Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Law & Order: Criminal Intent episodes/archive1

Add links
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 not promoted by Matthewedwards 22:14, 7 March 2009 [1].

List of Law & Order: Criminal Intent episodes[edit]

Nominator(s): Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email)
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because it's as good as any other Featured episode list. I'v been working on it the last few days. Everything looks okay. Lead section is a little long at 4 paragraphs, but considering the number of list entries I think it's appropriate. Each episode is individually referenced, seasons are referenced also. No episode summaries because each episode has an article. In the future I may make season pages. Thanks for looking. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural note: Nominator is a WikiCup participant. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs)

General
  • Can an image be found to be added in the lead section?
  • Not that I can get to pass WP:NFC#8. I can't think of a single image to use that "would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."
  • Not even one of the main character(s)?--₮RUCӨ 01:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • A DVD cover works in a season article. A Logo works in the article for the series. There really is nothing that can work in a list of episodes. This has been discussed before at WT:TV and WT:NFC. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 04:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider adding a {{future}} (or the respective future tag for tv series) to the article.
  • Done
Lead
  • Unlike the other shows in the Law & Order franchise Law & Order: Criminal Intent gives significant attention to the actions and motives of the criminals, rather than primarily focusing on the police investigation and trial prosecution. -- shows should be "series"
  • Done
  • Episodes do not usually contain trials, and often end in confessions rather than plea bargains or verdicts. -- Why is trial linked here and not in the previous sentence?
  • Done
  • It premiered on NBC on September 30, 2001. -- WP:OVERLINK of NBC
  • Done
  • Walon Green and Robert Nathan signed to take over for the forthcoming eighth season, controlling eight episodes each;[13] however, after making two episodes, Nathan was replaced by Law & Order executive producer Ed Zuckerman. -- controlling isn't the best word choice here, can a replacement be found, something along the lines of "handling"
  • Done
  • For the first five seasons, Vincent D'Onofrio and Kathryn Erbe starred as detectives Robert Goren and Alexandra Eames, Jamey Sheridan played Captain James Deakins,[14] and Courtney B. Vance played Assistant District Attorney (ADA) Ron Carver. -- It should be made aware by adding ",respectively" that who played who. It would be best by adding it after "Eames".
  • Done
  • In 2005 Chris Noth reprised his Law & Order role as Detective Mike Logan,[16][17] and was partnered with Detective Carolyn Barek, played by Annabella Sciorra. -- Comma after 2005
  • Done
  • At the end of season seven, Noth left the series at the end of season seven; he will be replaced in season eight by Jeff Goldblum as Detective Zach Nichols. -- Remove one instance of at the end of season seven
  • Done
Series overview
  • The emdashes should be center aligned.
  • Not Done. Because the airdates are left-aligned, the dashes are too.
  • Yet the disc entries are also left-aligned, and the blank entries have center aligned dashes.?.?--₮RUCӨ 23:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seasons
  • Is it necessary to bold and the episode names?--₮RUCӨ 17:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for looking. Let me know if you have any more. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--₮RUCӨ 21:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I'm afraid I oppose the lack of episode summaries. If season article currently existed with them, that would be fine. In fact it would be okay if the episode articles themselves were of a high standard, but currently I think most (all the ones I've looked at) of the episodes articles could be eligible for redirect/deletion under WP:NOTPLOT. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think they need a cleanup, definitely. If they were all deleted or never existed then I would probably agree, but right now they're here. Having a list of episodes and sticking the summaries in a season page is no different; the reader has to navigate to another page to see them. I'm going to have to think about this, but right now I'm not convinced it's a good idea.
  • I definitely would not oppose if there were featured season pages. Ideally I would have the seasons featured first, but I guess that if the season pages were of a good standard I would also not oppose. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't say they did. I was just saying it would be preferable as it would ensure the episode summaries have been copyedited. I realise my oppose may seem strange, but basically if I redirected one of the episode pages to this list tomorrow (hypothetically of course), that would be correct under Wikipedia policies, and it is not an action that should be undone. The WP:TV heirachy suggests that the structure goes Episode list -> Season pages -> Episodes. It is this missing middle ground that concerns me. The episode list has effectively been split already (i.e. not having episode summaries) but they do not exist in any valid "subarticle" (i.e. season page). Rambo's Revenge (talk) 09:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Other comments
    • Season 8 | April 19, 2009?
      • Fixed by an IP
    • The widths mess up on my browser. I know the code is trying to force them to be the same but it doesn't work. They are all different and the headers alignment is also messed up.
      • Hmmm.. they align fine on both my laptop and desktop. I don't know what you're seeing so I can't even attempt to address it.
        • It works in Firefox, its just IE7 that is completely screwed up. I'll have a tinkle sometime and screenshot it if I cannot fix it myself. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • I managed to fix this and I see you have tweaked the width percentages, which I approve of. So this one is done. 09:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Cite the new season episode name, or remove the table.
      • It's cited in ref 196.
        • Ah yes I missed it as I expected it to be adjacent to the episode like the others. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I can see that a lot of work went into the massive editing of this list in the last week, but as a regular user (for research) I have to say that I found it more useful and informative the way it was before the edit, and I frankly object to the way this has happened - there was no discussion, no consensus that change was needed, and no collaborative effort in getting to this point. Having all of the narrative on the top makes it harder to use - if researchers look for specific episodes that feature one or another team of detectives, for example, they now have to jump back and forth between the top and the sections, whereas previously there were headers on the sections and a column that listed the detective teams in each section, which was more useful. These are examples of things I would have discussed on the talk page if this had been presented as a suggested change to the list rather than a fait accompli going straight to FLC. So I would like discussion and explanation for why the list is better this way, beyond its possible elevation to Featured. Tvoz/talk 06:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't aware permission needed to be sought to make edits. Articles should have a WP:LEAD section that "serves both as an introduction to the article below and as a short, independent summary of the important aspects of the article's topic." Why is it better? I believe it's better because it gives writers, directors and production codes, showing who contributed to the episodes and in what order they aired compared to the order they were produced. It is fully referenced. Each season still has a Wikipedia:Header, so I don't know what you mean here, unless you mean a paragraph of prose in for the last 3 seasons that was poorly written, giving minutiae about guest appearances and "markings" for which actor is in which episode. If researchers want to see which episode features Noth and which features D'Onofrio, they can read the episode article. Why an episode would list the cast members I have no idea. Where is the encyclopedic value in it? This was the only episode list on Wikipedia that did, Featured or not. It borders on information written purely for fans only. I understand you oppose the new style, but which of the Featured list criterion does it not follow to make your oppose to FL-status valid? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I said nothing about needing "permission" to make edits, I said that a complete revamping of an article without any discussion or consensus to do so, and then rushing it to FLC, is, to me, not the best way to edit here. Indeed I might agree with some of your arguments, had you bothered to make them on the article's talk page - I am just troubled by the lack of interest in discussion and, again, the rush to get this version elevated (is there a contest underway?) which is the fastest I've ever encountered in 2-1/2 years here. Was there some reason to not engage regular editors and readers about your vision for the piece? I did not write or edit the original, and I am sure it needed work - so I'm not defending any specific phrasing, but I am speaking about the value of the way it had been laid out. For example, your suggestion here that anyone want to see which episode featured which detective team could read the episode article completely misses the point that researchers may well need to see an overview of the series in order to find which episodes portrayed which cast. This program happens to be somewhat unique in that it features more than one set of lead actors, who generally did not crossover into one another's episodes, so the only way a researcher can quickly review which episodes featured which cast, so that they then can go to the individual articles, is by having an index which this list in effect was. What you've done - by not having a short season summary or episode summary or even an indication of which team is featured in which episode - is to render the list somewhat useless as a research tool, unless one is researching who wrote which episode or what its production code was. The names of the episodes are not enough information to make them distinguishable from one another. As such, it fails on comprehensiveness. cTvoz/talk 23:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, there is a contest, but that has nothing to do with the speed on which I worked on this list. A lot of my nominations are quick from the time I begin working to the time they are nominated. In fact, if you look at User:Gary King's Featured list contributions, you'll see that some of his are nominated the same day they are created. Why wait? True, there's no WP:DEADLINE, but if something is good enough to be featured, why not nominate it? An overview of the series is at Law & Order: Criminal Intent. An overview of the episodes can be found in the Lede of this page, which does have the information. I'm loathed to put an extra column in there because the layout would be all wrong, but if I put some other identifier, such a dagger (†) or asterisk (*) beside the episode names, would you be happy with that? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, something like daggers or asterisks to which cast is featured would definitely help. Hey, I'm not knocking speed, and I don't think there's some kind of virtue in patience - I just felt that what might look like a minor change, but for readers might actually be a major-ish change, was rushed through without any questions or explanation, and that didn't sit well. Thanks for being responsive to the concern - and good luck in the Cup. Let me know where the party is if you win. Tvoz/talk 18:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By the way - you mentioned in the nom that you might in the future make season pages - that's a good idea which would also be helpful to readers/researchers. Tvoz/talk 18:58, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll get on that, and I have started a page for the first season already. It should be in the mainspace tomorrow. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:36, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By the way - I see that a detective got lost in the transformation of the list: another one of Logan's partners for part of Season 7 was Nola Falacci, so you'll have to add her to the lead and include her on the asterisk-dagger scheme when you get to that. Thanks Tvoz/talk
OK, thanks. Yeah, I forgot about her. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:17, 7 March 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Law_%26_Order:_Criminal_Intent_episodes/archive1&oldid=1138482876"