Since a couple of good article listings and delistings, the article has essentially been rewritten and turned into a list. I feel that it is ready for a featured article.
I disagree. Animation Insider is an RS. It has early reviews on episodes of series, is given permission to host copyrighted material from the copyright holders, and is given lengthy interviews with staff of shows. Specifically for Avatar, it reviewed The Awakening before it was out and hosted music from the show for examples of when they interviewed the people who make the shows music. If being recognized by Corporations like that doesn't make them an RS, then we need to rethink what does.
*SIGN* 19:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Struck the two above, but there are two broken links at the moment. Those should be fixed so they aren't big red "Error" messages. (I'm not watching this FLC any more, I trust ya'll to fix the error messages) Otherwise, it's done!
Ealdgyth -
Talk 14:54, 30 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Taken care of.
*SIGN* 01:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Hmm, I believe that other than the questionable source in the lead, everything else seems OK. I am not exactly sure about the sourcing used in the Production section; it seems that the character voices are sourced to Variety.com and Hollywood.com, the latter of which I am not too sure. —
Parent5446☯(
messageemail) 02:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Well, character voices do not require sourcing. They can be verified by the official site and animation DVDs.--
RekishiEJ (
talk) 21:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC)reply
It's been 5 days since an objection was raised, so, as the nominator, I support making this a FL.
NuclearWarfarecontact meMy work 03:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Well, I must say that since the beginning (this is probably one of the first articles I worked on where I saw its creation, though I think somebody else made the Season 1 article) the article has come really far. The article's lead successfully captures a concise plot summary, critical reception, and the DVD Release information as well as a catchy introduction. Though the Production section does not contain as much variety in sources as I would like, it provides a good amount of information on the behind-the-scenes for the show. The Reception section provides a lot of positive critical review, and I am a little worried about whether it might be one-sided (is there really no negative critical reception for the season?). Other than that, the episode summaries seem good, and the DVD release section is really good (I must say the chart standardization amongst all the lists has really been a great improvement; I was never a fan of gray). In conclusion, the article has come a long way, and despite some few flaws it might have, I provied my support in this nomination. —
Parent5446☯(
messageemail) 02:26, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Comments
"find a Waterbending master to teach Aang and Katara." -- teach them what?
The second halves of the first and second paragraphs of the lead are basically the same, ie an overview of the season's plot
Done by removing the second paragraph part. Although now, the second paragraph looks rather short, so I'm splitting the plot into its own paragraph.
NuclearWarfarecontact meMy work 18:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"A couple days before the release of the fifth volume" -- "A couple of days", but anyway, it needs to be something more concrete. Does it mean "two", or "a few"?
I don't know about removing the sentence, but it should be a real figure, not something vague.
Matthewedwards (
talk •
contribs •
email) 18:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Unfortunately. We shouldn't be seen to be giving preference to one sales site over another. TVShowsOnDVD.com is owned by
TV Guide, and doesn't sell anything so that's a better choice. For the UK, Amazon usually is allowed to slide through because there is no site similar to TVShowsOnDVD. Some cult magazines have DVD listings, though.
Matthewedwards (
talk •
contribs •
email) 18:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply
{ Done, I think. I left all of the Amazon references for Region Two, which you said is fine?
NuclearWarfarecontact meMy work 19:03, 6 September 2008 (UTC)reply