Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Trinity Blood 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 16:08, 2 January 2008.

List of Trinity Blood episodes edit

I believe this list now meets the qualifications to be a featured list candidates. All of the issues brought up in its previous failed FLC have been corrected. The list is stable and well sourced, with through episode summaries (without being excessive) and full coverage of TV airings and the DVD releases in various regions. AnmaFinotera (talk) 08:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ - the second sentence needs to be sourced (ANN is fine). Episode summaries need to be cleaned up. Characters need to be linked to their respective entry on the character list, and the last seven or so episodes are too long. Excise the extraneous plot details and summarize the episodes more throughly. For your references, use {{cite web}} for the ones that do not use it. As per below, the DVD lists are usually included at the relevant media list or at the main article, but I won't stake an oppose on it. Change the color as well to something more neutral; gray for instance. A DVD image (or collection if available) would be nice as well. All these are pretty manageable though. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the source on the second sentence, fixed the two references that weren't using cite web, and fixed the color and headers. I've started working on the episode summaries and the wikification of characters.

I'm curious about the thing on DVD lists though. I've seen it both way and I've been putting them on the episode pages for all anime and show articles I work on. That's my personal preference since the DVDs are collections the episodes and if someone is looking at the episode lists, to me, that would be where they would most expect to see purchasing options. It would seem odd to me to have a DVD image without a DVD list too. ;-) The anime/manga MOS is kinda ambiguous about it since it includes the list of episodes in the media section and the featured lists seem to deal with it three ways: the way I have it in TB, having the DVD info in the main article, or having it merged into the season table (where there is one). AnmaFinotera (talk) 17:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's vague enough to allow editor discretion in terms of where to put it. I don't find it is necessary, and believe it is more relevant to the media list rather than the episode list, which is per its namesake, concentrated on the episodes. Mention of the DVDs is fine for comprehensiveness purposes. Anyhow, all the sources still need to be put in a {{cite web}} format, including url, title, publisher, and accessdate at the minimum. Also, add the romanji in for the episode titles per previous precedent. This can help you if you have problems with that. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:19, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woops, I thought I'd gotten all of the refs. I think I got the rest this time. :P I used the site to do the romanji...hopefully I got it right. :) Also finished shortening up the episode summaries and wikifying the character names. AnmaFinotera (talk) 02:05, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Superb work. I can happily support. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:42, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~ Support: are there any references for the actual items in the list? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the refs for the air dates are on the column headers, or do you mean the titles themselves? AnmaFinotera (talk) 23:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's referring to the titles themselves, which are better established by the official listing given by Kadokawa and Adult Swim. It's the reason every single other featured anime episode list has a set of "general" references. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would never have thought the titles needed sourcing as we don't have to source the series title or film titles or television episode titles. However, I have put the sources on the column headers. The general references thing just looks ugly to me and doesn't really work to me as they only cover the episode titles not anything else in the article. Hopefully that will be good instead of having to do the general references? AnmaFinotera (talk) 00:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The point of doing the "general" section is to separate the references for the key content of the list, and because inline citations for them look ungainly, and are for specific points of information instead of twenty or so odd items. It's how certain lists have very few inline citations because they merely cite a "general" section. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I can see that side. I'm just so anal that for me, the inline is more accurate. If it has to use general, though, in order to go up in assessment, I guess I'll have to get used to it :P AnmaFinotera (talk) 00:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That implies you're going to do more lists. Go, go, go =) Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 00:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, working on two more episode lists and two character lists at the moment, with more in the queue :D AnmaFinotera (talk) 01:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm - yeh. I wasn't recommending sourcing the titles so much as the summary of each ep. That's where most of the content is :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was always under the impression that the plot details didn't need to be sourced, as citing the episode itself as a source would feel redundant. The general references provide very brief summaries of the episodes, and the list wouldn't be comprehensive if a full plot summary wasn't given. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 02:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay - that's a really good point :)

Support, it seems all the problems brought up by other editors have been fixed. There were a few small grammatical problems in the article, but they were minor and I fixed them myself. Good job. Nikki311 23:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.