Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Desperate Housewives (season 1)/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 by The Rambling Man 19:13, 21 September 2009 [1].

Desperate Housewives (season 1) edit

Nominator(s): (SUDUSER)85 14:07, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because I have worked and improved on this article for the past month using my sandbox, then tranferring it to the actual page. I saw it had great potential to become an FL so I did some sprucing up, and added some sources. I think it looks FL worthy now. Please tell me how you feel about the article, thank you! (SUDUSER)85 14:07, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Diaa
  1. The Caption of the infobox image should have a little more details.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I added citation needed templates, replace those with references.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • done However, I can't really find one regarding the special episode. Is that ok? (SUDUSER)85 14:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    All cite needed tags filled. (SUDUSER)85 03:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Expand the first paragraph with a little more about the general plot of the season.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • not done I will work on it tomorrow. (SUDUSER)85 15:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
done I have done some expansion there, how does it look to you? (SUDUSER)85 07:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's good.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 08:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  1. The Production section is mainly about the Crew so I suggest retitling it as such or expanding it to include information about how the season was produced.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Isn't there any info available about the production?--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 01:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. The second paragraph of Cast is merely a list of the supporting characters. I suggest reducing those to be about only the most notable ones and expanding their information.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • done I have expanded the descriptions on the most prominent supporting characters on the season. (SUDUSER)85 15:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. "winning its timeslot of 9:00pm Eastern Standard Time / 8:00pm Central." why winning? didn't it premier at 9:00 PM?--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • done changed to "ranking as first in its timeslot of 9:00pm Eastern Standard Time / 8:00pm Central." (SUDUSER)85 15:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. In "DVD release" add the references for the Release date of every Country next to its name instead of putting them all next to Release dates.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 01:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Is there any info regarding how well the DVDs performed, how many sold and so on?--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 01:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I couldn't find anything regarding DVD sales, I have searched Variety, TV Guide and The Futon Critic yet I could not find anything. Do you have any suggestions? (SUDUSER)85 07:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Under "Awards" I suggest adding a {{see also}} link to List of awards and nominations received by Desperate Housewives.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 01:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  7. What's the general reference used for the episodes air dates, director and writer?--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 01:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  8. General production information should be there like where the season was shot, a little about how the pilot succeeded and made the season and so on.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 08:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • done A very small section but see how it is and tell me how you feel. (SUDUSER)85 15:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Well, I find this to be the main issue actually: Regarding the Episodes summaries, please expand their summaries since their very short and unclear. For example the first episode is more about introducing each character's lives and problems. Trying to find out how she died isn't the main issue of every episode but mostly they find out accidentally about everything.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 08:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • done They're finally done. Each summary is at least three or four lines long. see for yourself. (SUDUSER)85 07:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 11:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image comments
  • File:Desperate Housewives season 1 poster.jpg; resolution is above .1 megapixels, but not significantly so. The rationale could use some beefing up; how does the image aid reader understanding (providing easy reference to the form the work was marketed as, et al.) Also, the raw img link spits me a 403. You need to find the page it's used on and use that as the source URL instead.
    • done I reduced the image size and improved the rationale. I also found a working link. Please check it for yourself. (SUDUSER)85 16:58, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think File:Housewives season 1 cast.jpg's rationale sticks. The appearance of the characters is not markedly different from their (free image replaceable) real life appearances; there's only a line of critical commentary relating to their appearances. Furthermore the most important characters are shown on the season 1 poster. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 22:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • So do you suggest it be removed from the page? Then it will be orphaned. (SUDUSER)85 16:58, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm saying I don't see how it would meet FLC image criteria. If it's orphaned an admin will delete it. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 15:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • done It's been taken out of the page. (SUDUSER)85 05:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on image and prose concerns. Per David Fuchs above, the rationales aren't strong and we don't need two images to depict largely the same thing. Writing needs a tuneup; at random, "Season one was nominated for a total of fifteen Primetime Emmy Awards. Six of the fifteen nominations were won" is clunky and repetitive, "Gabrielle bribes a little girl to keep quiet after catching her and John 'in the act'." is too colloqial. The summary length of the first episode is much longer than that of the other one. Personally, I think the other summaries should be expanded, as right now they don't flow at all; all I see is a series of events. MOS breaches too: "Carlos is arrested, claiming he was 'set-up'. " Use double quotes not single; "as first in its timeslot of 9:00pm Eastern Standard Time / 8:00pm Central" Spaces between the time and am/pm; publications are italicized (e.g. USA Today) I recommend withdrawing and submitting for a peer review. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • partially done I have taken care of the MOS breaches, though i am still rewriting episode summaries. As for the image concerns, see my responses for David Fuchs' comments above. Also per your suggestion, I did not want to send it for a PR because I felt that it would take alot of time. (SUDUSER)85 17:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • All the summaries have been rewritten (SUDUSER)85 07:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks, I'll look at the list in detail sometime later this week. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:54, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Wrestlinglover
  • Support: pass critieria in my eyes.--WillC 09:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stay tuned.--WillC 04:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I got busy and forgot all about this review. I don't think I will have the time, or the will to review this today or tomorrow. So sorry I placed this here.--WillC 09:26, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I found some time to review down to the reception section. Will finish later if I find somemore.--WillC 09:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Desperate Housewives season 1 poster.jpg is the promotional poster. Why use this instead of an image of the boxset?--WillC 09:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well the promotional poster was the original image in the article, and after looking at articles such as Lost (season 1) and The O.C. (season 2), I thought using a poster would be okay?
      • Was wondering, the South Park articles have the boxset.--WillC 09:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Marc Cherry wrote the script for the Housewives pilot and his agent appealed it to six networks; CBS, NBC, Fox, HBO, Showtime and Lifetime, only to have all of them turn it down." → "Marc Cherry wrote the script for the Housewives pilot and his agent appealed it to six networks (CBS, NBC, Fox, HBO, Showtime, and Lifetime); however, only to have all of them turn it down." Sounds better imo.
    • done fixed
      • Okay.--WillC 09:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the initial season, 13 roles received star billing." Makes no sense to me. What? From what I gather from the section, move it to the end of the paragraph and change it to (rough draft) "Overall, there are 13 main starring roles in season one.".--WillC 09:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • done Might I suggest "The first season features a cast of thirteen actors who receive star billing."?
      • That will work.--WillC 09:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Eva Longoria Parker starred as Gabrielle Solis, the materialistic ex–fashion model who cheats on her husband" Wasn't a Parker at the time of the season, make that noted. Like "Eva Longoria (now Eva Longoria Parker) starred as Gabrielle Solis," or any way that may be better.--WillC 09:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • done changed it per your suggestion.

Changes addressed with comments by (SUDUSER)85 13:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

      • Okay, good.--WillC 09:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved issues from Rambo's Revenge (talk · contribs)
Comments from Rambo's Revenge (talk · contribs)
  • DVD release date flags don't meet WP:MOSFLAG, suggest removal
    • done However its a bit confusing when other lists such as Lost (season 1) and The O.C. (season 1) do use flags to illustrate DVD release dates per country. Anyways, no big deal. (SUDUSER)85 06:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ah thats because I wasn't clear. The flags in the DVD table, it was the ones next to the DVD release date in the infobox that were the problem, anyway I've now removed these and put the other ones back. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 08:54, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the lead "Sundays at 9:00 pm", you need a time zone here, because is it Eastern, Central or Pacific time.
  • "of the iTunes Store", you'll need to check which ones, because it will be available in US iTunes Store, possible Canada and UK, but I doubt it will be in the French iTunes Store for example.
  • In the body "9:00 pm Eastern Standard Time / 8:00 pm Central." doesn't look quite right to me. It just seems like a fully spelled out translation the "9/8c" they use in America. However for me with the spelling out and forward slash it just looks a bit messy. Also I think (I'm not American) that May is in daylight saving time, so you shouldn't use the "Standard" in EST. Maybe 9.00 pm ET (8.00 pm CT) would be better.
    • done I used the idea you suggested. (SUDUSER)85 06:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Couldn't find anything explicit in WP:MOSNUM, but I think "#4 out of #156" is a bit encyclopaedic, especially as literal translation would be "out of number 156". I'd put Desperate Housewives ranked 4th out of 156 programs, according to...
    • done put it as "Out of all regular primetime programming that aired during the 2004–2005 American television season, Desperate Housewives ranked 4th out of 156 programs, according to the Nielsen Ratings system.[4]" (SUDUSER)85 06:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the Awards section, in the Emmy titles you shouldn't capitalised "For A" or "In A"
  • Ref 39, be descriptive e.g. add a note in cite web saying something like Program: "Desperate Housewives", Year Range: From "2005 to "2005" → Search
  • Golden Globe award titles should use spaced ndashes instead of hyphens.
  • Original airdate is followed by ref 16 which is about cast and not airdates.
    • done fixed episode guide reference (SUDUSER)85 06:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • A similar search explanation as above would also help in ref 41.
  • Ref 52, says "Weekly Program Rankings Report" whereas all the others say "Weekly Program Rankings", strictly speaking it is the former but I'm not that fussed I just think they should all be consistent.
    • I put it with that title because that's the title of the web page, it's a little odd to look at, when you put it with the other "Weekly Program Rankings" refs, but i just think its important to use the actual title. I hope it's not a major issue? (SUDUSER)85 06:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Obviously this is never something I'd oppose over, but when I open those ABC Medianet pages I get the title of all of them to actually be "Weekly Program Rankings Report", hence my initial comment. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 08:54, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • done fixed the appropriate refs which "Rankings Report" instead of just "Rankings". (SUDUSER)85 09:42, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks pretty good otherwise, although I haven't had time to read the episode summaries. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

done all suggestions by Rambo's Revenge fixed. (SUDUSER)85 06:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I read a few episode summaries in full, and am happy to assume that the rest are of a similar quality. I gave the whole thing a quick check for formatting, spellings and ndashes and only made a few minor changes. Anyway the list now looks in excellent shape and I am happy to lend my support. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:01, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you for your contributions and I'm glad that you like the list! (SUDUSER)85 02:40, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What makes http://www.thestudiotour.com/ush/backlot/street_colonial.shtml a reliable source? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • done You are right, its not affiliated with Universal Studios at all. I have already removed and replaced the source. (SUDUSER)85 03:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The images still need alt text per WP:ALT. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Could you tell me which images need them and give me an example on how to write it? (SUDUSER)85 05:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • done I have filled the images with alt text, you can use this to check it. (SUDUSER)85 11:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • The alt text for the infobox is excellent. The map alt text needs work; I've asked Eubulides (talk · contribs) to help you out. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • Thanks for that. Is there anything regarding the prose that you would like address? (SUDUSER)85 13:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • Done; thanks. Yes, the map text needs work. It currently says "as described by the text" but I don't see any description in nearby text of where the characters' houses are located. Instead, the alt text should say that Wisteria Lane is a cul de sac, and list the houses in order. If the house numbers are important they should also be listed. The idea is to convey the gist of the map to the reader; please see WP:ALT#Maps. Eubulides (talk) 18:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
            • done I've edited the alt text and made it a bit more descriptive. Use the alt viewer to see how it looks. (SUDUSER)85 07:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think the summaries might benefit from a final copy-edit for polish (I made a few), but overall this list meets featured quality. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I appreciate that. (SUDUSER)85 04:54, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Desperate_Housewives_(season_1)/archive1&oldid=1089081518"