Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Peep Show 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 01:36, 5 March 2008.

---

List of Peep Show episodes

Self-nomination. I believe that this list is of a high enough standard to become an FL. The introduction is comprehensive, the image in the article is given a full fair-use rationale and the article is well referenced, with synopsis' of all 24 episodes currently broadcast. ISD (talk) 12:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - Good to see that somebody else got around to doing this before I did, I suppose I can claim for about 10% of the work... Anyway, looks pretty good, the show won Best Comedy at the Brit Coms in 2007 as well, which might be worth mentioning (David won Best actor as well). Gran² 15:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply to comment - I've added the other award as requested. ISD (talk) 13:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Resolved stuff from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

• Comment, some minor points before I support.
  • Any reason why you're wikilnking Mitchell and Webb and not David Mitchell and Rob Webb on their own, as is the case on the Peep Show page?
  • "...point-of-view of the characters..." - perhaps worth emphasising that it's from the physical point of view (i.e. you're in their heads) rather than their emotional points of view?
  • "The beginning of series..." - should this be clarified? It's either "the beginning of series one..." or "Early episodes...." or something.
  • "co-worker" - maybe just me being old-fashioned but British English used to call these colleagues, but no drama either way I guess.
  • "He also falls in love and later marries American Christian Nancy (Rachel Blanchard), whom later leaves him because the marriage was arranged to get Nancy a visa. However, it is clear that Jez loves her. Mark gets Sophie to love him, although by the time he does he no longer truly loves her. They get married, though Mark does not want to, but then Sophie leaves Mark just after the wedding ceremony.[3]" - this reads quite clumsily, I'd suggest an independent copyedit of this lot.
  • "The first series started on September 19, 2003.[4] As of 2008, four series have been broadcast, with a fifth series in production." - merge these two... "2003, and as of..."
  • Order references numerically (so each use of [4], [14] (except in front of [13]!), [21] (except for [20]!) and [28] (apart from [27]) in the synopses should be first).
  • "Mark gets into trouble with his love Sophie as she sits on his hand, with Jez after laughing at his musical work and with some children who are bullying him" - can't quite make this out. Perhaps just a semicolon after trouble or an em-dash?
  • "experiments on drugs" or should it be "experiments with drugs"?
  • "Jez has is stomach pumped."?
  • "thus damaging Mark's chances of her loving him" - clumsy.
  • "World War II" - British English - "Second World War".
  • Wikilink "tenner" for our non-English readers.
  • Wikilink "sectioned".
  • I know the synopses are supposed to be summary style but the prose leaves a little to be desired in my opinion, sentences can be better flowed into one another. Something to consider working on, while not essential for FLC, it would improve the article immeasurably.
  • " 'El Dude Brothers'" - first and only mention.

Hopefully some of these comments are of use, good luck with the FLC. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Response to comment - I've carried out most of the requests you asked for. ISD (talk) 13:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Reponse to comment - I've tried to improve the prose as well. ISD (talk) 21:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• Further comments
  • Any reason why the episode numbers are centrally aligned with the column heading while the other two columns (whose headings are also centrally aligned) are left-aligned?
  • "Mark tries to impress her while Jez attempts to attract Toni's sister, whom Mark incorrectly tells him has cancer." confusing.
  • "His anger leaves Mark needing therapy." - him needing therapy.
  • " in an unusual sort of date" strange wording.
  • "Jez;s life"?
  • "...her about dying of his uncle's..." - him dying.
  • " gets revenge" - strange wording - and how, exactly?
  • "stops Mark for seeing Sally again." - stops Mark from seeing Sally again?
• Probably needs another copyedit in my opinion - try WP:LOCE... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Response to comments - I've carried out all the edits, and have taken the article to the League of Copyeditors. ISD (talk) 09:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

• Support - good work, just the right balance between detail and conciseness. Tompw (talk) (review) 20:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
• The episode titles should be bolded so that they are easier to distinguish.
• I am not at all familiar with the series and the first thing I noticed when I was browsing it is that no episodes aired in 2006. Is there a reason for this and if there is, perhaps it should be mentioned.
• The writers and directors should be included in the list.
• I would prefer to see this list use the {{Episode list}} template that other FLs like The Simpsons (season 6) and Lost (season 3), Degrassi: The Next Generation (season 2), etc. use. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Response to comments - I've tried to carry out all the edits you asked for. I can't find a source saying why there wasn't a series in 2006. As all the episodes are written by the same two people, it is probably redundant to mention them in the tables, but I included them in the introduction.

• Object at present. Could you explain a bit on the British Sitcom Guide source? From the "about us" page, it seems to be written by contributors just like a wiki. I've got to object on WP:RS for now, but if you can explain the situation, I'd understand. JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• • Response to objection - As someone who works for the British Sitcom Guide, I know how the site works. The site is controlled by a set of internal editors, with anyone wanting to make any changes having to email them to the site. Someone who works for the website then carries it out. Therefore, I would claim that the site is a reliable source. ISD (talk) 11:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment wouldn't that be a conflict of interest, linking to a website you work on? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Response to comment - I have made one edit to the overview page. The page had did not include one of the director's names. I normally work on the news section. ISD (talk) 12:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
        • Support. Thank you for the clarification. JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

CONDITIONAL support

• The table headers are hard to read. Could you change the text to white. Also, the bg colour for season 3 is really, really bright.
• Question: Are there no actual episode titles for the first two seasons?

-- Matthew | talk | Contribs 08:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

• • Response to conditional support - Rather than changing the colour of the text, I've changed the colour of the table readings so that they are now all white, thereby making the text easier to read and making all the tables uniform. None of the episodes in the first two series have titles. No titles are listed on the DVDs, the IMDb, the Channel 4 website or on any other site. ISD (talk) 09:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    • OK, that's fine, then. -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 05:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

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