Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Gene Roddenberry filmography/archive1

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 SchroCat 09:43, 5 May 2015 [1].

Gene Roddenberry filmography

Featured list candidates/Gene Roddenberry filmography/archive1

Nominator(s): Miyagawa (talk) 12:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a recent content split from Gene Roddenberry, which I've been working up over the past few weeks. As the article was approaching 100kb, it seemed the logical thing to do (no Vulcan pun intended!). I have not included the awards recieved by Roddenberry in this list, as I'm anticipating locating them in the main article (surprisingly he didn't recieve many). This is my first time creating a filmography, so I've based it off of previous FLs. The most unusual point about the layout is the inclusion of "executive consultant" in the movies table - but I figured it was better to include it there than have it added as a note for all six films. Miyagawa (talk) 12:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment from Harrias ^talk 14: 41, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Why "9 episodes" etc, but "Five seasons" etc in the Television table? Harrias ^talk 14:41, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The ones with the seasons were the ones where Roddenberry was series creator - while the ones with the episode numbers were the only episodes of that production he was involved with. Miyagawa (talk) 17:21, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't explain my point at all; why use figures for one set of numbers and words for the other? Harrias ^talk 18:54, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha - I've fixed it per the style guide, so words for numbers one through nine, and then actual numbers for 10+. Miyagawa (talk) 12:27, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support with that change, and those made below, I'm happy that this list meets the FL criteria. Good work. (Any chance you could take a look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/PCA Player of the Year/archive1?) Harrias ^talk 09:57, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Tentative support—based on my user name, it should come as no surprise to anyone that I am a Star Trek fan. I did make some changes to correct and simplify the citations: using {{harvp}} for the shortened footnotes, correcting the capitalization of Mr. DeCandido's last name and un-curling the single quotes per the MOS. I also merged two sets of duplicate footnotes together
There are some minor quibbles left to be fixed, like spelling out the number in "five seasons", but using the numeral in "9 episodes". Most style guides would only use a numeral for numbers 10 and higher, and they would spell out nine and lower, although some also move the line to encompass the teens. I'm sure that will be cleared up to satisfy Harrias in short order.
I can see is that the heading above the table on the films is "Filmography" while the other heading is "Television". I would think that since both media make up part of the filmography, that the former one should be "Films" or "Motion pictures" to pair with "Television".
Lastly, I don't know why you didn't just put the note about "Unification" into the Notes column of the TV table rather than using a footnote.
All in all, it's good work and I think that it should be promoted in due course. Imzadi 1979 → 21:03, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for those fixed - I've corrected the numbers as mentioned above. I've also changed the films and television sections to subsections under a general filmography section. As for the Unification bit, I just thought the text would be a bit long in the notes section and so thought it'd work better as a footnote. Plus it didn't directly to Roddenberry's work on the series but I thought was worth mentioning. Miyagawa (talk) 12:27, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Cowlibob (talk) 02:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He had a much more diverse filmography than I expected.

Link Gene Roddenberry in the first sentence and since he's dead you can add birth and death dates.

Done. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was a bit confused by the "began his writing career" sentence. Was he writing scripts during his time as a pilot as well as when he was a sergeant? With only the ones he did as a sergeant actually be produced?

I've re-drafted. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"During that time" sentence you've repeated time again at the end of the sentence. Rephrase.

I've removed the bit from the end. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was curious, is there a ban on LAPD officers from writing for television? Cowlibob (talk) 00:55, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea about now, but at the time they had to ask for permission to get a second job. So Roddenberry initially used an alternative name to avoid that. Miyagawa (talk) 22:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"he wrote for several series" Are any of these series worth a mention in the lead?

Added a couple of the more notable ones. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You've mentioned Highway Patrol twice. Cowlibob (talk) 09:42, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I've removed the second appearance. Miyagawa (talk) 18:18, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"already constructing" sentence. Probably needs more detail as it just surprises the reader with it's Star Trek.

Re-drafted to mention it was a science fiction series first. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You could proabably remove the filmography section heading and simply have sections for Film and Television.

Done. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No need for links for creator, producer and writer.

Removed as suggested. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The second column should be title not film

Corrected. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1954-1956 should be 1954-56. Same for any date in the same century.

Corrected. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Episode entitled can be rephrased as Episode: "So Short a Season"

Done. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of this article is sourced to the Alexander bio as well as the filmography tables. Is it possible to find some alternative just for some diversity?

I'll see what I can do. In the very least the Star Trek entries in the filmography tables should be replaceable. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Joel Engel's book Roddenberry on Open Library was available, so I've swapped out several cites with that. Miyagawa (talk) 19:47, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Film titles should be sorted to ignore "the"

Changed the sorting on the film titles. Miyagawa (talk) 19:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cowlibob (talk) 09:36, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review, I think I've rectified the points you raised. I was surprised about his volume of non-sci-fi work too - I knew about The Lieutenant but not much about the others. Miyagawa (talk) 19:47, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support Sorry for the delay. I added a bit of clarification about the LAPD second job thing. I'm sure your bio ref would cover that. Good job! Cowlibob (talk) 02:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I'll double check it tonight to make sure it's the right page. Its in there somewhere, but I'm not 100% certain it's the same cite. I'll confirm here once I've checked it. Miyagawa (talk) 11:26, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm that I've sorted out that citation now. Miyagawa (talk) 09:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 13:19, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Image could use being cropped to get that blond noggin out of the way.
"He began to write pilots" ->" Roddenberry wrote pilots..."
"at 7:30pm." not sure this is important, but if it is, please format time according to MOS:TIME.
"While working on that series, he began working..." repetitive.
Does unfavourable really have a "u" in USEng?
"he worked on his first feature film" wouldn't it make sense to be clear, i.e. he wrote and produced his first feature film?
Similar question re: USEng spelling of "cancelled" v "canceled"?

The Rambling Man (talk) 12:21, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. I've rectified those issues and added a cropped image. Miyagawa (talk) 13:07, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, just one last thing, I noticed inconsistent formatting of " Have Gun–Will Travel "... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:10, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected the first instance to Have Gun – Will Travel as I hadn't realised it was going to a redirect. Miyagawa (talk) 13:16, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. – SchroCat (talk) 09:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.