(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Halo media - Wikipedia Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Halo media

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 16:56, 20 March 2008.

List of official Halo series media[edit]

I am nominating this list because I believe it meets all the Featured List criteria. FightingStreet (talk) 18:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Looks pretty good. I do have a few suggestions:

  • The language in the lead is generally a bit clumsy. I'd recommend a thorough copyedit.
  • The column headers are generally a little vague. I'd recommend changing "Date" to "Release date" and "Media" to "Media type".
  • The in-line citations need to be cleaned up a little bit. Namely, the wikilinking of publisher values are kind of all over the place. Only the first instance of a publisher should be wikilinked. Also, the publisher should ideally be provided with every source.
  • There should probably be a separation between the lead and the table itself. ie a heading.
  • I'm not really sure if the Bestiarum or the Conversations from the Universe booklets deserve their own entries.
  • Lastly, an external links section would be good. Bungie's website would be an obvious choice. Drewcifer (talk) 22:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ALSO I disagree with some of the sentiments below, I think the In-universe column is great. I would not recommend removing it: it puts each piece into context as far as the greater story goes. It seems like a very useful addition to the table to anyone wanting to learn more about the series and its storyline. Drewcifer (talk) 06:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I can understand that. I mainly oppose it because information like that is already available at Halo (series). Plus it can be mentioned in the "Description/Notes" section, and should describe things from an out-of-universe perspective. Like, "takes places after the first game", occurs before the third game". I'm mainly opposing the presentation of it, not specifically the inclusion. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]
But the in-universe data being sortable is the whole point of it, in my mind. Like I said, it makes the article that much more useful to the reader wanting to learn more about the Halo series and its storyline. Drewcifer (talk) 03:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, there are people that come to Wikipedia to find that, but we have to cater to the general audience as a whole. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction), articles "should adhere to the real world as their primary frame of reference. The approach is to describe the subject matter from the perspective of the real world, in which the work of fiction and its publication are embedded."
Admittedly, it is a cool idea and function, but it serves a purpose Wikipedia is not meant to serve. Also, the Halo series article is undergoing revisions to get it FA and should be able to convey the plot info better than this table could. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Fair enough: it's obvious there's different opinions on the matter, and this might be a debate better suited for the article's talk page or the Halo WikiProject. I would argue that we shouldn't hold that particular column against the FLC, and let involved editors figure it out on their own. Either way, as far as this FLC goes, the column isn't a deal breaker for me. Drewcifer (talk) 22:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • I think the lead sentence should be: This is a list of official media related to the Halo series
  • Explain what "machinima" and "Red vs. Blue" mean. A comma is also needed after "fan fiction"
  • Description column shouldn't be sortable
  • All of the "Media" column words should be wikilinked as the column is sortable.
  • "external pages" and "see also" sections would be good
  • At least one image is needed I think. Maybe of the first Halo game, or a poster of the upcoming film.. I'll leave it up to you.

That's all for now -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 18:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Though the list is informative and well sourced, I have a few issues I'd like to see addressed before supporting.

  • My main issue is criteria 1(f) - "Well-constructed". Though it lists all the media related to the series, I think having everything in one sortable table makes the information difficult to interpret and navigate. I would use List of Kingdom Hearts media as an example and divide the info into four sections:
    1. Games
    2. Soundtracks
    3. Printed media
    4. Film
  • I would also remove the "In-universe date" as that really doesn't provide any vital or notable information to the general reader. And information like where in the story content takes places in best included in the "Notes" section of the media.
  • I also agree that an "External link" would be good.

This list is in pretty good shape, and once 1(f) is met, I'll be happy to support this. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Support: All of my issues have been addressed. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]
  • Conditional Support- Yeah, it basically need restructuring and the elimination of the in-universe dates, there's really no need for that. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support - As with Judge; I happen to like the in-universe dates, but to the general reader they won't be much help. Once the above issues are taken, I'll switch to full support. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 11:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All my concerns have been addressed, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 13:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments - The picture at the top of the page. I highly doubt that's a free image, because the taker has captured copyrighted and trademarked pieces of media. You cannot take a picture of the X-Box name and say it's free to use, Microsoft has a trademark on that name and logo. The same goes for Halo and its name and logo (specifically that Halo 3 logo that is on there), and I obviously don't need to mention Master Chief appearing in the image as well. This is the same reasoning why someone that personally captures a screenshot of a television show or movie cannot claim that screenshot as their won. The image might be yours, but everything inside the image is copyrighted, so you have no claim of that stuff. This isn't a huge deal beyond the copyright license needs to be fixed. I don't know the exact template to use, someone might want to speak with the people at WP:FU as to which one fits it best.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm no copyright expert, but I think this might be appropriate {{Non-free product cover}}. Some one more knowledgeable should probably chime in though. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]
      • That seems more appropriate. The only thing extra would be that I would use this template and then list all the different copyright owners (that's Microsoft and Bungee are the only ones that I can think of off hand) and the year those works were released. That should take care of the licensing issue, then you'd just have to put in a rationale for use, which shouldn't be hard just explain why it meets all 10 criteria for a non-free image. Here's an example of a scanned image of a toy box cover.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have replaced the image with one of the covers of the central 3 video games. It is a fair use image and quite high resolution which I can reduce if necessary although it is already reduced from the original photo. James086Talk | Email 05:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yeah, that was a bit high. I reduced it down to 600x450px. Generally, these images are really down to 350px, so be aware that another editor might think it needs to be reduced further and put a "reduce fair use" template up.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:13, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More comments: I was bold and reorganized the table into separate sections. It's all in one edit, so it can be undone if someone disagrees with it. My edit takes care of my original issues with the list. Although, another point came to my attention while editing the content. The Halo film, has a release date of 2008, but the notes state is "postponed indefinitely". Does anybody know which is correct? That and a few more extra sources here and there would be nice, but that's just me; I like to source things as much as possible. Because of these two minor issues, I feel that criteria 1(c), "Factually accurate", is not completely satisfied. (Guyinblack25 talk 17:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Comment: I believe the widths of all of the tables should be constant, and expand the entire length of the browser. Can someone fix this? TH1RT3EN talk ♦ contribs 14:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:35, 14 March 2008 (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_Halo_media&oldid=1140524854"