Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/The O.C. (season 1)

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 User:The Rambling Man 11:26, 3 August 2008 [1].

The O.C. (season 1)

I have tried to bring this list up to featured standard and I feel it now matches the standard of other similar featured lists. This is my first attempt at featured content so hope I have missed anything really obvious that would fail it. Thanks to Matthewedwards for his input at the recent peer review. --Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:43, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Further to my peer review, I have done a copy edit:
- Full dates are not required by the MOS to be wikilinked any more, so I removed them
- There was one reference with a retrieval date of 1989, so I updated that
- I also converted all the references to {{cite web}} or {{cite news}}
- Some of the publishers in the references were itallicised, so I removed those by moving them from work= to publisher=.
- Made a few minor changes to some words, using AmEn instead of BrEn, such as "harbour" → "harbor", "whilst" → "while", etc and date format on "26 October 2004" → "October 26, 2004"

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 19:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

question - Image:The_O.C._the_complete_first_season.jpg appears to be decorative, how does this image meet WP:NFCC? Fasach Nua (talk) 15:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am by no means an expert on image policies so if this image violates policy or consensus requires it's removal I will not hesitate in doing so. Correct me if I'm wrong but I guess the criteria you think it fails is "8. Significance". This is my interpretation of why it doens't violate policy but if I am wrong please let me know:

The image accompanies it's relevant DVD section and quickly allows readers to identify and verify various facts about the DVD, such as name, number of discs. It also shows how the DVD is packaged and distributed. Digipak is an incorrect general word often used and refers to a very specific method. It is difficult to describe exactly a seven disk set is packaged & distributed in words and an image does this very well. On that note would you be more in favour of and image like this [2] which perhaps portrays some of those aspects better. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On reflection, I would keep this image, move it to the infobox and lose the other two. It serves to identify the series and the characters WP:NFCC#3 Fasach Nua (talk) 08:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would oppose promotion while the three non-free images are included Fasach Nua (talk) 12:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not in favour of moving the image in question to the infobox as Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Style guidelines#Image prefers a poster or intertitles. Given this could you clarify you opposition, is purely based on the number of fair-use images, or on a specific picture violating a WP:NFCC, because you said you were in favour of keeping the DVD image. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The DVD image at the bottom needs to go. There is no critical commentary on said image (Critical commentary does not constitute listing the features on the DVD set). The image of the cast is a little more borderline. My question is, are we going to be looking at the same people for each succeeding season page (Appears that way on the next two season pages)? If so, then it should go, as there is nothing special about the look of any of these characters, thus standard free images of all these "living" people can be attained if images are even necessary. The only image I don't have a problem with is the infobox image, as general consensus has always been that the infobox is fair-game for the universal "identifier" image of the article. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done, but i'm not sure about consensus always having existed. I feel a valid point to make under WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, is that earlier this year this article was promoted with seperate fair-use DVD images for the infoboxes of three different releases. Was this wrong? I think establishing a clear consensus could be useful.

Additionally although not really an issue here I will try to address your concerns with cast photos for subsequent seasons. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:16, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image of the DVD boxset served to fulfill the function of both remaining images, it illustrated the programme, and it illustrated the cast. WP:NFCC minimal uses would indicate that if one image can perform the function of multiple ones, then the single image should be used in preference to the multiple images Fasach Nua (talk) 12:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. From WP:NFCC minimal usage applies when one image conveys "equivalent significant information". This is clearly not the case as the poster confirms additional significant info. like the date, time network of release none of which are information that can be obtained from the DVD image. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would imagine the date, times and network could all be conveyed using GFDL text, therefore I oppose promotion Fasach Nua (talk) 14:31, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Being unsure of the fair-image minefield I consulted The Rambling Man, and have done what he suggested. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's one solution. You could have also just put the DVD cover in the infobox, and satisfied many elements: The cast, the name of the show, the identifier that it is the first season. It's also the image the studio deemed to represent the first season. Though, if you choose to take that route, I would crop the discs out of the picture. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 05:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, I would prefer the DVD cover in the infobox, as it's the official designation of the season, but I won't stake an oppose on it. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 23:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment "from the wrong side of the tracks" doesn't sound very encyclopedic to me. It doesn't tell us much and sounds more appropriate for a fictional novel. Use something more concrete, like "a troubled teen who grew up as an alcoholic and drug user" as an example Gary King (talk) 04:01, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply, I agree that as it stands it doesn't sound entirely encyclopedic, however it was an official description used by FOX in their show description. The FOX website has since been removed however it is used on the official Warner Bros. page (OC Insider), and has also been used as a description numerous times in the news [3], [4], [5]. You may feel your original comment still stands but I just thought i'd raise this point incase you feel it is better kept (and possible referenced). Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recall that it was indeed used to describe the series; if that is the case, then I suggest getting the exact quote, putting it in quotes, and then referencing the quote. Gary King (talk) 17:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done, the quote is split and referenced at the end of the sentence, which hopefully should suffice. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:57, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, it looks better now. Gary King (talk) 17:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Did Network Ten air the entire season, including those already aired by ~~Seven~~ Nine, or did they just pick it up from where ~~Seven~~ Nine left off? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 03:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From what I remember reading (sometime last week), they aired the other three (previously aired on Nine) before showing the rest. I am annoyed however as I can't find a reference or something to verify this. But this wouldn't be suprising as I recall Channel 4 repeating the first few episodes after their long summer hiatus. The only facts I could find were that there were six months in between the channel Nine & Ten airing The O.C., with Ten purchased all the rights.^[6]. This by no means proves my claim, and assuming no proof can be found, should I change the wording to something along the line of "with Network Ten airing the remaining episodes"? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support I provided a Peer Review, and my concerns there and here have been taken care of. Looks good. Everyone else's comments look to have been addressed, and it appears to meet the criteria. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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