Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes/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 not promoted by User:Scorpion0422 03:41, 4 September 2008.

List of The Office (U.S. TV series) episodes
I think this fulfills the FL requirements. Nergaal (talk) 04:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

Gary King ( talk ) 14:45, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Still are issues like the above.
 * I believe that points 1&3 are ok in some countries/areas even in the literary English–although I might be wrong. Anyways, I solved them. As for #4, I really do not believe it needs a ref (it is a relatively minor plot detail that can be verified by watching the episode). Nergaal (talk) 17:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm asking because it might as well be specified as it shouldn't be hard to find, not because it needs a ref; which it would as a side-effect, anyways. Gary King ( talk ) 18:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * why isn't this link ok? http://www.tv rage.com/person/id-48829/?show_all_gcredits=1#ecast_6061
 * also, I went through the text again... Nergaal (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The link is blacklisted; it was probably spammed on several articles before. Gary King ( talk ) 20:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * so it is basically worse than unreliable? Nergaal (talk) 20:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Basically Gary King ( talk ) 21:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ←how is http://www.hollywood.com/celebrity/Rashida_Jones/186511? also, is there any point to continuing with this? I've put a humongous amount of time into this and it seems that little has changed. should I just give up on this article? Nergaal (talk) 23:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like it is not considered reliable. Gary King ( talk ) 00:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That is what 1 user thinks, and the obvious counter-question is: what makes it unreliable such that it cannot be used to list the appearances of a certain character? Also, you still did not answer wather there is any point in continuing with this FLC. Nergaal (talk) 00:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The primary issue is that it is unclear how the information at that URL is obtained. Also, I think I suggested at the beginning of my review that this be withdrawn so that it can be worked on before re-submitting it to FLC; if I had not mentioned this, that I will mention it now. It gives everyone more time to work on the article and it does not cause a strain on the already stretched reviewers at FLC; I'm the only person that has gotten to this FLC so far (besides Ealdgyth, who checked the URLs), so there might be other issues that others bring up that I missed. Gary King ( talk ) 04:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * With regards to hollywood.com, and a similar link on one of my FAC submissions, User:Ealdgyth at WP:Featured article candidates/Mother and Child Reunion (Degrassi: The Next Generation) said "Given the information being sourced to it, I can deal with this. However, I would be much more worried about using it for contentious information." TVShowsonDVD.com is owned by TV Guide and is considered reliable. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The link shows the appearances of the character, and as a result it shows that it has been disappeared from most of the episodes. I do not think this is contentious. Nergaal (talk) 16:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://tvoholic.com/
 * It is only meant to say that there are x episodes, of which y are 1h long. Nergaal (talk) 18:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. On this site, perhaps you could find something like TV Guide for the information? Ealdgyth - Talk 21:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Current ref 28 is lacking a publisher.
 * I'd try to replace the IMDb reference with something a bit less likely to get challenged.
 * The zaptoit refs are showing up as deadlinks in the link checker tool.
 * Otherwise sources look okay. Links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The Zap2it links are NOT dead. The problem is that they contain the "|" character, and since I've used citeweb, the template reads it as the end of the url. Any ways around that? Nergaal (talk) 18:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Urf. No clue. Do they work from the article itself? If they do, then don't worry about it. If they don't work, I have no idea.. you might have to format the refs by hand. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If they don't work, consider replacing the "|"s with an ndash or colon? I'll take a look at the page tomorrow. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * Don't start with "This is a list of..."
 * rephrased entire intro


 * The DVD image appears to fail WP:NFCC
 * removed; but no images?


 * "The program" --> "The series"
 * The Office (U.S. TV series) is linked to on the second use of The Office, not the first
 * "and a full-length second and third season in 2005–2006, respectively in 2006–2007." doesn't make sense
 * "two sets of webisodes." -- Is "sets" the right word? Perhaps "seasons"?
 * Many Featured episode Lists where the series also have season pages do not include episode summaries, and instead leave them for the season pages.
 * All the Featured episode lists where the series also have season pages transclude the episode tables from the season pages. This allows for easy updating because when the season page is updated, the main list is updated automatically.
 * UK, not U.K., and because of that, US, not U.S.
 * You suggest moving the page? Nergaal (talk) 05:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I have to oppose at the moment because it's just not up to current episode list standards. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 20:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * YESSS, somebody actually bothered to write specific complains and not just a random pick. I will try to fix these issues within the next few days. Nergaal (talk) 04:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I've rephrased most of the intro, and I think I dealt with all the complains listed. Any other problems? Nergaal (talk) 06:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe my "specific complains [sic]" are under the "Resolved comments from Gary King (talk)" banner up top?  Gary King ( talk ) 14:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * And I believe I solved all of them. It is possible to have skipped a very few but I kind of doubt that. Nergaal (talk) 16:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.