Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Project Runway contestants/archive2
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
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 The Rambling Man 20:21, 10 October 2009 [1].
- Nominator(s): Another Believer (Talk) 15:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Featured list candidates/List of Project Runway contestants/archive1
- Featured list candidates/List of Project Runway contestants/archive2
Toolbox |
---|
Unfortunately, the previous FL nomination was closed before one particular issue could be addressed. Several reviewers have already offered support for this list, so I am re-nominating it now hoping that all concerns have been addressed. Be sure to take a look at the first review, if needed. Thanks so much! Another Believer (Talk) 15:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Alt text is acceptable - but "Picture of" could be removed. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Thanks! Another Believer (Talk) 18:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "In addition to winner, competed in final round", not clear. just "competed in final round" would be imo more clear. This gives the a hint that this contested won.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- However, might it confuse some people to see that one color represents those that competed in the final round, while another color signifies the winner (without pointing out that yellow coloring includes final competitors in addition to the winner)? Personally, I prefer the current wording, though I would not be opposed to changing it if another reviewer raised issue. I believer it was Killervogel5 (a reviewer from the first nomination) who added the current wording. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- How about "In addition to the winner? Since it's only one winner...--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 10:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- How about "In addition to the winner? Since it's only one winner...--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 10:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I suggest changing from Dashes in Season six to "TBD" since it will be determined.-Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The lead should be expanded. It's not clear how exactly the contestants get eliminated. "Progressively" should be more defined. Is it weekly or what exactly? "few contestants" how many is the minimum for the final round? --Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Contestants are eliminated in a fairly subjective process, which varies depending on the purpose of the assignment. There is no set point system or guideline the judges follow, at least not one that is apparent/obvious to viewers. The number of contestants that compete in the final round is typically three, although it has been four as well in the past. Also, sometimes a fourth competitor showcases a collection at Fashion Week, but it is not televised as part of the finale. It is a bit confusing, which is why I think it is best left out. I think most television viewers are familiar with the typical reality competition show format... a single competitor is eliminated each week until a final winner is named. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Isn't the day of elimination relevant to this list?--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 10:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No. The competition does not run on a "day" basis in that viewers do not know how much passes between each round. It is not like Big Brother or The Real World, where contestants enter the house for a specific number of days. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Isn't the day of elimination relevant to this list?--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 10:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Why is "Wendy Pepper" 3rd and "Kara Saun" 2nd even though both lost in the final round. Or do they also rank the looser? Please explain this in the lead if it is so.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Wendy Pepper was eliminated before Kara Saun. Judges always eliminate a contestant to come in 3rd place, leaving two competitors on stage at the end of the finale, of which one will be named the winner of the season. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. Feel free to reply if you have any concerns that still need to be addressed, otherwise your support would be very much appreciated. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Could u add more images from commons ?--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 10:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I think the images that could be used are already in use, as some of the others ones pictured there are duplicate (of the same contestant), of poor quality (blurry), or do not meet fair use requirements. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, assuming the above issues are resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC) Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Small thing, shouldn't the key mark the blue background as "Appeared in more than one season"? As it's currently used it marks BOTH appearances, so the current text of "Contestant appeared on the show for a second time" doesn't really capture it properly. Staxringold talkcontribs 15:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You are right. Originally, I only highlighted Danny Franco's cell the second time it appeared, but since both cells are colored I think the wording in the key should be corrected. Thanks for noticing! --Another Believer (Talk) 00:55, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, this sort of list doesn't particularly appeal to me, but it's written well, it's complete, and it ticks all the right boxes at WP:FL?. Support Matthewedwards : Chat 03:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Seems that all of the outstanding issues both here and from the first review have been addressed, so I'll support as well. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:39, 8 October 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.