Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Seinfeld episodes


 * 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 07:02, 6 April 2008.

List of Seinfeld episodes
I believe the list has finally reached a point that it's well formatted, and easily accessable for changes. Information that needs to be cited is.Gman124 (talk) 00:33, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment: We have decided on consensus that there can be no non-free/fair-use media on lists. Please remove those (completely unnecessary anyway) logos from the article immediately. I'd even say logos like those in no way satisfy fair-use criterion on Wikipedia and should be deleted. The lead is too stubby; combine the small paragraphs into bigger ones that read well together. Why don't you include the image in this article in the lead? indopug (talk) 05:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's correct. Featured list criteria #3 states "It has images if they are appropriate to the subject, with succinct captions or "alt" text and acceptable copyright status. Non-free content (fair use) images must pass the non-free content criteria." That would imply fair use images are allowed. Granted, I didn't see it before you posted this comment so I don't know if there were too many or rationales weren't included, but purely for my own reference, can you point me to where this consensus exists? -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 21:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment: I would go with Indopug's comments as well. Another idea for a suitable image could be the complete series boxset, although you have to remember to include the fair use rationale. ISD (talk) 14:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support: I think that this article is now of FL status. I made a minor edit in the introduction, but that's about it. ISD (talk) 19:45, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I have removed the logos. Gman124 (talk) 14:53, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments-The lead needs more sourcing, also is note 28 really necessary, to me thats trivial. T r U C o  - X  16:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * added some more references to the lead and removed the unnecessary reference. Gman124 (talk) 19:01, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, good. But also, are references 32-33 necessary as well? T r U C o  - X  21:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * removed those two notes. Gman124 (talk) 14:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Support All concerns addressed. Meets the criteria. One thing though, the column width for the writers is very wide, even wider than the title's itself. It'd look more presentable if the directors' and writers' columns were the same width and the second writer onto another line. It's not that big of a deal though. -- ṃ• α• Ł• ṭ• ʰ• Ə• Щ•   @  17:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Support The table format is a little different from what I'm used to, but I can support. -- Scorpion0422 00:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.