Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/The Simpsons (season 2)/archive1

The Simpsons (season 2) edit

Wikipedia's best work: Each episode has a description, image, guest stars and its production code
Useful, comprehensive, factually accurate, stable, and well-organised:
- Useful: Allows people to view an individual season of The Simpsons
- Comprehensive: Every episode and notable detail is mentioned
- Factually accurate: There is a link to the official guide on the FOX website
- Stable: The season is no longer aired, so it doesn't need vast updates
Well-organised: Easy to understand format
Uncontroversial: no edit wars or disputes of any kind
Standards / style manual: Layout is clear and concise

I imagine there will be some concerns about notability, but the second season is considered one of the shows most important season because it solidified its status as a pop culture phenomenon. And no, we couldn't do a similiar list with all seasons because there are 18 and 360+ episodes, so it would be a little long. -- Scorpion0422 19:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support as Nominator -- Scorpion0422 19:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The images need fair use rationales for this page. Episode summaries should be expanded, many are single sentence paragraphs. Jay32183 19:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The summaries are the perfect length for the page, otherwise they'd be too long. THe purpose is to just give a short overview of the episode. And the only non-screenshot image has fair use image rationale. -- Scorpion0422 20:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - The screenshots need fair use rationales, and the summaries are greatly insufficient. See List of The Sopranos episodes and List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes. Both of those were promoted recently and have much meatier summaries. You can give a short overview in a full paragraph without being overly detailed. Full paragraphs are better writing than single sentences. Jay32183 20:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support I guess you might as well, but why is it any better than any of the other season articles?--ANDY+MCI=Andy Mci 20:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not necessarily better and if this one passes, the other seasons could be nominated. This one is fully sourced as well. -- Scorpion0422 20:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The writing isn't that good, and I don't really see what makes the article so informative. Croctotheface 22:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for reasons listed above. The overviews are not long enough, and some are poorly written. i.e.:"Lisa falls for a substitute teacher, but Homer ruins it all by acting stupid when meeting him. Then, he (the teacher) leaves." That does not strike me as Wikipedia's best work. But, the article is close, imo. Just a little more work, and it would be a FL. Resolute 06:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose.
- Episodes should be in quotes.
- Television shows should be in italics.
- References should be after punctuation.
- "List of Episodes" should be "List of episodes"
- Summaries should be longer.
- It is a myth that The Simpsons beat The Cosby show. If you look at this reference you will see that The Cosby Show finished in 5th place during that season and The Simpsons finished below a 30th place. They did however beat The Cosby Show a few times. Most notably with "Bart Gets an F", but what the article writes is plain wrong (and by the way not what they said during the commentaries). --Maitch 16:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It appears that this article will be defeated, so rather than leave it up, I'd like to request that it be drawn from consideration. Thanks, -- Scorpion 16:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]