Talk:The Seinfeld Chronicles

The Seinfeld Chronicles has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 1, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
September 10, 2014	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
November 12, 2014	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television: Episode coverage / Seinfeld

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
	This article is supported by the Seinfeld task force.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Untitled

The quality scale guidelines say "Once an article reaches the A-Class, it is considered 'complete', although obviously edits will continue to be made." Having watched the episode, listened to Notes About Nothing, etc., I think the article is about as complete as can be (not that it can't be improved). I don't think every article can or should be long in order to be a good article. So why "start class"? What can be improved? ~ InkQuill 01:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Superman References

I have added a sub-section underneath the plot for the reference to Superman. If any of you feel it should go somewhere else, feel free to move it.

I am going to try to add this section in to some of the other episode pages in the coming days.

WBredefeld 07:45 PST 29, March 2006

Woah! What's with all of the attention to detail in the plot section? It's fine, but I just didn't expect so much. S t e v e o 2 11:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Seinfeld chronicles.JPG

Image:Seinfeld chronicles.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review: comments

A most enjoyable article, with just a few areas that need attention.

Lead. You might consider dropping the abbreviated plot summary in the lead. It could be replaced by a summary of the world-wide impact of the series that followed from the pilot.
In the first paragraph of the Production section you use the words “pilot” and “episode”. Are these the same thing? Later in the paragraph you use the term “show”. Is that also the same thing? As it stands this paragraph is a bit confusing to the reader – can you redraft or clarify it?
You need to explain “Neilsen” ratings to ill-informed Brits. I can guess what they are, but a footnote, or explanation in the text, is necessary
I’m not sure about the Cultural references section. Are these really “cultural” references? Their context is entirely within the Seinfeld series, and I would have thought that the section title required a rather wider spectrum. Perhaps expand the section – or re-title it?
Have you resolved the "fair use" problem? (A couple more images might improve the appearance of the article.)

I haven’t done a thorough punctuation or MoS trawl, but on the face it these are OK.

If you can attend to the above there’ll be no problem with GA

I have seen the various changes since the above was posted.

Lead: Fine now

Production: OK now. I've done a bit of tweaking in paragraph 1, to sort out a slight grammar problem & also to avoid some repetitions of "pilot" and "stand-up". I think it reads well now, but you'd better check that I haven't changed your meaning.

Neilsen: Fine, you've linked

Cultural References: I see you've changed the title. Shouldn't "Reference" be plural in the new title, as you give more than one example? I'm a bit disappointed you didn't extend this section, because at present it gives a rather weak ending to the article. Can I suggest a couple of ways in which you could beef it up? First, start it with a sentence such as: "The pilot was a reference point for various incidents and storylines in later episodes of Seinfeld". Then, extend the sentence about the main story arc in Series 4 by explaining that story. These are small points, but they will help in giving the article a final polish.

Images: You've added another picture. Again, its not a public domain or free-use image. I assume that in both cases you are relying on the indication on the image page which says that publication is authorised "on the English Language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the US by non-profit Wikimedia Foundation". Have you been able to confirm your right to publish?

We're nearly there, but I would especially like assurance on the last point. Brianboulton (talk) 16:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review summary

I am pleased to say that this article has passed GA. I have carried out a number of final tweaks on the text, to deal with issues of punctuation, grammar, repetitions, a few MoS points, and have added an explanatory phrase re the Betrayal episode, but these were minor matters.

In relation to the six GA criteria the review is summarised as follows:-

Well-written:The prose was adequate, and was improved by a little treatment. MoS violations fixed. PASS
References, sources: PASS
Broad coverage: PASS
Neutral: PASS
Stable: PASS
Images: I was satisfied by the editors that fair use rationales had been added. PASS

The article is now GA, so congratulations to the editors. Brianboulton (talk) 22:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original music.

I don't think it's mentioned on the official site but it's mention on the original episode. If you turn on "Notes About Nothing", it mention's that Jep Epstein did the original music. Then on syndication Jonathon Wolff took over. I presume it's too late so I'll leave it on discussion page leaving anyone who's into editing to consider this info because had I not mentioned it, it will not see the light of day. You'll get what I mean. Johnnyauau2000 (talk) 09:59, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kramer's Dog

In the section listing references to this episode in later episode (the Dog) it was stated that Jerry tells the passenger on the plane his neighbor has a dog. This is incorrect. The passenger asks Jerry if he has any pets, Jerry replies with "just my next door neighbor" not referencing the god Kramer presumably has in this episode but more referencing the type of relationship he and Kramer have (where essentially Jerry is responsible for Kramer's food.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.74.9 (talk) 01:27, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead too long?

Some parts, like a different theme song, were not mentioned in the article. I wonder if some parts can be moved properly into body article, like Production. --George Ho (talk) 06:25, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Seinfeld Chronicles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150213005740/http://blip.tv/kevin-pollaks-chat-show/kpcs-jason-alexander-4337348 to http://blip.tv/kevin-pollaks-chat-show/kpcs-jason-alexander-4337348

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:32, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]