Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Megas XLR 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 NapHit 17:21, 21 October 2012 [1].

List of Megas XLR episodes

Featured list candidates/List of Megas XLR episodes/archive1

Nominator(s): Khanassassin ☪ 11:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list as I believe, that after quite some work, it's ready for FL Status. :) Khanassassin ☪ 11:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 01:07, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Comments

The lede should have three big paragraphs, per WP:WIAFL. The lede of that list seems rather short. Also, the lede seems very messy. I'd recommend a peer review, and a copy-edit, perhaps from GOCE. The lede is indeed too short.

A peer review for a short lead only? Also the question is what should be written and not how much.--Kürbis (✔) 17:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Correct. Perhaps just a copy-edit. TBran dl ey 17:31, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Nowhere in WP:WIAFL does it say that leads must have three paragraphs. WP:LEAD doesn't even say that; in fact, it says that some shorter articles should have leads that are less than three paragraphs. As it happens, I think this lead is a bit short for my tastes, but I don't want some non-existent criteria to become a standard by force. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:11, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - The problem is that the series didn't receive enough coverage. Interview, reviews, almost nothing, though there's a very big following. If I could I'd make 3 gigantic paragraphs... but I can't. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:26, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unlink action per WP:OVERLINK
- Done.
The lede image should have alt text
- Done.
Image needs a caption and description, with a thumb*
- Done.
That image doesn't seem very high-quality. Could it be replaced?
- Looks pretty fine to me.
Add plainrowheaders to the top of the series overview table
- Done.
series overview table does not MOS:DTT, need to add row and colscopes to ensure it does
- Done.
Series overview table seems a little messy
- Not anymore.
Add table captions to all tables per MOS:DTT, with add the begin of the coding of the table
- Done.
Don't use ";" due to a recent discussions about it. Use actual sub-section headers
- Uh... I didn't. I used plain bold, which is OK.
2004–2005 → 2004–05, as per WP:YEAR
- Done.
Only have "Megas XLR episodes" linked in external links
- Done.
"The series was met with positive reception", to "The series has met with positive reception"
MOS:TV states that "For very lengthy series, generally 80+ episodes, it may be necessary to break the episode list into individual season or story arc lists." This series has far less than 80 episodes and the season articles contain nothing but the episode list tables. There's no decent Lede, nothing about cast, production, reception, or anything that would require separate pages per WP:SIZE, WP:SPINOUT, WP:SS or WP:SIZESPLIT.

"may" does not mean "should" or "must"--Kürbis (✔) 17:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but at this time, the article doesn't meet featured list criteria. Please get a copy-edit, and/or a peer review, then re-nominate. TBran dl ey 15:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that it is a content-fork, why you state that it should be peer reviewed and re-nominated?--Kürbis (✔) 17:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See above. TBran dl ey 17:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I got the rest of the minor issues. TBran dl ey 01:07, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 12:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Lead too short, should be at least two paragraphs.*
- There are two paragraphs. :)
There's no fair use rationale for the use of that image in this article.
- There is now. :)
Don't really think we need to link "comedy".
- OK, de-linked. :)
" a New Jersey Junkyard" junkyard shouldn't be capitalised.
- Sorry, didn't notice. De-capitalised :)
Columns for the same information should be the same width from section to section.
- Done.
Where are the air dates referenced?
- MSN source.
  - Directly cite it then, like you do with production codes. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:36, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done.
How could number 12 be aired 8 months after number 11?
- Sorry, air date error.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:40, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I've resolved the issues. :) Cheers, --Khanassassin ☪ 14:48, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: You might consider adding some more DVD information like release dates, rather than just stating it was released on DVD. -- Wikipedical (talk) 19:07, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The source doesn't say what the release date was, that's the problem. --Khanassassin ☪ 14:54, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, per criterion 3b. I don't think there is enough content yet to warrant three articles (1, 2, 3). Good raise 11:21, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.