Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Highlander: The Series (season 2)
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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:Matthewedwards 23:11, 10 January 2009 [1].
I am nominating this episode list because I think it meets all the criteria. It's accurate, complete and has reliable sources. It has recently undergone Peer Review and has been copyedited by three different editors. It was modelled after the most recently featured episods list such as The O.C. (season 4) and is now ready to get your comments. Thank you for your time, Rosenknospe (talk) 20:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The panoramic image of Vancouver is excellent, but does it really have to be that big? -- Scorpion0422 20:16, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you using IE6 by any chance ? I know the Wide image template doesn't work with it and makes the page ridiculously large, although it works fine with IE7 and Firefox. We tried to use the Panorama simple template during Peer Review, but the bottom of the picture gets cropped for some reason. I'd welcome any other idea you might have. Rosenknospe (talk) 20:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm using Firefox, and in addition a large resolution, and that infobox image is a little big.--SRX 20:57, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'm afraid most infobox pictures in episode lists are 200 to 250 px wide, see for example 30 Rock (season 2), The O.C. (season 4), or all Lost or The Simpsons lists. In fact, this picture is quite near the lower limit of the range, so I don't feel I did anything out of the ordinary. Do you find it really disturbing or looking like an advertisement ? Rosenknospe (talk) 21:25, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This in a way goes against WIAFL Cr 6, Visual appeal. because the image is very distracting. I would consult with the respective project(s) to discuss reducing the default size for the images in the infobox.--SRX 22:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
- Image size is fine; they're typically up to 256px in width. Gary King (talk) 22:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, I've just requested input from WikiProject Television, as well as The Simpsons, The Office (US), Lost and Degrassi task forces. (And somebody already commented, thank you !) I hope a discussion will take place. However, until a new consensus is built, I think it better to stick to the current one and keep the image size for now. I will of course change it if necessary. I hope this answers your concerns. Thank you for taking the time to comment, Rosenknospe (talk) 22:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems a bit excessive to contact so many WikiProjects; I don't think that the criterion conflicts with any WikiProject guidelines. Gary King (talk) 22:11, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I wanted to get an answer, though I didn't think I'd get it so quickly, and I thank you very much for that. Sorry if I've been excessive, but I've got FLC nerves ;D Rosenknospe (talk) 22:20, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem, I definitely understand the nerves part. Anyways, no harm done; I think the lesson learned here is that when someone suggests something, take it into consideration but always go with what you think makes the most sense and explain why (I'm not saying that anyone is correct in this particular case, but I think this is a good general rule to follow). Gary King (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, I will keep that in mind. Rosenknospe (talk) 22:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem, I definitely understand the nerves part. Anyways, no harm done; I think the lesson learned here is that when someone suggests something, take it into consideration but always go with what you think makes the most sense and explain why (I'm not saying that anyone is correct in this particular case, but I think this is a good general rule to follow). Gary King (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I wanted to get an answer, though I didn't think I'd get it so quickly, and I thank you very much for that. Sorry if I've been excessive, but I've got FLC nerves ;D Rosenknospe (talk) 22:20, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems a bit excessive to contact so many WikiProjects; I don't think that the criterion conflicts with any WikiProject guidelines. Gary King (talk) 22:11, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, I've just requested input from WikiProject Television, as well as The Simpsons, The Office (US), Lost and Degrassi task forces. (And somebody already commented, thank you !) I hope a discussion will take place. However, until a new consensus is built, I think it better to stick to the current one and keep the image size for now. I will of course change it if necessary. I hope this answers your concerns. Thank you for taking the time to comment, Rosenknospe (talk) 22:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Image size is fine; they're typically up to 256px in width. Gary King (talk) 22:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This in a way goes against WIAFL Cr 6, Visual appeal. because the image is very distracting. I would consult with the respective project(s) to discuss reducing the default size for the images in the infobox.--SRX 22:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'm afraid most infobox pictures in episode lists are 200 to 250 px wide, see for example 30 Rock (season 2), The O.C. (season 4), or all Lost or The Simpsons lists. In fact, this picture is quite near the lower limit of the range, so I don't feel I did anything out of the ordinary. Do you find it really disturbing or looking like an advertisement ? Rosenknospe (talk) 21:25, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What I meant by my comment was that it isn't really necessary to have a large panoramic image in this article. A smaller (200-300px) image of the city would work better. -- Scorpion0422 01:09, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ooh. Sorry for not getting it. Well, I chose this image because it matched the color of the page and you can see several filming locations of the series on it, but okay, I'll go find another one. Rosenknospe (talk) 21:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I am using Firefox, and I think the image looks fine. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have replaced the Vancouver wide image by a normal-sized one. Hope this works. Any other thoughts ? Thanks for commenting, Dabomb87 ! Rosenknospe (talk) 20:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I am using Firefox, and I think the image looks fine. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ooh. Sorry for not getting it. Well, I chose this image because it matched the color of the page and you can see several filming locations of the series on it, but okay, I'll go find another one. Rosenknospe (talk) 21:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What I meant by my comment was that it isn't really necessary to have a large panoramic image in this article. A smaller (200-300px) image of the city would work better. -- Scorpion0422 01:09, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) It is obvious that you have exerted much effort into this excellent article, kudos to you and the other collaborating copy-editors!
- "MacLeod discovers Tommy had been hired by Mike to kill Gallen" I think that a "that" should be inserted before "Tommy".
- "Sullivan kills Coleman when he tries to buy George" Literally?
- Yes. Those are tough men. Rosenknospe (talk) 21:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "MacLeod and Charlie meet Sara Lightfoot (Michelle Thrush) and baby Jamie who are fleeing the Hoskins family." Needs a comma after "Jamie".
- "Xavier St. Cloud uses mercenaries to behead fellow Immortals." "uses"-->employs.
- "so MacLeod fights
herand beheads her. " - "sarcophagus" Wikilink it.
- "MacLeod realizes Constantine"-->MacLeod realizes that Constantine...
- "Richie joins MacLeod in Paris because he is chased" Add being before "chased".
- The "Notes" need references. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The note about Michel Modo is self-referential and in my opinion doesn't need to be sourced, and I have provided references for the two others. I have done all the modifications you suggested, too. Thank you very much for taking the time ! Rosenknospe (talk) 21:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources
What makes http://www.hulu.com/highlander a reliable source?- According to their About page, "Hulu was founded in March 2007 by NBC Universal and News Corp and is operated independently by a dedicated management team". Rosenknospe (talk) 21:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Likewise http://web.archive.org/web/20000104020414/retrovisionmag.com/index.html? Dabomb87 (talk) 21:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Their home page archived here states that they were a magazine publishing excerpts on their website. Rosenknospe (talk) 21:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I will leave this source unstruck so that other reviewers can evaluate the source. Although it is probably good enough, we need to be absolutely sure, because it sources WP:BLP material. In my mind, the fact that it is a print magazine does not fully prove that it is reliable, although it makes it more likely. We still need to know what kind of fact-checking they do. Anyway, this source is not going to stop me from supporting, I am just leaving it unstruck so that other reviewers can form an opinion of their own. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- For all it's worth, it's listed at OCLC 40987681. Thank you for supporting, Dabomb87, have a happy new year ! Rosenknospe (talk) 12:00, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I will leave this source unstruck so that other reviewers can evaluate the source. Although it is probably good enough, we need to be absolutely sure, because it sources WP:BLP material. In my mind, the fact that it is a print magazine does not fully prove that it is reliable, although it makes it more likely. We still need to know what kind of fact-checking they do. Anyway, this source is not going to stop me from supporting, I am just leaving it unstruck so that other reviewers can form an opinion of their own. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Their home page archived here states that they were a magazine publishing excerpts on their website. Rosenknospe (talk) 21:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from SRX
Comments from Truco (talk · contribs)
- Lead
- It aired September 27, 1993 in broadcast syndication,[2] continuing to follow the adventures of Duncan MacLeod, a 400-year-old Immortal who can only die if he is beheaded. - how about stating The first episode of the season aired on September 27, 1993...
- The episodes are available at the online video on demand service Hulu, a joint venture between NBC and Fox Broadcasting Company. - on the not "at the"
- The lead should also state when the season ended.
- Production
- The first season aired earlier in the United States than elsewhere, thus in early 1993, Rysher TPE, the distributor that had sold the series to the American market, had to make a decision about financing a new season even though several of its co-producers had yet to air the first season. - this needs to be reworded, but then I got confused at the end. The sentence, to me, is stating that after airing in the U.S., the distributor was going to make a decision whether to finance a new season to the U.S., 'yet the co-producers had yet to air the first season (the part in bold throws the sentence off, it needs rewording.
- You got it right. Rysher was distributor and co-producer at the same time. They invested money and got it back in advertising rights, if you like. The thing is, in North America episodes are aired very quickly after they are filmed (about one week to two months) while in Europe they are typically aired more than a year after they are filmed. (You need time to translate the episode and dub it, then the channels usually wait until September to start a season in order to get the maximum audience.) What happened was, Rysher aired the first season between October 1992 and May 1993. In early 1993, even before the end of the season, they saw that they were getting good ratings and wanted a new season. At this time, none of the European partners (TF1, RTL, Reteitalia) had aired the series, they would only start in fall 1993, at which time the second season was already in production and the first episodes were being aired. So the Europeans wouldn't be able to make a decision. I'll try to explain that in the article, I'm not sure of what you mean by "the part in bold" though, could you please clarify ? Rosenknospe (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, done now. Rosenknospe (talk) 12:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You got it right. Rysher was distributor and co-producer at the same time. They invested money and got it back in advertising rights, if you like. The thing is, in North America episodes are aired very quickly after they are filmed (about one week to two months) while in Europe they are typically aired more than a year after they are filmed. (You need time to translate the episode and dub it, then the channels usually wait until September to start a season in order to get the maximum audience.) What happened was, Rysher aired the first season between October 1992 and May 1993. In early 1993, even before the end of the season, they saw that they were getting good ratings and wanted a new season. At this time, none of the European partners (TF1, RTL, Reteitalia) had aired the series, they would only start in fall 1993, at which time the second season was already in production and the first episodes were being aired. So the Europeans wouldn't be able to make a decision. I'll try to explain that in the article, I'm not sure of what you mean by "the part in bold" though, could you please clarify ? Rosenknospe (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Gaumont Television (France), Rysher TPE (United States) and Reteitalia (Italy)[7] returned for the new season. - what do you mean "returned?" Returned to produce the series?
- Yes. I'll reword that. Rosenknospe (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Rosenknospe (talk) 12:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes. I'll reword that. Rosenknospe (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Amuse Video (Japan) also was no longer part of the co-production, but Gaumont Television Christian Charret signed Filmline International (Canada) as a new partner. - was also not "also was"
- As a result of this new co-production agreement, with less wealthy partners, the budget of the season decreased to US$22 million, half of it coming from French [8] and other European sources,[9] and the income per episode from international sales, which had reached $800,000 in the previous season, decreased too - 1)It is stated that the budget decreased to a certain amount, but what was the budget for the first season? (it helps to clarify this in the article) 2)"half of it coming from the French" - is this intended as it was the French's fault for the decrease or the budget itself? 3)I would make the "and the" into a semi colon 4)What did the income per episode decrease to?
- 1) I'll get you that.
- 2) No, it only means that half of the money came from the French and other Europeans, quite an unusual fact for a North American series. The budget decreased because the co-production agreement was redesigned, and the new partners has less money to invest than the former ones.
- 3) Done.
- 4) I don't have this information, the source only says that it decreased, but not how much income they made in the new season. Rosenknospe (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Everything fixed now. Rosenknospe (talk) 12:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- According to The Hollywood Reporter, pre-production started in April 1993[11] and filming in June the same year. - comma before "and"
- Creatively, the second season was intended to be more action-oriented than the first, but lead actor Adrian Paul refused to do "another kung fu series", insisting that more romance and history be brought in the scripts. - the comma should go within the quotation marks like ","
- Former executives in charge of production Marc du Pontavice and Denis Leroy returned as associate producer and coordinating producer respectively. - comma before "Marc" and after "Leroy"
- David Abramowitz served as head writer,[17] but he could not be credited as such because as Highlander was a Canadian-based show, only Canadian writers could author scripts;[18] Abramowitz was American, and thus was credited as creative consultant instead. - remove the "as" before "Highlander" and add an and before "only"
- Brent Karl Clackson was line producer in Vancouver, succeeded by Patrick Millet (with the title of production manager) on the Paris segment. - add the before "line producer" and add but was before "succeeded"
- The opening theme is "Princes of the Universe" from the 1986 album A Kind of Magic by Queen;[6] incidental music was composed by Roger Bellon. - was not "is" (past tense)
- Cast
- Jim Byrnes was introduced as MacLeod's Watcher Joe Dawson, in the season's first episode "The Watchers". - comma before "Joe"
- Reception
- During the 1993 November sweeps, ratings increased from 3.5 the previous year to 4.1 (a 17 percent gain), meaning that 4.1 percent of viewers aged 18 to 49 watched the episode. - it should be elaborated earlier that the ratings were among adults, because it literally does not "mean that 4.1....etc."--Truco 21:54, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Doing... Rosenknospe (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]- Reworded. Thank you very much for your thorough review. Any other thoughts ? Rosenknospe (talk) 12:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - all my issues were thoroughly addressed, which I agreed upon, and this list now meets WP:WIAFL.--Truco 00:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for supporting ! Rosenknospe (talk) 12:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support
Oppose for now. Several references are books with no publishing date. Quite a few references do not have the same date format.— BQZip01 — talk 06:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]- I can't believe I used the wrong parameter in the Cite books template ! *bangs head on wall* And I didn't realize the Cite news and Cite web templates didn't format dates automatically. (I mean, you get used to comfort ;) Everything's fixed now, thank you for taking a look. Other thoughts ? Rosenknospe (talk) 12:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You aren't the first to make that mistake. Won't be the last. It has my support now. — BQZip01 — talk 23:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you ! Have a nice day, Rosenknospe (talk) 10:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You aren't the first to make that mistake. Won't be the last. It has my support now. — BQZip01 — talk 23:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I can't believe I used the wrong parameter in the Cite books template ! *bangs head on wall* And I didn't realize the Cite news and Cite web templates didn't format dates automatically. (I mean, you get used to comfort ;) Everything's fixed now, thank you for taking a look. Other thoughts ? Rosenknospe (talk) 12:30, 8 January 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.