Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Characters of Parks and Recreation/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 Dabomb87 15:42, 5 August 2011 [1].
Characters of Parks and Recreation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I've been working on Parks and Recreation coverage on Wikipedia since the show began, and so this list is the culmination of more than two years of gathering and disseminating sources in that time. I believe list is comprehensive, well-written and thoroughly sourced with reliable articles. I intend one day for this to be the anchor article of a WP:GT. I'm fairly new to the FLC process but am ready and anxious to address any concerns or questions! — Hunter Kahn 16:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Legolas2186
- Can we tweak the infobox image to somehow address the fact that its not a picture of the whole cast? Donna, Ron Swanson and Jerry are missing I believe.
- Use WP:CITEKILL for a cleaner approach to the references, whenever its overflowing, for eg: "rather than guest stars or non-regular supporting cast members.[1][2][3].."
- I'm not sure if this is in WP:CITEKILL, but Parks and Recreation and Parks and Recreation (season 1) use a "Notes" section for sentences where a large number of citations are needed. I've started to do this in Characters of Parks and Recreation as well but I ran out of time. I'll finish this later today or tomorrow. Does this work?
- Remove capitals from reference titles.
- Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by reference titles? — Hunter Kahn 00:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The reference titles are usually just the headlines that source articles use, like "Misguided, She Yearns to Guide" for reference 1. These shouldn't be in all capital letters, even if given that way in the source. The only problem one I see is reference 2 ("PARKS AND RECREATION", which should just be "Parks and Recreation"). Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:56, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by reference titles? — Hunter Kahn 00:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Check the italicization of online vs. printed media in the references. For eg: The A.V. Club is a printed source actually, and you have it italicized in some references and in others, its non-italicized.
- I found similar inconsistencies with Punchline Magazine, and Time wasn't italicized but should have been. I think I've fixed them all now. — Hunter Kahn 00:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
More to come.... — Legolas (talk2me) 15:57, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:34, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments – Have only reviewed the lead and first few sections and have already compiled a laundry list of items. It's something I expect for a page this size (longer than most articles at FAC!), but a good number of these comments are not nit-picks; they are things that should have been spotted before this was nominated. Even a simple read-through would have helped for most of them. Will complete the review as I get time.
|
- Comment: A number of articles on the characters have been proposed for deletion/merging. I think that would need to be resolved before this could be promoted. J Milburn (talk) 14:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, unfortunately, this is a recent development. I've started a centralized thread on the talk page to discuss this, so if anyone could provide input there, I'd highly appreciate it. — Hunter Kahn 21:39, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What is the status of this nomination, please? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:29, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- There is still an ongoing discussion at Talk:Characters of Parks and Recreation about whether some of the individual character articles should be merged or not (anyone who would care to provide input there would be very much appreciated, by the way), so as the nominator I'd be OK with this FLC being withdrawn for the time being. I expect to bring it back down the road when and if this discussion is resolved. (I may also nominate it for a peer review before doing so.) — Hunter Kahn 19:21, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.