Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Highlander: The Series (season 2)


 * 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:Matthewedwards 23:11, 10 January 2009.

Highlander: The Series (season 2)
I am nominating this episode list because I think it meets all the criteria. It's accurate, complete and has reliable sources. It has recently undergone Peer Review and has been copyedited by three different editors. It was modelled after the most recently featured episods list such as The O.C. (season 4) and is now ready to get your comments. Thank you for your time, Rosenknospe (talk) 20:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The panoramic image of Vancouver is excellent, but does it really have to be that big? -- Scorpion 0422  20:16, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you using IE6 by any chance ? I know the Wide image template doesn't work with it and makes the page ridiculously large, although it works fine with IE7 and Firefox. We tried to use the Panorama simple template during Peer Review, but the bottom of the picture gets cropped for some reason. I'd welcome any other idea you might have. Rosenknospe (talk) 20:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm using Firefox, and in addition a large resolution, and that infobox image is a little big.--SRX 20:57, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid most infobox pictures in episode lists are 200 to 250 px wide, see for example 30 Rock (season 2), The O.C. (season 4), or all Lost or The Simpsons lists. In fact, this picture is quite near the lower limit of the range, so I don't feel I did anything out of the ordinary. Do you find it really disturbing or looking like an advertisement ? Rosenknospe (talk) 21:25, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This in a way goes against WIAFL Cr 6, Visual appeal. because the image is very distracting. I would consult with the respective project(s) to discuss reducing the default size for the images in the infobox.--SRX 22:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Image size is fine; they're typically up to 256px in width. Gary King  ( talk ) 22:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've just requested input from WikiProject Television, as well as The Simpsons, The Office (US), Lost and Degrassi task forces. (And somebody already commented, thank you !) I hope a discussion will take place. However, until a new consensus is built, I think it better to stick to the current one and keep the image size for now. I will of course change it if necessary. I hope this answers your concerns. Thank you for taking the time to comment, Rosenknospe (talk) 22:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems a bit excessive to contact so many WikiProjects; I don't think that the criterion conflicts with any WikiProject guidelines. Gary King  ( talk ) 22:11, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I wanted to get an answer, though I didn't think I'd get it so quickly, and I thank you very much for that. Sorry if I've been excessive, but I've got FLC nerves ;D Rosenknospe (talk) 22:20, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, I definitely understand the nerves part. Anyways, no harm done; I think the lesson learned here is that when someone suggests something, take it into consideration but always go with what you think makes the most sense and explain why (I'm not saying that anyone is correct in this particular case, but I think this is a good general rule to follow). Gary King  ( talk ) 22:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I will keep that in mind. Rosenknospe (talk) 22:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


 * What I meant by my comment was that it isn't really necessary to have a large panoramic image in this article. A smaller (200-300px) image of the city would work better. -- Scorpion 0422  01:09, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ooh. Sorry for not getting it. Well, I chose this image because it matched the color of the page and you can see several filming locations of the series on it, but okay, I'll go find another one. Rosenknospe (talk) 21:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I am using Firefox, and I think the image looks fine. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have replaced the Vancouver wide image by a normal-sized one. Hope this works. Any other thoughts ? Thanks for commenting, Dabomb87 ! Rosenknospe (talk) 20:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Sources
 * What makes http://www.hulu.com/highlander a reliable source?
 * According to their About page, "Hulu was founded in March 2007 by NBC Universal and News Corp and is operated independently by a dedicated management team". Rosenknospe (talk) 21:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Likewise http://web.archive.org/web/20000104020414/retrovisionmag.com/index.html? Dabomb87 (talk) 21:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Their home page archived here states that they were a magazine publishing excerpts on their website. Rosenknospe (talk) 21:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I will leave this source unstruck so that other reviewers can evaluate the source. Although it is probably good enough, we need to be absolutely sure, because it sources WP:BLP material. In my mind, the fact that it is a print magazine does not fully prove that it is reliable, although it makes it more likely. We still need to know what kind of fact-checking they do. Anyway, this source is not going to stop me from supporting, I am just leaving it unstruck so that other reviewers can form an opinion of their own. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * For all it's worth, it's listed at . Thank you for supporting, Dabomb87, have a happy new year ! Rosenknospe (talk) 12:00, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Support - all my issues were thoroughly addressed, which I agreed upon, and this list now meets WP:WIAFL.--Truco 00:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for supporting ! Rosenknospe (talk) 12:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Oppose for now. Several references are books with no publishing date. Quite a few references do not have the same date format. — BQZip01 —  talk 06:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't believe I used the wrong parameter in the Cite books template ! *bangs head on wall* And I didn't realize the Cite news and Cite web templates didn't format dates automatically. (I mean, you get used to comfort ;) Everything's fixed now, thank you for taking a look. Other thoughts ? Rosenknospe (talk) 12:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You aren't the first to make that mistake. Won't be the last. It has my support now. — BQZip01 —  talk 23:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you ! Have a nice day, Rosenknospe (talk) 10:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.