Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Awake episodes/archive2


 * 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 Giants2008 19:09, 4 August 2012.

List of Awake episodes

 * Nominator(s): TBrandley 09:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I, personally, think it now meets FL criteria. After a peer review, and a copy-edit from Wikipedia's wonderful editors, I now think it is ready. Thanks, TBrandley 09:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: The description for "Turtles All the Way Down" seems quite jumbled. A nice copyedit would be good. Guy546 ( Talk ) 15:47, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: Prose is a bit choppy, an example: "It was well received by television critics, who praised it storylines" should be 'prasied its storylines'. I agree with Guy546 that this could use a bit of copyediting.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 18:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: I agree that the page is in need of some serious copy editing. How about starting with the word 'Michael', which is spelled Micheal at least five times on the page? Many of the episode descriptions are choppy and have ambiguous parts. I'm not about to list examples here so that you can just add a "done" check mark. Get another copy editor to go over the page with a fine-toothed comb before considering FL. Honestly, if you cannot notice that you spelled criteria wrong in your nomination above (creitia), you don't have the eye for it. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 20:29, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * After a little bit of copy-editing, I'll be willing to support this list. Will put the article on my watchlist to keep an eye on it. Otherwise, good job. :) --Khanassassin ☪ 16:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Support pending this fix: I still see "Michael" misspelled twice.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 03:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * . TBrandley 03:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Support pending this fix: I still see "Michael" misspelled twice.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 03:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * . TBrandley 03:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Support. This is fine now. Just make sure to work on the rest of the episodes after this ;). Guy546 ( Talk ) 13:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure thing :) TBrandley 13:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Support - with one final comment: the "1" in the Nielsen ratings box is a broken wikilink. Paper Luigi  T • C 21:07, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * . Thanks! TBrandley 21:33, 7 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Support - Note this is the first time I'm ever doing this; I couldn't really find anything except ref #11 Metacritic should not be in italics its a website. Further no issues. Regards AdabowtheSecond (talk) 02:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment on your comment: the template automatically displays whatever is in the "work" parameter (the parameter for the name of the website) in italics. It's supposed to be like that.  Paper Luigi  T • C 02:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That's what I would have said :) Thanks for noting, Paper Luigi, and thanks for voting, AdabowtheSecond! TBrandley 03:48, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If it is not a print media, then it should not be italicized. Therefore you should place two apostrophes on each side.-- GoP T C N 10:16, 8 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Support Copyedit's done, and now I believe meets the criteria. Nice work, TBrandley. :) --Khanassassin ☪ 14:19, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! TBrandley 14:48, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Still more comments from Logical Fuzz.
 * "Episodes "Pilot" and "Say Hello to My Little Friend" were particularly praised"....for what specifically?
 * . It was for the main storylines.
 * That's not what I meant. Yes, it is the storylines, which are mentioned in the previous sentence. But what about the storylines was so good?  What specifically was praised?
 * Yeah, now its done.
 * In the ep summaries, when you first mention the main character for an episode, you refer to him in various ways: Michael, Michael Britten, Detective Michael Britten, Detective Britten. Other than in the first ep (when you are introducing the character), I think you need some consistency with this.
 * Well, for sure I'd call that "partly done", but it is better than it was. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 23:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * . Now, it is fully done.
 * . Now, it is fully done.

Thanks for checking again! Have addressed new issues. TBrandley 03:59, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I also commented under "Episode 4" in Giants2008's second round of comments. You missed that.--Logical Fuzz (talk) 13:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Nope, still not done correctly.--Logical Fuzz (talk) 19:56, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Support: The article looks good to me. (Un)fortunately, I didn't find any issue ;-). --Sofffie7 (talk) 21:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Can you confirm where production codes are referenced?
 * Thanks for you comments. Think I have fixed most issues, expect for the ref. for production codes. Other article do not have refs. Thanks again ! TBrandley 03:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * List of The Simpsons episodes is a FL, and it cites the production codes under "Episodes- Key". List of Lost episodes is also a FL, and doesn't include the production codes at all. So my opinion is to reference them or remove them completely, because if you leave them there uncited; there is no way to confirm that they are not made up.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 03:48, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Watch the episode, and you'll see that is very true. Thanks, TBrandley 03:50, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * List of Seinfeld episodes also references production codes. Is there no way you can find something that references these codes?  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 03:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Could I use http://epguides.com. It is used for Seinfeld Season 9 on that article. TBrandley 04:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that's fine.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 04:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Have listed at WP:HD to make sure! TBrandley 04:34, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm unsure about the site and have questioned it in the past. Will be interested to see what the response to it is. Also, the one uncapped issue I have is still a problem, along with the grammar issue created by subsequent editing that has been noted. How six people can be supporting this with something as blatantly problematic as that prose error, I will never know. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 16:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Giants, can you explain what the prose error is? I'll try to fix it.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 16:53, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Although I am not completely certain of what the issue is, I think I may have resolved it.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 05:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That was one of the two issues. The phrase "run in" should be made into "run ins", which is what I originally asked for. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 16:18, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ,  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 19:03, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No, that's not the issue. The "runs into" from before was correct, and is now incorrect. The issue I had was in "tries to make sense of his run in with these two very different versions of the same woman"; the "run in" should be "run ins" instead. It's disturbing that every time I bring this up, a change is made that makes things worse and doesn't fix the original issue. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 16:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * . Sorry for us getting it wrong. But, anyway, Thanks! TBrandley 16:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well Giants, in the future, if you specifically know the issue, and it is unclear to other users what you are asking for, how about you just fix the issue. After all, this site is a community effort and the primary goal is to help out Wikipedia.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 21:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Because it's not up to any one person to fix issues in a nomination. Because if we don't help nominators understand where issues need to be fixed, how would we help improve nominations when presented here?  The community effort comes from people like Giants taking an enormous amount of their own time to help you understand what needs to be fixed.  Please don't assume that we're all here to fix issues which we see day in day out, that's not our job.  We're all volunteers, but instead of just assuming we'll fix your issues, please know that we'd rather help you understand what needs fixing.  "Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime".  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:29, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I did not intend to come off as rude. I think it's typically appropriate for the reviewer to leave comments, and not fix the issues themselves, but since it appeared multiple users could not figure out the meaning, I think it would have been better for Giants to have fixed the minor issue.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 21:34, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * In an ideal world we could all understand every nuance of everything we say to each other so nothing subjective remains. That doesn't happen.  Giants works hard here to help all nominations progress and I'm certain he would avoid ambiguity wherever possible in any comments he makes.  He (and other reviewers) really want to help and that means helping nominators and other reviewers understand what we're looking for at FLC.  This is no different.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:45, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I understand what you are saying; please understand that I did not intend to express rudeness with my comment.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 22:00, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries. We're all doing the best we can.  Hopefully we can get this list promoted soon and encourage you and other editors to keep up the great work!  The Rambling Man (talk) 22:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That being said, are there anymore issues to be addressed? Thanks, TBrandley 15:05, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Comments on Lead: Regarding the last paragraph of the lead, where you are mentioning critics/commentators. It appears to me that you need additional sources in order to use the plural critics and commentators. The sentence: Episodes "Pilot" and "Say Hello to My Little Friend" in particular have received positive reviews from commentators for their "heart wrenching" storylines. The sentence: Various cast members have also been praised by critics, particularly Isaacs' performance as Michael Britten. Either more refs are needed, or the sentences need to be rewritten and in singular form {a critic, a commentator).--Logical Fuzz (talk) 23:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * This is cited to just one critical review. Has more than one critic called these heart-wrenching?
 * The review you are citing is talking only about "Say Hello", it does not mention "Pilot".
 * . I have removed. It said it was the best since the pilot
 * . I have removed. It said it was the best since the pilot
 * Again, the use of plural "critics", despite one source.
 * I don't see where in the given source the praise for "various cast members", just Isaacs.
 * . Added two more ref., now with 3 in all.
 * I wouldn't call that done. Three refs, so what? Ref 15 gives no praise of any of the cast except Isaacs, and all Ref 16 says is "well acted". Not what I was hoping for. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * . IGN praises the main cast, and The Washington Post praised BD Wong and Cherry Jones.
 * All of those have been properly addressed. Thanks! TBrandley 23:58, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Not exactly, see above.--Logical Fuzz (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2012 (UTC)


 * One more note from another look at the list: in "'Say Hello to My Little Friend' was generally considered the best episode of the series since pilot by commentators", "the" needs to be placed directly before "pilot". Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:20, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅, TRLIJC19  ( talk  •  contribs ) 21:30, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.