Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes/archive1

List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes

This list is a good collection of episode summaries, nicely sorted, and updated when new information comes out. The pictures pass copyright and it is organized logically. Cnriaczoy42 14:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The lead should be expanded. Also, the last 2 images on the page don't have fair use rationales. Otherwise looks good, leaning towards support once that is taken care of. VegaDark 18:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Pictures taken care of, working on the lead, will be done on Thursday at the latest. Cnriaczoy42 20:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment - The lead looks a lot better now. Except I noticed that there is not a single reference for the entire list. This needs references before It would have my support. Surely there are some episode guides around the net that can be used? Other things I noticed is that the pilot episode is mentioned as never airing, yet isn't on the list. Even if it didn't air I think it should be included, with a note saying it never aired. Another thing is that the first instance the title of the list in the article should be bolded per the Manual of Style. VegaDark 22:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Support - All my concerns have been addressed, as well as the episode description issue. Looks good enough now. VegaDark 22:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Comment - Fair use rationales need to be added to the two most recently added images. VegaDark 07:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        They will be added today when I finish off the others. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 14:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There seems to be an inconsistent level of detail in the episode summaries, some are full paragraphs, others are single sentences. I would prefer all of them as full paragraphs. Jay32183 21:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment This were the official summaries given by Nickelodeon. Do you recommend that they be change dto provide information about the episode rather than juat a teaser? Cnriaczoy42 02:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes. The most recently promoted list of episodes had one paragraph summaries of each episodes plot. If the current text was copied from somewhere else then it definitely needs to be rewritten, potential copyright issue. Jay32183 02:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Do the first four look good enough or are they too long? Cnriaczoy42 02:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Those are good. They are only too long if you care about the table being the exact same size as the image, but that doesn't bother me. Jay32183 03:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        This might not pass. I am still trying with all my might, but at lest two members of Wikiproject:Avatar are insisting that we use the official summaries and that they are not copyvio. I will continue working towards improving this article. Cnriaczoy42 13:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that the episiode text is lifted directly from a TV guide/Nickelodeon? If so, this may be a copyvio. Please can you indicate where you got the episode descriptions from (online, magazine, etc). Colin°^Talk 09:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Conditonal Support~~ Support The episode summaries should be rewritten as above with the added note: spoilers should not be avoided for the sake of not revealing information. If it's really important information it should be included. I also think the fair use rationales on the images could be a little more specific. That is, say why that particular image was chosen for a reason other than it came from the episode, such as "This image illustrates "foo" which is important because "bar". Jay32183 19:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Man I just tacked my own singular fair use onto those. But if it's necessary I can go though and give a reasoning for each. The picture for "The Library" might need to be changed though, never liked it on there anyway. As for the spoilers, there is no reason for spoilers to be on a simple list. The list is there to be a list, not to be details of the episodes, that is what their individual pages are for. There are many people that use the list simply as a reference as to what shows they have missed and then go look for them, spoiling it would be unfair to them. In all fairness the plot information isn't even needed as it isn't always on other featured lists. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 20:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Your choices are include spoilers or do not include summaries. Please note that if you remove the summaries the images are no longer illustrating a significant section of text and would also have to be removed. I suggest you read WP:SPOIL before saying you aren't going to include spoilers. It quite specifically says not to remove text because it's a spoiler, which you did when the nominator of the FLC attempted to expand the episode summaries. Just add the {{spoiler}} tag. Jay32183 20:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Did we meet the conditional support or not? Cnriaczoy42 22:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - You met the condition as far as the summaries are concerned. The lead has been expanded per the above request, and references added. I also requested that the fair use rationales be a little more specific. Instead of just saying "It comes from the episode in question" say something along the lines of "This screenshot shows..." so that non-experts can verify that images were chosen appropriately rather than at random. Carefully selected images were one of the conditions that needed to be met from the fair use debate. Jay32183 06:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        First 20 done, will finish the other 22 tomorrow when I am not falling asleep at the keyboard. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 06:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        That's exactly what I suggested. Report when the last one is done and I'll officially support.Jay32183 07:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Done. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 22:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Good work, I change my opinion to support. Jay32183 22:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per copyvio concerns. -- Ned Scott 05:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Which are, or at least will be by tomorrow, completely gone. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 06:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- - Excellent work. I'm still thinking about this before I move to support, but in the very least I retract my objection. -- Ned Scott 04:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - no references. Also excessive use of fair use images. Renata 07:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- Unless I'm misinformed, wasn't the "excessive use of fair use images" already turned down when it came to lists? I'm pretty sure it was because I remember it having 3 fors and like 15 againsts. Therefore your oppose because of excessive use has no merit. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 20:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is speciffically stated here that that is not an issue. Cnriaczoy42 22:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Renata is claiming the images don't meet FUC#3(don't use more than needed), not that having any unfree image will stop this from being promoted. I personally disagree, but I know what Renata means. Jay32183 23:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Renata is currently on a Wikibreak, and thus cannot strike out his oppose for right now. However, it seems that the conditions of his oppose have been addressed. Y BCZ 01:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- Unless I'm mistaken, all of the copy-vios have now been removed. A reference has also been added. I'll admit, even as a regular editor of the page, I had concerns about if it could reach featured status, but as of now it has my Support.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added TV.com as a reference, and the reference added above needs to be converted to {{cite web}}. Jay32183 20:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Easily done, but I would like to ask for your opinion on the reference's matter on the talk page, we've had some issues with TV.com in the past.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There's an external link in the lead that should be converted to ref format. Other than that the list has a good chance of becoming a FL. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 06:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm surprised I hadn't noticed that earlier. I've taken care of it. Jay32183 07:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]