Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Sister Wives episodes/archive1
- 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 not promoted by The Rambling Man 18:22, 29 November 2010 [1].
List of Sister Wives episodes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it satisfies the FLC criteria. New episodes will begin in March, and I will continue to maintain the article to ensure it remains in compliance. I am ready and willing to address any concerns. Thanks! (Incidentally, the article Sister Wives is nominated for GAN, if anyone is interested in reviewing that one.) — Hunter Kahn 05:46, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose for three reasons
- The lede, at just over 100 words and only a single paragraph, is woefully short.
- The image fails NFCC 8 on this article. (Though it passes it on the main series article.)
- The list is still too short to pass criteria 3b, with only seven items. This would stand a much better chance after another season... or, preferably, two.
Courcelles 07:01, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - Fails WP:LEAD. Not sure how reliable Religion Dispatches is as a source. Also seems to fail 3b of the criteria. Afro (Don't Call Me Shirley) 13:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per above-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 13:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- This is my first FLC nomination, so I may have been a bit too quick with it. (Although regarding Religion Dispatches, the reliability of it has already been discussed on the talk page.) I'll be happy to withdraw the nom until at least after the second season and bring it back. One question before I do though, what exactly is the size criteria here? A user above referred me to criteria 3b, but all that says is "In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists", and at that page I can't find anything specific about size... — Hunter Kahn 14:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Though some lists are shorter, it generally is recommended that each list has at least 10 items. Afro (Don't Call Me Shirley) 14:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Hunter Kahn, and welcome to FLC and your first nomination. As usual these process can seem a little challenging. So, bear with us, we're here to help you, and all advice provided is usually just to improve your list (and, eventually, your experience of FLC!) so with luck you'll be able to succeed in due course. A couple of ideas of mine:
- The mysterious "3b fail" thing. Well, in my mind at least there seems no reason why not to merge this list into the main article, as it's not so long and therefore may well not be a reasonable standalone list. "Ten items" is an unwritten rule, and in general has recently been nothing more than an unwritten guideline. In fact, if a list is truly standalone then the ten items business is pretty much irrelevant.
- Courcelles' comments are important, the lead is too short, it needs to summarise the list (i.e. could easily be a synopsis of the whole main article), the fair use rationale doesn't usually swing it on a list of episodes, unless it's an image of the DVD of the series or similar.
Although I'm a featured list director, please do remember these are just "thoughts" of mine and I will bow to community consensus. Let me know if I can help further. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.