Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of QI episodes

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 promoted by Scorpion0422 17:24, 31 March 2009 [1].

List of QI episodes[edit]

Nominator(s): ISD (talk)
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because this list covers every single episode of QI, including who was on each episode, who won each episode, names and dates. The introduction to the episode is comprehensive and there are no problems with the image as far fair-use rationale are concerned. If promoted, then this will be the first FL to cover a quiz show/panel game. ISD (talk) 08:44, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"This is a list of episodes of QI" Featured lists don't start like this, see List of 24 episodes for a good example of an opening sentence. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:20, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response to comments: I've changed the opening sentence. ISD (talk) 13:26, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Much better. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:38, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
General
Lead
  • Conversely, points are deducted from a panellist who gives, "answers which are not only wrong, but pathetically obvious":[1] normally ones in which answers generally accepted as true are actually false. -->...normally, answers which are generally accepted as true are actually false.
  • Clarify in the lead that after the second series it remained on BBC two until 2008, its not that clear.
Footnotes
  • The broadcast of this episode was delayed because it clashed with the Comic Relief telethon. -- clashed isn't really a good word to use, how about ran simultaneously?
References
  • The main reference and notes should be formatted into a format like it is in this FL.--Best, ₮RUCӨ 00:55, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Response to review: I've carried out all of the changes that you asked for. ISD (talk) 06:54, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards. --Best, ₮RUCӨ 15:03, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • 23 December 2003 -- don't partially link dates in this way, or use easter eggs. You could say in the lead, that "QI premiered in 2003" or something, not perfect, but better
  • Has Series G been made yet? If so "N/A" is incorrect in the producer column. Someone produced it, you just don't know who. Because it hasn't actually aired on TV yet, I would remove that row.
  • The "for example" you give about a chameleon; it's unclear whether you're saying that statement is accepted as true but is false, or if it is wrong and pathetically obvious. The colon should be a semicolon, too. Really, from "Conversely" onwards, the paragraph needs rewriting.
  • "following the success of a non-broadcast pilot." in what way was it successful?
  • "For example, the first series covered" this shouldn't start a sentence. The previous sentence should "end" with a semicolon, and this sentence should run on from that one
  • "The first series was first broadcast on September 11, 2003 on BBC Two" ref please
  • "From the second series, BBC Four broadcast the following episode immediately, with the episode being broadcast on BBC Two the following week in its usual slot." This doesn't make sense straight away. What does "immediately" mean? As soon as it was filmed? Something like:From season two onwards, the first episode premiered on BBC Two; the following episode was broadcast immediately after on BBC Four, which then re-aired the following week on BBC Two. Each subsequent episode premiered on BBC Four immediately after the BBC Two rebroadcast of the previous week's episode.
  • "broadcast the following day on BBC Two, replacing the early broadcasts." What early broadcasts? These are previously undiscussed.
  • "extended repeat called QI XL" -- "titled"
  • Again, what does "Early broadcast or extended repeat" mean in the main series table?
  • I wouldn't put the "home channel" column, because you've already said that the majority of episodes premiered on BBC 4, and it's just too much info to stick in a single column
  • Why not name the producer in the prose, and get rid of that column too?
  • Make sure the guests first and last names don't get put on separate lines
  • Being picky, but does "Clip show featuring deleted and extended scenes from Series E." belong in the "guests" column?
  • "The broadcast of this episode was delayed because it ran simultaneously with the Comic Relief telethon." the original scheduled airdate did? Or the actual airdate?
  • Can you confirm that the Original airdates are for BBC 4 where applicable, and not the airdates for the BBC2 airing?
  • What makes http://www.comedy.org.uk/guide/tv/qi/episodes/ a WP:RS? I've tried to use it before and was told it isn't
  • date formats in references should be in dd mmmm yyyy, the same as in the body of the article, and not ISO format
  • Same link in EL and references

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:46, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response to comments: I have carried out all the changes you asked for. Concerning the use of the BCG as a reliable source, I should first point out that I have used it in other featured lists (see List of Peep Show episodes) and they were accepted. Before an article is created for the site, it must first go through an editor who will check everything is OK. ISD (talk) 11:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I know you've already discussed it on the talk page, but I don't think you should list the pilot with Series A; for one thing, it messes up the numbering (Ep 1, Series A is listed as overall ep 2, when it is actually ep 1), and for another the pilot isn't a part of Series A, it was just released on the DVD. They really ought to be separated (or have the pilot removed from the table altogether and just mention it in the lead). Bradley0110 (talk) 19:51, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response to comment: I personally believe that the pilot should be included with the first series. For starters, I've seen other episode lists which have put the pilot along with the first series/season, such as the List of Seinfeld episodes. Also, I believe that the pilot does count as ep 1, as it was the first episode made - it just wasn't the first one broadcast. ISD (talk) 20:02, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know you're just using that as one example, but Seinfeld's pilot was retroactively renumbered S1E1.Bradley0110 (talk) 20:07, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as far as I know, there are no other examples of an FL which includes a non-broadcast pilot. Therefore there is nothing to really compare it with. I still think I am right, but no doubt you will differ. Maybe it is best to mention this on the WP:FLC talk page. ISD (talk) 20:18, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you, as the primary editor, believe that that is the best format to use, then OK. As for "no doubt you will differ", don't worry, I'm not out to 'get you'! Bradley0110 (talk) 17:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I wasn't trying to offend. I've started a converstion about this on the WP:FLC talk page if you want to go into it further. ISD (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

  • Is the unaired pilot episode a part of the official first series? If so, I think it would be fine to keep it where it is, otherwise it should be listed separately. Also, was it included on the DVD? If not, the first table should be edited
  • "The broadcast of this episode was delayed because it ran simultaneously with the Comic Relief telethon." This is confusing. Does "was delayed" mean the originally scheduled airdate was changed and it aired at a later week, or that it aired in a later timeslot? Does "ran simultaneously" mean it actually aired at the same time as Comic Relief? If so, how is that possible? Only one programme can air on a channel at a time, unless they do some split-screen dual broadcasting weirdness
  • "This episode was a clip show contained deleted and extended scenes from other episodes in Series E." should probably be an "and" after "clip show"
  • "the first series was first broadcast on September 11, 2003 on BBC Two." This sounds like the entire first series aired on the same day
  • "As a result, the broadcasting of episodes immediately afterwards on BBC Four was replaced. Instead, an extended repeated titled QI XL was broadcast on BBC Two and was shownthe day after the episode was originally shown on BBC One." --> "As a result, the scheduling of episodes on BBC Four was dropped in favour of an extended repeat broadcast on BBC Two the following day titled QI XL"

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response to comments: I've carried out your comments. The pilot was released as an extra on the Series A DVD and therefore I believe it to be officially part of the series. ISD (talk) 08:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "which are believe to be obvious" - believed
  • "A non-broadcast pilot was first made and well received..." - what is the meaning of "first made" it doesn't really work, maybe you are trying to say that the show was picked up after the BBC responded well to a pilot or something like that.
  • "As a result, the broadcasting of episodes immediately afterwards on BBC Four was replaced. As a result, the scheduling" - repetitive "as a result", in fact the first sentence could probably be scrapped.
  • Because you have a section for it, I would possibly add another row to the Series box, which says Series G; 16; TBA; N/A
  • "This episode was an clip show contained deleted and extended scenes from other episodes in Series E." - an clip show? also missing word between "show contained"
  • "replaced in the television schedules" - isn't is just one schedule

Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 11:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response to comments: I've carried out most of the changes you asked for. The only one I did not to was add another row for Series G. There was a row, but another user, who is also one of the FL directors, told me to remove the row. ISD (talk) 13:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm haven't supported this yet because the prose still needs some work to meet criteria 1 – "professional standards of writing"

  • "Between the second and fifth series, the first episode premiered on BBC Two" - so is that just S3 & S4??
  • "the following episode was broadcast immediately afterward on BBC Four" - afterwards is BrEng
  • Repetition of "immediately afterward on BBC Four" in two sentences that are very close to each other
  • "the first episode premiered on BBC Two; the following episode was broadcast immediately afterward on BBC Four, which then re-aired " feels clunky and only strictly mentions the second episode. I'm not a prose expert but something like the episodes were aired each week on BBC Two; the second and subsequent episodes were first shown on BBC Four in time-slot immediately following the previous episodes BBC Two broadcast would probably be better.

Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 10:39, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response to comments: I've carried out the improvements you asked for. ISD (talk) 13:48, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues (includes resolved fair-use image discussion), Dabomb87 (talk)
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
  • "QI is a BBC comedy panel game television show which began in 2003." "which"-->that
  • "but also for interesting ones" I don't think italics are necessary here.
  • ", "answers which are not only wrong, but pathetically obvious":[1] in other words" Semicolon (before footnote), not colon should be used.
  • "answers which are "-->answers that are
  • "QI is a 26-year-long commission, with each series covering topics beginning with a different letter of the alphabe" 1)What does "commission" mean here (link would be helpful); 2) "QI is a 26-year-long commission, with each series covering topics beginning with a different letter of the alphabe"-->"QI is a 26-year-long commission; each series covers topics with a different letter of the alphabet"; 3)Do we really need to link "alphabet", even if it is to Latin alphabet?
  • "for example, the first series covered topics beginning with "A" and is referred to as "Series A" instead of "Series One"" Make this a separate sentence.
  • "QI was picked up after" What does "picked up" mean?
  • "immediately after on "-->immediately afterward on
  • Per WP:CAPTION, image captions that are sentence fragments should not have periods at the end.
  • "A seventh series is to be made in 2009 lasting 16 episodes, which will bring the total number of episodes to 91."-->A seventh series, made of 16 episodes, is to be made in 2009, which will bring the total number of episodes to 91.
  • One dab link needs to be fixed. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:28, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Response to comments: I've made the said improvements. ISD (talk) 08:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on image I don't think the FU image (File:Quite Interesting logo.png is necessary here; this is only the episode list and the logo is not really needed for identification. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response to image comment: I have changed the image to one of the DVD covers, as I believe this is more fitting to the article. ISD (talk) 08:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You'll have a hard time justifying the WP:NFCC for that too. Your probably best not having an image at all (like any other recent FL episode lists, 1, 2, ...) Rambo's Revenge (How am I doing?) 10:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the image. There is now no image in the article. ISD (talk) 11:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:28, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support although I'd still rather see the pilot separated from Series A, if not from the table (which, I concede, would add an unnecessary extra line to the TOC) then at least from the numbering system. Regarding the image problems, I get the impression that you, ISD, have attended some recordings of QI. If you attend any this year, then I'm sure you could arrange to take a photo of at least the empty studio! Bradley0110 (talk) 08:54, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Response to support: Thanks for supporting. If you want to talk about the tables, there is a thread about it on WT:FLC. As regards to getting a photo of the studio, it would be difficult because the studio prohibits photos taken inside. ISD (talk) 09:09, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sneaky cameraphone pic? Bradley0110 (talk) 12:16, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a cameraphone. ISD (talk) 13:53, 29 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_QI_episodes&oldid=1138484159"