*Oppose
- I know it is almost customary, but I really do question the value of the DVD box image under NFCC 8. The purpose of use- given as "To show show the cover for public interest and/or it's content." is extremely weak.
- I've removed the image. You're right, the FUR was no good, and unable to come up with anything stronger (I really can't think of a compelling reason it would be necessary) I nixed it entirely. There's already a free image of two of the cover stars beside "Cast", and I suppose we could add the title card in the ibox if an image there is necessary, but I don't think it would be of any particular value. Frickative 19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "The executive producers were series creators Ryan Murphy and Brad Falchuk, and Dante Di Loreto," Remove one of those ands.
- I was trying to denote the fact that Murphy and Falchuk are the series creators and Di Loreto isn't, but yes, the end result was unnecessarily awkward. I've re-worded it as "The executive producers were Dante Di Loreto and series creators Ryan Murphy and Brad Falchuk'. Any better? Frickative 19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I like that myself, good point before the change. I thought it looked a little odd, too, but never got back to that. CycloneGU (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "Due to a scheduling conflict with American Idol, the fourteenth episode, "Hell-O", was pushed back to 9:30 pm, before moving back to the earlier timeslot for the remaining episodes." Isn't that a bit trivial for a season article?
- Agreed and removed. Frickative 19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "Virtually every song on the five albums has been released as singles with exception to bonus tracks and the entirety of Journey to Regionals, which had no singles." Just try that sentence again.
- This one is my fault. I'll fix this in the morning or so, I have only now seen this review and I have had a long day, am half asleep, and not on my best thinking terms. If I think of something good, I'll fix it tonite. =) CycloneGU (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- How's this? "Journey to Regionals did not release any official singles, while the remaining four albums were fully released as singles." Currently in article. CycloneGU (talk) 04:25, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Like Matthewedwards, figuring I may eventually watch this show, I skipped the Episodes section entirely.
- The Cast section, first paragraph. Any words besides "played" and "portrayed", which are both used many times would be nice.
- How about using brackets? i.e. "Glee is a series where William Schuester (Matthew Morrison) teaches a group of misfit students..." Otherwise, I'll find some synonyms. CycloneGU (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "played Santana Lopez and Brittany," Commas. We need more commas. Actually, that entire sentence could do with some work.
- 3 paragraphs in a row starting with "The season" is rather jarring
- Decided to fix this while doing the item below. CycloneGU (talk) 03:52, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, the entire Cast section is prone to run-on sentences, and so many citations it is almost unreadable. Any chance those citations would be fine at the ends of sentences?
- Fixing this now. I like putting all the citations at the end. I don't see an issue with doing it this way. CycloneGU (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Let me know if this is what you had in mind, or if you prefer them at the end of the relevant sentence instead of in the middle. CycloneGU (talk) 03:52, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "and the UK[90][88] and" footnotes in order, please
- Fixed. Frickative 19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "ARIA and CRIA,[102][98] an" Again
- Fixed. Frickative 19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "and gold by the BPI and RIAA.[99][91]" Ditto.
- Fixed. Frickative 19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You need to formally define RIAA- by putting it in parenthesis next to the expansion- to use it.
- Oops, total oversight. Fixed. Frickative 19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "However, as Scott Collins for the Los Angeles Times noted, the other major networks besides Fox all opened the evening by airing a speech by President Barack Obama, disrupting regular viewing patterns" You're attributing something to someone, the citation must be repeated before the sentence
- Done. Frickative 19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "The following eight episodes averaged 6.63–7.65 million viewers," How can you "average" a range? Averages are by definition a single number.
Will fix this shortly. CycloneGU (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I'm holding off on that ATM until Frickative checks this. I think she meant one show averaged 6.63 million viewers over the hour, and the highest averaged 7.65 million over the hour. The wording isn't clear, however, so this does need some clarification. I'll let her look at this. CycloneGU (talk) 03:55, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, this entire ratings section needs a chop; almost all this data is in the table.
Fixed the first point, but I agree no need to say something twice, so it may be removed shortly upon study. May render above point pointless. CycloneGU (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- General refs need access dates.
- Done. Frickative 19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Refs 1, 12, 61, 75, 82 need locations
- Done. Frickative 15:31, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Refs 11, 38, 139 needs the work
- Done. 11 and 139 had two publisher parameters, silly mistake. Frickative 15:31, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Refs 12, 15, 16, 49, 58, 59, 61, 75, 76, 86, 114 need publisher
- What makes Refs 55 and 56 reliable?
- I think these were left over from the early days of the show, when coverage of the supporting cast was sparse. I've replaced them both with a ref to a New York magazine interview. Frickative 23:53, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Refs 101 and 106 won't work in a year and a half. Plan now.
- I'm late to the party, but I show 101 as the AllMusic page (which should work years from now), and 106 is tvbythenumbers.com which I know nothing about in terms of longevity. I had a problem with 102 (a Billboard article), however. CycloneGU (talk) 03:58, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- FOLLOWUP: I've now seen that the refs in question are Scottish charts or such. I still had a problem with 102 tho. CycloneGU (talk) 04:19, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Added archiveurls for both. Billboard has been up and down for the past few weeks, so I've added archiveurls for the six Billboard refs as well. Frickative 15:31, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Until the DVD image is removed or a much, much better rationale written, I must oppose. Courcelles 16:16, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Quick question, but do you oppose every film article up for FA status for having a poster in the infobox? Because there isn't a fair use rationale strong enough for 99% of films to justify that image in the infobox either and that is what the DVD cover equates to in TV since most TV shows don't get posters like films. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:10, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd oppose anything with NFC whose rationale was as weak as this one's was, yes. Look at File:Richardiii poster original.jpg and compare the FUR there to the one I quoted above. Courcelles 09:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, see you're looking at a FUR. But there's nothing in that article that talks about the poster itself. There is no critical commentary in that film article on the poster, and WP:FUC and WP:NONFREE require critical commentary in the article on any piece of promotional material. So, in theory, Frickative could simply copy and paste the FUR from Richard III's poster and use that to justify the use of the DVD cover art since just as much information in the Glee page is supporting those claims as is in the Richard III article supporting the claim that that poster is something illustrating the style of the film. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 13:43, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|