Geneviève Huriet, Amélie Sarn and Loïc Jouannigot. Would it be better to identify the television channels, so A co-production between France's TF1 and several Canadian companies, it is based on the Beechwood Bunny Tales books by Geneviève Huriet, Amélie Sarn and Loïc Jouannigot. ?
- Suggest something like TF1 has been involved in the show's production since its premiere, with Valérie Baranski as the series writer, Patricia Robert as producer, Moran Caouissin as director for the first season, and Eric Berthier for the second and third.
- The third paragraph of the lead is confusing - perhaps it could be rewritten as something like
The first four episodes of The Bellflower Bunnies premiered on TF1, then ran on its children's channel TFOU TV (formerly TF! Jeunesse), and has since appeared on France's local Playhouse Disney. The series has also been broadcast on CBC Television in Quebec, KI.KA in Germany, Portugal's RTP in the Azores, and in several other countries. As of June 2008, 52 episodes have been produced, with four episodes airing in the first season, 22 in the second, and 26 in the third.[3][4] The complete series has only aired on KI.KA, where the last fourteen episodes appeared in May 2008,[3][6] while the first 38 episodes have aired in France.[5]
- I would then go on to briefly explain the first list (of titles in French / German / English) in the lead.
- Another idea would be to give the titles in the list of episodes, always in the same order, so Episode 1 might be something like
| Episode # | Original title (French / German / English) | Air date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | "Le déménagement / Ein neues Zuhause / Room to Move" | December 24, 2001[1] | |
|
The Bellflowers move to a new home, but Periwinkle has trouble adapting to the change. | |||
and Episodes 27 and might be someting like
| Episode # | Title (French / German) | Air date | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Broadcast | Official | |||
| 27 | 027[2] | "La fée Pirouette / Quinie, kleine Fee" | April 4, 2007[2] | |
|
A fairy from Aunt Zinnia's childhood book comes to life and gives her powers to Violette. | ||||
- This would allow you to combine the French and German epsiodes lists from Season Three - just leave an n-dash – for the unknown French title and unknown official number in the "German" episodes.
- If you choose to do something like this, the first list could be cut back to just a list of the thirteen episodes based on the actual books.
- If possible, I would list the episode numbers for the DVD releases. For example, the first North American DVD has episodes 1 and 2.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Tasks Footer
- ^ "Broadcast information for "La Famille Passiflore : [émission du 24 Décembre 2001]"" (in French). Institut National de l'Audiovisuel. 2007. Retrieved 2008-04-05.
- ^ a b "Broadcast information for "La fée Pirouette"" (in French). Institut National de l'Audiovisuel. 2007. Retrieved 2008-03-23.