Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Spider-Man (1994 animated series) episodes/archieve1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Spider-Man (1994 animated series) episodes

[edit]

I think that this list is worthy of featured status. In accordance with the criteria, it is useful, has all the fair use rationals, and info about show and I think it's complete now. Self-nom by Gman124 00:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - You need to go through and trim the wiki links, you should link in the first instance, not every instance. Also, I think there should be some consistancy in the plots; some of them are just a single sentence while others are a paragraph long. A good copy edit to the plots is necessary also. You need fair use rationales for those DVD covers.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have added fair use rational for dvd releasesGman124 00:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good work. Now for the wikilinks. I know it's a pain, but someone needs to go through and delink any repeated links. I think his name is "John Semper", well the last name is Semper..anyway, he's linked 12 times in Season 1, and there are only 13 episodes in that season. You should link the first instance of a name.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the repeated links. Gman124 14:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know that sucked, I've had to do it for a series with over 100 episodes before. The only other things I see are 2 lines in the lead paragraph that may need a citation, and the plots. There is a line that reads, " the only series that in-house studio produced." It seems like you may need to prove that. The other line is the "second longest running Marvel show". The plots don't need the "part 1" or "part 3 of 3", the titles of the episodes kind of take care of that. Also, the plots need some major copyediting for flow. I was trying to read a couple and they sentences didn't make that much sense (I'll try and help out with this later part).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the summaries and I think the summaries for the episodes are about the same size for each episode now, and I thinks it's ok now. Gman124 21:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It looks good now, visually. Someone will need to go in an copyedit the summaries for better wording. There are some things that need a bit better wording, for flow purposes.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the plot is ok nowGman124 20:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — I changed just a few things per WP:LOE, but this is coming along nicely. Cliff smith 20:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

why do we even need a season section, those two episode lists have their DVD releases listed at the top, and Spider-Man series don't have the seasons out on DVD Yet, there's only a couple of episodes on DVD. And the airdates and episode numbers are already in listed in the list, so I think having a season section is really unnecessary. Gman124 21:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Guidelines for LOEs state that they should follow the example of other FLs. I could list you a great many of them, all of which have a Season list. Also, the whole color-coding system is designed to be employed with a Season list—you could say that the two are existential. In addition, the Season lists are not redundant: they state the years of broadcasting and the episode totals for each season, so saying that airdates and episode numbers are "already" there doesn't really hold much weight (they are similar but different). P.S. Those other lists have separate articles for their DVD releases; such info in the Season section is just basic stuff. Cliff smith 00:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have romoved the colored lines, so i don't think it needs season section now, and there a some featured episode lists that don't have season section like List of Stargate SG-1 episodes. Gman124 13:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since the colored lines are gone I agree that it doesn't really need a Season section now. Also, the majority of FLs have one, not necessarily all, but the majority. Cliff smith 22:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • the pictures make it easier to read the article and other Featured Lists have alot of them. I don't see why they can have it and this page can't.Gman124 00:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The images serve to identify the episodes in question, so there is no reason to remove them and removing them only makes the list less informative, and becomes difficult to identify an episode, because you can only rely on the summaries.Gman124 14:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. If you are going to oppose this list on a "too many fair use images" base (considering they are only screencaptures and "free images" cannot be attained for them), then you'd have to call into question several Featured Lists.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(#8) is a subjective call. If many editors believe that the use of these "50 fair use" do contribute significantly to the article (e.g. identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text, then there is nothing wrong. Wikipedia does not provide a set limit to fair use images in an article, especially when dealing with a list of episodes article. Since Wiki doesn't say, "oh you can have 3 FU images, but not 5, maybe you can have 4", then (#3) is also a subjective call. It's based on what the article is illustrating, and how easily one could come across free images for that article. Free images for a television article are probably 100% impossible, unless the owners decide they dont' want the show anymore and released it into the public domain.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Spider-Man_(1994_animated_series)_episodes/archieve1&oldid=129051638"