Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/How I Met Your Mother (season 1)/archive1


 * 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:Hahc21 10:01, 19 February 2014 (UTC).

How I Met Your Mother (season 1)

 * Nominator(s): haha169 (talk) 20:47, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list. Thanks in advance for taking the time to review this list for its WP:FL? compatibility! haha169 (talk) 20:47, 25 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The most important part of TV season articles (and the part that makes this a list rather than an article - there is a lot of good prose here) is the table of episodes. But naturally just the names and production info isn't all that vital: readers (including me) like to know briefly what happens in each episode without having to go to each article. Episodes 1, 7, and 14 are fairly good, but most others could hardly be called a summary, so I'd really appreciate an expansion of these. More review to come. Reywas92 Talk 05:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I googled several of these summaries after noticing they didn't seem like typical WP writing style - they're mostly copied from stuff like http://www.cbspressexpress.com/cbs-news/releases/view?id=11590 and tvrage.com/How_I_Met_Your_Mother/episode_guide/1. You did a good job with the text sections, but these have been there since the article's creation, and these copyvios need to be completely rewritten, not just expanded. Reywas92 Talk 05:34, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the catch! I hadn't thought that that might happen. I'll get to work on it. --haha169 (talk) 19:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. I hope my new summaries are up to standard. --haha169 (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, those are much better. Here are some other suggestions:

Reywas92 Talk 16:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The lead summary is a little too detailed, particularly "but when she moves to Germany for a culinary fellowship, Ted and Robin nearly have sex." if that could be rewritten.
 * "Ted's self-appointed best friend and womanizer" sounds like he's Ted's womanizer.
 * Award names should not have quotation marks. (Casting and Awards sections)
 * "who were cast as Ted and Marshall respectively" is redundant to the first paragraph's info.
 * Tense should be consistent in reception, e.g. derides -> derided.
 * Done, fixed all of these things. Looked over the tenses in the whole article and I think I caught all of the errors there. Thanks for the suggestions!! --haha169 (talk) 03:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * A few are still a bit short (like The Limo and Return of the Shirt) and several still read too much like a teaser than a summary, but everything else looks great. Reywas92 Talk 17:53, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I think I see what you mean. How does it look now? --haha169 (talk) 03:39, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Excellent Support

Comments: Nice work on the list, but the references could be fixed Otherwise, I support this list for promotion
 * Main sources such as The Hollywood Reporter and Orlando Sentinel should be listed as work instead of publisher.
 * The publisher of the sources should be the owner of the publication. For example Tribune Company would be for the Orlando Sentinel, Prometheus Global Media for The Hollywood Reporter, The Walt Disney Company for ABC Television Group and so on and so forth.
 * For ref 21, the article's title should not be all caps per se WP:ALLCAPS policy.
 * For ref 22, the work is credited as the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences with its abbreviation ATAS as its publisher.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 04:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I hope I have fixed these issues to your satisfaction. --haha169 (talk) 19:37, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Support (having stumbled here from my FLC discussion page). Excellent effort overall by . I do agree with the comments by, above, in particular those first two comments about work and publisher modification recommendations to citations. Another minor thingy: there should not be an External links subsection, if there are no actual external links. Good luck, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 12:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the comments! I begun working on some of them. But because of time restraints, I will finish them up tomorrow. --haha169 (talk) 04:56, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I think I made those changes that you asked for correctly. Thank you for the comments, Birdienest81 and Cirt! --haha169 (talk) 19:37, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 11:41, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Comments by DragonZero


 * Support I believe it would be better to have the cast section either in the parent article or the character article, as it is information that relates to the series as a whole instead of just a season. Otherwise, no further issue as far as I can see. Please revisit your review for Code Geass if possible. Thanks. DragonZero  ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 07:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your quick responses. I will check back to my review on your FLC in turn! --haha169 (talk) 18:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.