Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:FLC)
Jump to: navigation, search
This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Welcome to featured list candidates! Here, we determine which lists are of a good enough quality to be featured lists (FLs). Featured lists exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and satisfy the FL criteria.

Before nominating a list, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Peer review. This process is not a substitute for peer review. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FLC process. Ones who are not significant contributors to the list should consult regular editors of the list before nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly.

A list should not be listed at featured list candidates and peer review at the same time. Users should not add a second featured list nomination until the first has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed. Please do not split featured list candidate pages into subsections using header code (if necessary, use bolded headings).

The featured list director, Giants2008, or his delegates, Crisco 1492, SchroCat, and PresN—determine the timing of the process for each nomination; each nomination will last at least 10 days (though most last at least a week longer)—longer where changes are ongoing and it seems useful to continue the process. For a nomination to be promoted to FL status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the directors determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the director who considers a nomination and its reviews:

  • actionable objections have not been resolved; or
  • consensus for promotion has not been reached; or
  • insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met.

It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve critical comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support.

After the 10-day period has passed, a director will decide when a nomination is ready to be closed. A bot will update the list talk page after the list is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the {{FLC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates or adds the {{ArticleHistory}} template. If a nomination is archived, the nominator should take adequate time to resolve issues before re-nominating.

Purge the cache to refresh this page – Table of Contents – Closing instructions – Checklinks – Dablinks – Check redirects

Shortcut:

Featured content:

Featured list tools:

Nomination procedure

Toolbox
  1. Before nominating a list, ensure that it meets all of the FL criteria and that Peer reviews are closed and archived.
  2. Place {{subst:FLC}} on the talk page of the nominated list.
  3. From the FLC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please post to the FLC talk page for assistance.
  4. Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~ and save the page.
  5. Finally, place {{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/name of nominated list/archiveNumber}} at the top of the list of nominees on this page by first copying the above, clicking "edit" on the top of this page, and then pasting, making sure to add the name of the nominated list. While adding a candidate, mention the name of the list in the edit summary.

Supporting and objecting

Please read a nominated list fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.

  • To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the list nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole FLC page).
  • To support a nomination, write *'''Support''', followed by your reason(s). If you have been a significant contributor to the list before its nomination, please indicate this.
  • To oppose a nomination, write *'''Object''' or *'''Oppose''', followed by the reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, the director may ignore it. References on style and grammar do not always agree; if a contributor cites support for a certain style in a standard reference work or other authoritative source, reviewers should consider accepting it. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed. To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it. Alternately, reviewers may hide lengthy, resolved commentary in a cap template with a signature in the header. This method should be used only when necessary, because it can cause the FLC archives to exceed template limits.
  • If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so after the reviewer's signature rather than striking out or splitting up the reviewer's text. Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, break up, or add graphics to comments from other editors; replies are added below the signature on the reviewer's commentary. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page, with a diff to the reviewer's talk page showing the request to reconsider.
  • Graphics are discouraged (such as {{done}} and {{not done}}), as they slow down the page load time.
  • To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write *'''Comment''' followed by your advice.
Nominations urgently needing reviews

The following lists were nominated more than 20 days ago and have had their review time extended because objections are still being addressed, the nomination has not received enough reviews, or insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met. If you have not yet reviewed them, please take the time to do so:

Nominations[edit]

Deepika Padukone filmography[edit]

Nominator(s): Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:22, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

After successfully taking Padukone's biography to featured status, I am nominating a fully-sourced and well-written listing of her film and music video appearances. As usual, look forward to lots of constructive comments. Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:22, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from FrB.TG
  • WP:ALT needed for the image.
  • Her only music video appearance (that too before acting) needs to be mentioned.
  • Filmfare Award for Best Actress linked twice in the lede.
  • Surely there is a better way to describe her role in Bachna Ae Haseeno than "Ranbir Kapoor's love interest"?
  • "Padukone's first film release of 2009, the kung fu" - We are aware that we're talking about films until now.
She might have had a music video release as well, couldn't she?
  • The sentence mentioned above is really long. Consider splitting it.
  • Ref. 7 has a publishing date.
  • When you say that the film Cocktail marked a turning point in her career, you do not need to further say that "critics praised her performance".
It could have been a turnaround simply because it earned a ton of money. This wasn't the case.
  • "Among these were two of the highest-grossing Bollywood films — the romantic comedy Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani and the action-comedy Chennai Express — and the tragic romance Goliyon Ki Raasleela Ram-Leela, for which she won the Filmfare Award for Best Actress." - Whoa, so long!
Is this even a valid concern: "Whoa so long!"? Tell me one FLC criteria that says sentences cannot be long! --Krimuk|90 (talk) 15:20, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
It's not about the criteria. It will be a little bit tiring to read such a long sentence, therefore I think it needs to be divided into parts.
  • Link The Indian Express in ref. 15.
  • I don't see a need to add three images of her, all taken during the same time.
Not a valid concern.
All of her looks spotted in the list are all same. I don't think there is a need to crowd the list with overuse of images.
  • Why two sources for Billu? Ref. 26 should suffice.
  • Source 35 says that the song's name is "Dum Maro Dum Mit Jaye Gham", not "Mit Jaye Gham".
  • Ref 41. does not cite the name of the director of YJHD.
  • The spelling of her character (in Chennai Express) in the source is "Meenalochani" while you spell it as "Meenalochini"
  • Her character in the film has also a nickname.
So?
What do you mean by "So"? It needs to be added.
  • Are you sure that the language of Finding Fanny was entirely English?
  • According to ref. 20 the name of her character in Piku is only "Piku", not "Piku Banerji". -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 15:12, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
None of your comments warrant an oppose. It's highly unethical to oppose a nomination without providing a reason to. None of your comments are major concerns. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
My bad! Wanted to write "Comments". Mistaken. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 15:20, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

P. G. Wodehouse bibliography[edit]

Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 07:59, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

P.G. Wodehouse was a prolific author whose career stretched from his 1902 novel The Pothunters, through over ninety books to his unfinished 1977 novel Sunset at Blandings. In-between he brought, and still brings, joy to millions through the stories of Bertie Wooster and his valet, Jeeves; the immaculate and loquacious Psmith; Lord Emsworth and the Blandings Castle set; the disaster-prone opportunist Ukridge, the Oldest Member, with stories about golf; and Mr Mulliner, with stories about many things from film studios to the Church of England.

This page has been reworked recently to bring it up to scratch and all comments are welcome. – SchroCat (talk) 07:59, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Shinhwa discography[edit]

Nominator(s): Shinyang-i (talk) 22:43, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it is an inclusive and useful list that meets the content and style requirements of discographies and standalone lists. I also want it to serve as a model for Korean music-related discographies, as there are currently no FLs in this area from the time period covered by this list. South Korea's music charts have changed a few times over the years, and I feel this list accurately portrays and represents the charts being used at various points in time. Thanks for your time, and I look forward to your comments. Shinyang-i (talk) 22:43, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Wisden Leading Cricketer in the World[edit]

Nominator(s): Harrias talk 19:30, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Another cricket award list! A fair bit of tidying work on this list, and hopefully the prose helps to make sense of it all, though I've gone around in circles a couple of times on points. As always, all thoughts and comments welcome. Harrias talk 19:30, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by Ariana Grande[edit]

Nominator(s):  — Calvin999 08:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I've applied comments from the previously archived nomination and carried out further edits. I've done all that was asked previously by editors. The lead and table follows the same style and layout as previous nominations of mine, all of which passed, so I feel as though this list, even more so now than before, meets FLC criteria.  — Calvin999 08:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Comment: Image caption, (pictured) is not needed (barring in Nicki's and Katy's as their captions have several names) as it is pretty obvious that it's them pictured. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:46, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I've removed them.  — Calvin999 11:48, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Why is Katy Perry's image caption in italics?
    • Oh that was just where I'd left two apostrophes there. I've removed them.  — Calvin999 16:01, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Why is it that you have only repeated the links in "Originating album" and not in "Artist(s)" and "Writer(s)"? -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 13:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
    • If you're only referring to why Ariana Grande isn't linked every time, it's because the article is about her, as such, as it's pointless to link her name every time. All album titles are linked because depending on how you sort, the only linked one may not always be at the top otherwise.  — Calvin999 16:01, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Oh it's sortable. Then it's okay. I am facing some problems with the table that's why I thought it is not appropriate to link every time. Anyways I will try to look at it, and will probably leave some more comments if any. In the meanwhile if you can look at my nom. It's okay if you are not comfortable with the topic. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 17:22, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
        • Okay. Sure I'll take a look.  — Calvin999 18:23, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Pure Michigan Byway[edit]

Nominator(s): Imzadi 1979  06:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

No content to leave the tourism marketing campaign to just brochures and our license plates, we now have Pure Michigan Byways! With a bunch of work, and a assistance from an intern at the Michigan Department of Transportation, I bring you the only single page that documents the lengths, dates and termini of the byways in Michigan's program. (Really, MDOT never bothered to compile a single list any place even though they're in charge of the program.) Polishing this list will provide a template for other state or national scenic byway programs in the future. Imzadi 1979  06:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

List of census-designated places in West Virginia[edit]

Nominator(s): Seattle (talk) 00:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

A list of census designated places (CDPs) in West Virginia; some CDPs show past prosperity, but current economic emaciation. Seattle (talk) 00:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Comment Lead needs a good copy edit as there are lots of passive sentences in a row. For example the first sentence could be written more actively as follows: "The United States Census Bureau separates places by incorporation for statistical purposes during its decennial census". It's also a bit strange that the lead starts with something that this list is not about. Specifically talking about incorporation instead of the definition of a census designated place. Mattximus (talk) 02:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
@Mattximus: I've mixed a few active sentences into the lead. CDPs themselves don't have much of a definition, after a non-incorporated place. I've defined incorporation and the requirements specific to West Virginia to give a more complete definition of CDPs by way of contrast so that, if municipalities can do the defined articles listed under the Municipal Code of West Virginia, the implication is CDPs cannot. I followed the same for rules for incorporation. Seattle (talk) 01:26, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
The lead really needs a copyedit, but I like this list, so maybe I can take a look. Revert any edits you do not like. One thing that stands out is that almost all the lead is dedicated to talking about what makes an incorporated place, but the list is about unincorporated places. It's great information if this list was about incorporated places, but I don't understand why it's in this article.
Also the caption beside the lead photo is great and useful, but also not related to the page in question. The list of CPDs should not have a detailed history of a particular building. That summary belongs on the page specific to that building, and this page can link to that one. Mattximus (talk)

Madhuri Dixit filmography[edit]

Nominator(s): FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

My tenth nomination, which is on the filmography of Madhuri Dixit, an Indian actress. Do I need to say more who she is? Okay, she is the one known for her acting and dancing skills. She is the recipient of four Filmfare Award for Best Actress and a Best Supporting Actress award from the same award show. I look forward to constructive criticism, and I feel that the filmography fulfills all criteria and has the potential to be promoted. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

At first glance, I can see that the list isn't comprehensive enough. In the early 2000s, Dixit hosted a television show called Kahin Na Kahin Koi Hai, but there is no mention of that. There is also no mention of her appearance in the Gujarati film Satyavadi Raja Harishchandra. So I have to oppose it for failing to meet criteria 3(a). --Krimuk|90 (talk) 02:10, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
@Krimuk90: While the first one has been added there with a source, the latter hasn't been added. I searched for it to find a reliable source to add, however, nada. I don't think it was notable enough. If it were, a source would have been certainly found, no? You may start your review if you want. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 09:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't think much research has gone into creating this list. Here is a ref for the Gujarati film. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 09:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Added, thanks. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 10:06, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Comment – If I'm right, the source only confirms the existence of the film. We need explicit sources to prove that Madhuri was a part of the film. Some sources mention the name of the film as Satwadi Raja Harishchandra. Also, it looks like a Gujarati/Rajasthani film. I know neither of these languages. Vensatry (ping) 10:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
@Vensatry: If I'm not wrong, the source clearly says "Gujarati cinema too in films like Raja Harish Chandra with Madhuri Dixit", which indicates her presence in the film. Besides it is a Gujrati film, dubbed in Rajasthani. --Frank CHITCHAT 10:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
What if I say the source is a WP:MIRROR? Vensatry (ping) 11:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Despite the fact that it was Dixit's only Gujrati appearance, I doubt the notability of this film, as no proper and reliable source exists for it and secondly it has no article in Wikipedia - a place to create notable articles. What say ye? -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:27, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I'm unsure about the film's notability. I understand there won't be much coverage for a 1980s Gujarati film in the internet. But your reason for not including the film citing lack of notability isn't really convincing because lack of a WP article cannot be correlated with assessing the notability of a film. Trust me, there are loads of notable Indian films which don't have an article over here. If I were to take Devika Rani's filmography to FL status, I cannot ignore those red-linked films just because they don't have their own articles. Vensatry (ping) 11:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you on that, yet this film did not prove to be notable at least not for Madhuri Dixit as it was just a "special appearance". A big Bollywood film star of her era making a special appearance in a Gujrati film, but still no source. Non-notable film. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
It's alright. I have given the lead a major copy-edit as well. Good luck! This doesn't affect the nomination, but I'm sure you can find a much nicer image of the gorgeous woman than the current blurry picture. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the copy-edit Krimuk90, which makes it look much better than it was. BTW I have uploaded the image of same setting with a nicer quality, but if you feel there is better image than the current one, please go ahead and change it. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 09:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
It's good that you retained the film. But we cannot have the ref. as it's a mirror site. The other ref. is incomplete. Vensatry (ping) 14:12, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
No ref. is available for it, and I have removed it. It does not affect the comprehensiveness of it as it was a non-notable Gujarati film appearnce. I don't think that absence of one film appearnce should stop a list from becoming FL. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 15:23, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I wasn't the one who insisted you to include the film. So why didn't you saying anything when Krimuk opposed the candidate solely for excluding this film and the TV show? Reread the discussion below. Vensatry (ping) 17:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
At the time when Krimuk opposed it, there was a ref. and I wasn't aware of it being a mirror, that's why I didn't say anything. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 17:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────But then, you continued to have the film in the table until today. I pointed out it was a mirror long ago. Vensatry (ping) 17:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

While resolving other queries, I just forgot about this, and I was in the search of another source these days, however, I couldn't find any. My apology! -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 17:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
No need to apologize. I was concerned because initially you included the film when Krimuk had opposed and now when I say the ref. is a mirror, you say the film is a non-notable one and excluding it will not stop this from becoming an FL. Vensatry (ping) 18:38, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Actually, when Krimuk opposed, at that time, too I objected, "I searched for it to find a reliable source to add, however, nada. I don't think it was notable enough", but when he provided a source, I added that. Anyways enough of it.

Weak oppose

  • Ref. #1, needs a page no.
    • No page seems to be written there, but the link directly goes to the page no. (unknown) which I have used as a reference for the info. present in the list.
  • Sanjay Dutt and Shah Rukh Khan are linked twice in the lede
  • "Dixit then played roles in commercial failure" - borders tautology
  • "Her breakthrough role came two years later with the lead role in" - first role is redundant
  • The above sentence is a little too long. Consider splitting it
  • "one of the highest grossing film" -> one of the highest grossing films
  • "her role of a violent revenge-seeking woman was well received." - This is not verified by either of the sources.
    • I missed this – "She won a second Best Actress award ... woman who rebels against her manipulative mother-in-law in the drama Beta" This isn't verified by the source either. Page #573 of the book talks about Saroj Khan. Vensatry (ping) 18:48, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Whoops, my bad! It's pg 394 that says "In Beta, Madhuri Dixit takes on a scheming mother-in-law, Aruna Irani, to ensure justice for..." The "Best Actress" part does not need to be cited as it has been covered with a proper source in the table. @Vensatry: Please let me know if I have resolved your concerns. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 18:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • "she played a woman escaping from her abusive marriage" - Same as above
    • Yes, it doesn't, yet it talks the same thing about Julia Roberts' character in Sleeping with the Enemy; Yaarana was its remake. And since Dixit is the one stepping into the role of Roberts, I think the source is okay.
      • What are you trying to say? Is there a mention of Sleeping with the Enemy anywhere in this article? Vensatry (ping) 17:25, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • "However, her 1997 release of the romantic film Dil To Pagal Hai was a major success" -> However, the 1997 romantic film Dil To Pagal Hai was a major success.
  • "Her two film releases in 2002 were ... " - We are aware that we're talking about films until now.
  • "In the latter film, she portrayed a prostitute in love with an alcoholic" - I'm not sure about the usage of the word prostitute here. Courtesan would be more appropriate.
  • A mention of Gaja Gamini could well be made in the lede owing to the importance given to her character.
  • The link to Bombay Talkies in the table points to the studio
  • "The role of a con woman in Abhishek Chaubey's black comedy film Dedh Ishqiya (2014) marked her comeback after five years, which earned critical acclaim" - It's quite obvious to anyone that the gap was seven years.
    • Whoops! Mixed up with Aaja Nachle. Corrected!
  • "For her role in Dedh Ishqiya, Dixit received her 14th nomination of the Filmfare Award for Best Actress" - This should precede the previous sentence.
  • Swati was directed by Kranthi Kumar, not L. V. Prasad.
  • Be consistent with T. Rama Rao and Tatineni Rama Rao. Likewise, for K. Bapaiah and K.Bapayya.
  • "She served as the judge from fourth season til seventh season." - typo
  • Refs #26, #32, #52 are missing publishers
  • Link Zee News in its first occurrence
  • Why is India TV italicised in the ref.

The table looks fine, but the lede needs a fair amount of work before this gets promoted. Vensatry (ping) 13:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the amazing review. All of the concerns have been taken care of. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 15:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Leaning towards support The lede is a tad bloated, and it should feature some notable TV performances, but it is a well researched list other than this, I was looking at it earlier. Perhaps you could add some of her TV performances too to ensure it is fully comprehensive?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Dr. Blofeld: Thank you for the kind review. I think that Dixit, being a film actress does not have so much of contributions in the television industry, but the two shows she judged/hosted are present there. Besides she has had appearances in TV shows, which is common among film actors, and I don't think that is a good idea. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 09:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Krimuk left the impression that it wasn't comprehensive that's all. I agree that a lot of those sorts of TV appearances aren't worth mentioning.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
When nominated, a notable TV show that she had hosted was not mentioned at all. That's why I didn't consider the list comprehensive. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 12:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
The oppose came in mainly because this list was short of one TV show, seriously? Vensatry (ping) 15:16, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
His oppose was also based on the exclusion of that Gujarati film. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 17:15, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
It's not just about being short of one TV show, Vensatry, it's about not being well-researched. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 03:38, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
But then, I don't see much of an improvement in this list in terms of comprehensiveness. Vensatry (ping) 10:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Vensatry, the oppose was based merely on those two missing things, which are now present. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 14:51, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

A few comments Sorry for being late. Well, i feel there are a few issues to be rectified or an explanation being required.

  • Why mentioning 'Ek Do Teen' in particular? I believe her other songs 'Choli Ke Peeche', 'Dhak Dhak Karne' and 'Maar Dala' were equally popular. So, i suggest the nominator to remove it.
    • We all know that Tezaab was a breakthrough film for her, which I think is also mentioned in the previous sentence. The song was a major highlight in the film and was highly instrumental in the film's success. Dare I say, it served as a launchpad for her career. I agree that the other songs you've mentioned are also popular but we cannot include every cult song of hers here. Vensatry (ping) 10:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Per Vensatry's comment.
  • "play the romantic interest to male protagonists" — i don't think so that she used to play the romantic interests of antagonists in particular. Isn't the statement She continued to play the female lead in the successful action-dramas Ram Lakhan (1989), Tridev (1989), and Kishen Kanhaiya (1990) enough?
    • Done.
  • Perhaps Gaja Gamini be called and art house film rather than using the term experimental. If using art house is wrong, forgive me. But experimental is a bit out-of-the-blue.
    • Art house is a bit informal. I think experimental is correct as I have seen most of the high quality articles use this term.
  • In 2013, she performed an item number in the Ayan Mukerji-directed romantic comedy Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani. — adding the song name along with a reliable source is appreciable.
    • The song wasn't quite notable, but since it was her only appearance in 2013, I gave it a mention.
Since you gave a mention, at least cite it please. It is important. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:01, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The citation is properly covered in the main body of the article. Per WP:LEAD, we do not need to repeat the references in the lead, Pavanjandhyala. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:19, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Hmm. Surely makes sense. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Also, i assume that she was "praised" by critics mostly. For example, in the statement The widely praised role of a con woman in Abhishek Chaubey's black comedy film Dedh Ishqiya (2014) marked her first acting role in seven years i think "widely praised" can be replaced with "critically acclaimed".
    • The "widely praised" is same as "critically acclaimed" and such. Since "critical acclaim" has been used twice in the list, I have used the term "praised" to avoid monotonous prose.
  • Any info about the critical reception and BO Verdict of Gulaab Gang?
    • We need not mention critical and/or box-office performance for each and every film. This film's performance (barring Juhi Chawla's) was not notable anyway.
  • Are the four seasons of Jhalak Dikhla Jaa, in which she served as a talent judge, consecutive?
    • That is explained in the form of a FN.

Anyways, the table is looking fine and comprehensive. The validity of the image used is also perfect though a recent image can be more appropriate. However it is the nominator's call. Ping me after you rectify these issues and/or after you complete giving explanations if any. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:07, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the comments. Pinging @Pavanjandhyala: per his own statement. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 10:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Support — Good job overall, could be better. Being a non-native English speaker, i am unable to find further issues. But i am sure someone else may do. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Premier League Golden Glove[edit]

Nominator(s): NapHit (talk); Bloom6132 (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Been a while since I have been here, but came across this list recently and was in good shape, so have just sprued it up and hopefully it now meets the criteria. Since I haven't been here in a while, I might not be up to date with certain style guidelines, so I apologise in advance if that is the case. Cheers NapHit (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • "Players" column doesn't sort properly; should sort by last name
Should be ok now, but for some reason the sorting keys aren't appearing on my screen on any article, so I'm not 100% if its fixed. NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure why, but Čech isn't sorting properly. Seattle (talk) 22:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Fixed the sorting on Cech. —Bloom6132 (talk) 11:10, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Done NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Why do we need an "Awards won by nationality" table if readers can just sort the "Winners" section by nationality? It's not as if hundreds have won the award?
I understand your point, but I think its just for quick reference for the reader. There are numerous other instances of this occurring in other Featured lists, although that obviously is not a fully refutable reason why they should stay, but an indication that there is a precedent. NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Ref 9 needs "(Manchester City FC)", unless it's not published by (Manchester City FC)
done NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Done, Ive removed the van der war image. NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Originally, the Golden Glove could only be won outright by a single player. Should there have been a tie in the number of clean sheets, the goalkeeper with the superior clean sheets-to-games ratio received the award. can you combine these sentences with a semi-colon?
Done NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • They established a new commercially independent league in order to negotiate "in order" can usually be cut wherever seen
Done NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • with the Golden Boot can you link "Golden Boot" somewhere?
Linked on first instance NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • presented at the end of the inaugural season,[4] and the Premier League Player of the Season award first bestowed the two seasons later. a bit too "season" heavy. Is "the" needed before "two seasons later"?
reworded NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • However, it took over a decade to elapse before the Premier League Golden Glove was first awarded in 2005, when Petr Čech received the inaugural award. → "In 2005, the Premier League Golden Glove was first awarded, with Petr Čech its inaugural recipient."
Done NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Joe Hart has won the award on four occasions, the most times out of all keepers. not sure "times" is needed here
Done NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • During his streak, Van der Sar went 1,311 minutes... the third longest in the world after Mazarópi's 1,816 minutes. I'm not sure what this has to do with the award, mates. Seattle (talk) 02:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I understand your point, I'd lie a few more opinions first before I remove it. It does seem superfluous to the article. NapHit (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
OK. Seattle (talk) 22:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Arshad Warsi, roles and awards[edit]

Nominator(s): Skr15081997 (talk) 10:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Arshad Warsi has been in the Hindi film industry since 1987 but it was only in 2003 that he won fame for his role in Munna Bhai M.B.B.S.. Since then he has won several awards for his acting skills. This list presents all his film credits, awards and nominations.Skr15081997 (talk) 10:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments from FrB.TG
  • I don't see a need to add three images of him, all taken during the same time.
Removed 2 from the filmography section.
  • Why is it that you've not included a "Director" column in the table?
If an actor-director collaboration is really noteworthy, then it is mentioned in the lead. Adding separate column for director would increase total width. I have followed User:Cowlibob on this. An actor's direct contribution to a film is his/her respective role. Almost all the filmography websites list film's name, year and role. On WP, we provide 2 more columns–notes and ref(s). Had he been a director/producer then a different format would have been followed as in Satyajit Ray filmography.
Yeah, I know. Not a requirement, just a suggestion.
  • "and reprised his role as Circuit in Munna Bhai M.B.B.S. in its sequel Lage Raho Munna Bhai" - grammatical error.
Corrected
  • "Warsi also hosted the first season of the reality television show Big Boss, for which"
Added
  • Don't restrict the awards to only Filmfare in the prose as it's not just a filmography, but also awards list.
All awards and nominations have been mentioned in the lead.
  • "he played a lawyer in the National Film Award-winning comedy" - "National Film Award-winning" is WP:UNDUE.
Removed

Please have a look at this. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Nice work. I now support. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 12:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
@FrB.TG: Thanks for reviewing. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 12:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

  • The very first item listed in the WP:Featured list criteria is WP:Naming conventions, which says, in part, to "not use titles suggesting that one article forms part of another". A title such as "Arshad Warsi, roles and awards" suggests to me that this article is a subsidiary to the main Arshad Warsi article, and many other editors have expressed similar concerns about this particular title format (see, for example, User:sroc's comprehensive reasoning here). Therefore, I believe that this title violates WP:Naming conventions and that thus the article does not currently meet the FLC.
A Thousand Doors, the new title is List of roles and awards of Arshad Warsi.--Skr15081997 (talk) 16:12, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I think the prose of this list could do with a thorough peer review. In its current state, it merely chronologically lists all of Warsi's films in a rather dry fashion, which doesn't make for a particularly engaging read (e.g. "The following year, he [did something]. Two years later he [did something else]. In the same year, Warsi [did another thing]. In 2013, he [did something else]"). With the exception of the ones for which he won awards, it's difficult to see which of his roles are the notable and why. Is there any significance in his hosting of Razzmatazz, for example, or is it just something else that he's done?
Copy-edited
  • Certain years are repeated quite frequently in the lead. "2003", for example, is repeated three times in the sixth sentence.
Fixed
  • There are three citations in the first half of the first paragraph, but then none from there on. This is an issue for me.
I have added 6 citation to the 2nd para.
  • What's the deal with Jeetenge Hum? The Year column suggests that it was released in 2001, but the reference in the table is from 2005 and implies that, at that point, the film had yet to be released. Is there any other information available about the film?
It released in 2011. A source for the same has been added.
  • Unless the title of the programme actually was "Bigg Boss (season 1)", this should probably just be "Bigg Boss".
Done
  • I believe that, for page ranges, we use en dashes rather than hypens (e.g. "47–51" rather than "47-51").
Done
  • The awards and nominations table requires rowscopes in order to meet MOS:DTT.
Done
  • The Year columns might be better centre-aligned.
Done
  • {{IMDb name|0451174}} -> {{IMDb name|0451174|name=Arshad Warsi}}
Done
  • "Arshad Warsi's Official Website" -> "Arshad Warsi's official website"
Done

In its current state, I don't feel that this article yet meets the FLC, so I wish all the participating editors the best of luck in improving it. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 09:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Oppose for now – Fails 3(b) criterion. With the prose size of the parent article being less than 5k chars (~800 words), I don't find any reason to fork out a separate list just for roles and awards. Vensatry (ping) 10:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Vensatry: I have added a few lines to the main article, hope that suffices 3(b) requirement.--Skr15081997 (talk) 14:51, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Would you even call than an improvement? Vensatry (ping) 17:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
@Vensatry: I appreciate the time you are giving to this nomination, but can you be a bit specific? It will help both of us.--Skr15081997 (talk) 02:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure about the minimum prose size. Since you want me to be a bit specific, my rule of thumb would be 15k chars, say the size of Bipasha Basu's. Vensatry (ping) 06:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
15k sounds too much at present. However I will try to make the article 8-10k characters in prose size. Meanwhile can you review the list?--Skr15081997 (talk) 07:29, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I know but make sure it reaches at least 10k. Vensatry (ping) 10:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, give me some time.--Skr15081997 (talk) 12:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
@Vensatry: now the parent article has 10,167 characters of prose. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Comments from Krimuk90
  • The very first sentence has two instances of the word "film".
reduced to 1
Done
  • Warsi didn't "star" in either Maine Pyaar Kyun Kiya or Salaam Namaste. Salman & Sushmita did in the first, and Saif & Preity did in the other. Please tweak.
Tweaked
  • "His performance in the latter won him the Filmfare and Zee Cine Awards in the category Best Actor in a Comic Role" ==> "in the Best Actor in a Comic Role category"
Done
  • "honoured him" is not something we use to talk about film awards. Please use the more conventional received, won, garnered etc.
Done
  • In can see many, many instances of "in the same year". Please construct your sentences differently. In general, the prose definitely needs an additional bit of work.
Copy-edited
  • There is no mention of which of his films earned the most money. It's an important bit of info in an actor's filmography. It's also important to say that his first film was a box office flop. Without those bits of pertinent information, the lead reads like a monotonous collection of "he played xxx in yyy".
Added info on box office performances
  • The source you provided for Jeetenge Hum makes no mention of when it released, but only states that it has been in production for a long time. What made you put 2001 as it's release date?
The film was shelved for about 10 years. IMDb lists its release date as 2001 while the BH source used now says 2011.
  • I don't think the name of the tv show is Bigg Boss 1. The 1 refers to it's first season. The show is simply called Bigg Boss. You need to mention which season he hosted in the notes column.
Done
  • Warsi's official website as an external link is unnecessary in his filmography page.
Removed

--Krimuk|90 (talk) 02:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Krimuk90: I hope my recent edits have resolved all of your concerns. Thanks for your thorough review. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 10:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

More comments:

  • "he played the lead role in Raj Kaushal-directed mystery film Anthony Kaun Hai?, and the counter-terrorism drama Kabul Express" ==> "in the Raj Kaushal-directed..."
  • "Warsi also co-produced and starred in the supernatural comedy-drama Hum Tum Aur Ghost. It performed poorly at the box office." The two sentences can be combined.
  • "Golmaal 3, the year's second-highest grossing Hindi film also featured him in an important role". Not sure what "important role" refers to. You can say he played one of the primary roles in it.
  • "...and turned out to be a commercial disaster". Sounds like a tabloid report. Please tweak to something more formal.
  • What is a "solo commercial success"? Do you mean it was his first commercial success in which he played the lead role? It's not very clear from the prose that before Jolly LLB most of his successes were in ensemble films.
  • You have a number of "shelved" or "unreleased" films in the table, and have yet provided a release year for them. Why?
  • Maintain consistency in the notes column. In the television section, one note says "He hosted the show's first season." and another note simply states "second season". Follow the latter format.
  • Also, the season must link with the respective article, where available.
  • I see you have used "arshadwarsi.net" as a source for several claims. Personal websites are not considered reliable sources, and cannot be used to cite claims.
  • Why do we have the location information only for a few refs? Either include it for all them or don't include them at all. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

List of accolades received by The Dirty Picture[edit]

Nominator(s): Krimuk|90 (talk) 07:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

The Dirty Picture is a 2011 Indian film that broke stereotypes related to the portrayal of women's sexuality in Indian cinema. The film's star, Vidya Balan, was particularly awarded for a role that most Indian actresses would run away from. This article provides a fully-sourced listing of the many awards and nominations this film received. Krimuk|90 (talk) 07:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

SupportFrankBoy CHITCHAT 10:57, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. :) --Krimuk|90 (talk) 12:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Support --Skr15081997 (talk) 06:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. :) --Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

List of Warwickshire County Cricket Club grounds[edit]

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude, AssociateAffiliate

AssociateAffiliate started this article and created the table, I have added an extensive lead and generally tweaked it a bit, and now feel it meets the FL requirements..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Angel Haze discography[edit]

Nominator(s): Azealia911 talk 00:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Angel Haze is an american rapper, they've released one studio album, two extended plays, six mixtapes, eleven singles (including five as a featured artist) and eight music videos. I am nominating this for featured list, I've been working on it extensively for the past few days and think it sufficiently meets criteria, hope to hear others thoughts. Azealia911 talk 00:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Haven't looked thoroughly and may add more comments later, but on first glance:
    • All mentions of "extended play" should be changed to EP, the more common term. The releases infobox even uses "EP".
    • The "they" pronouns should be explained in a footnote for readers who have not read Haze's biography.
Chase (talk / contribs) 04:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Done Azealia911 talk 11:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Looks great! Simon (talk) 05:52, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
@: Please could you elaborate a bit on how this meets Wikipedia:Featured list criteria. As PresN has outlined here [[1]], short "looks great" reviews can give impression that the list wasn't actually "reviewed" even if it was especially if later reviews find substantial things to fix. I don't want it to seem as if I'm trying to hinder these noms but I'm actually ensuring the nom has better chance as reviews don't need to be discarded later on. Cowlibob (talk) 02:41, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: user HĐ did tweak the page before leaving comments, just to eliminate any thought of "gave approval without even looking at the page" Azealia911 talk 03:29, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't think this is a gifted support but have to take into account how these early "votes" have been considered in the past. Cowlibob (talk) 03:45, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Looks like a good article, apologies for my disruptive edit! new user here;) asl? HyunAChachki (talk) 21:58, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the !vote, and that's ok, we were all new at one stage, happy editing Face-smile.svg Azealia911 talk 21:59, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
@HyunAChachki: Since you started your account just yesterday and have made 8 mainspace edits. It's probably too early to start giving supports to featured list candidates but feel free to continue contributing on expanding articles. Please look at Wikipedia:Featured list criteria for what is required for a FL. Cowlibob (talk) 02:28, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Denzel Washington on screen and stage[edit]

Nominator(s): Cowlibob (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Denzel Washington is an actor best known for playing a doctor in the television series St. Elsewhere, and his film collaborations with Spike Lee, and Tony Scott. He has won the most competitive acting Oscars of any African American winning for Glory (1989), and Training Day (2001). Washington has also built a strong stage career which culminated in him winning a Tony Award for Fences (2010). This list covers his entire acting career and as always I look forward to all the helpful comments on how to improve it. Cowlibob (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments from FrB.TG
  • "Two years later" spotted five times. Can one/some of these be replaced with something else to avoid repetition.
  • "In 1993, he starred in the Kenneth Branagh's adaptation" - I don't know why is "the" there.
  • "In 1999, Washington won the Golden Globe Award for Best Actor – Motion Picture Drama,[10] and his second Silver Bear for Best Actor[9] for playing wrongly-convicted boxer Rubin Carter in the biographical film The Hurricane.[11]" - Can you shift the ref. 9 to the very end of the sentence?
  • The table has much space to add directors' names, no? I think this info. can be added.
  • Can you remove the width size from the third table (section "Stage") and let it adjust automatically as the empty space in "Year(s)" and "Ref." look so weird. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 19:29, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
@FrB.TG: Thanks for the review. I think I've sorted these. I prefer to highlight the important collaborations in the lead rather than have a separate column. Cowlibob (talk) 01:19, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't think there is any harm to have a separate column for the directors, and the table has the space. I am just asking it for the ease of readers in case they want to know the names of the directors rather than going to those pages and looking at the names. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 15:46, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

National Film Award for Best Supporting Actor[edit]

Nominator(s): FrankBoy CHITCHAT 13:19, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

The National Film Award for Best Supporting Actor was nominated for the FLC; however, the list failed because of not having enough comments and supports. I am looking forward to comments on how to improve it. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 13:19, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Support – Looks good to me Vensatry (ping) 18:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
    • I'm much grateful for the support. :) -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 18:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Comments from Krimuk90
  • You mention that the DFF has been set up by an Indian ministry, yet you in the very sentence you refer to the organisation as " the Indian government's DFF ". Redundant.
  • In the first paragraph you mention that the award is presented by the DFF, yet you repeat the information at the beginning of in the second paragraph :"The Directorate of Film Festivals instituted the "Best Supporting Actor" category"
  • "The award ceremony is held in New Delhi, India, where the award is presented by the President of India" ==> "The award is presented by the President of India at a ceremony held in New Delhi"
  • Prose is quite repetitive in the third paragraph. I spot four sentences beginning with "XXX won..."
  • In note d, do you mean unnamed or unknown?
  • Why is the location information only present in ref no. 2? --Krimuk|90 (talk) 09:58, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you @Krimuk90: for the comments. I have performed the edit, have tweaked for a better prose, and have added the location information to the sources wherever available. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 12:07, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
I would remove the location information for the two refs to maintain consistency. Other than that, this has my support. Well done. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 07:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Removed. Thank you for the support. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 09:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support on prose and list. Excellent work.--Skr15081997 (talk) 11:35, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 09:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support: Although I would suggest to remove the red link for Nanba Nanba until you create the article.
--Birdienest81 (talk) 17:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
No such plans, therefore removed. And, tks. (: -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 18:20, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
There are absolutely no problems with red links in FLs. Vensatry (ping) 18:47, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of the 2014 Atlantic hurricane season[edit]

Nominator(s): TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 04:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

The 2014 Atlantic hurricane season ended similar to that of its predecessor, with below-average activity overall. With the addition of all post-season analysis data via the National Hurricane Center, I believe this page satisfies the requirements of a featured list. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 04:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

American Expeditionary Forces on the Western Front order of battle[edit]

Nominator(s): Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 15:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because...it overall is a quite a decent list. Created it back in March. Since it was part of MILHIST it passed a B-class and a A-class review both in March. The A-class was closed and my article was promoted earlier this month. Anyways, I really hope this passes, even though this is going to be my first featured content. Thanks for now, Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 15:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Comment Shouldn't the title include the war? There are many Western Fronts, and not everyone knows the AEF were WWI. Mattximus (talk) 22:07, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
@Mattximus: done.--Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 23:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370[edit]

Nominator(s): AHeneen (talk) 17:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

The article has been expanded/improved to meet the FL criteria. A copyedit request was made at the Guild of Copy Editors and has been finished. I've created several GAs, but this would be my first Featured content.

Although the search is ongoing, there has not been a lot of events associated with the search in recent months. Since November 2014, there has only been about 1-2 events per month (and a few of the events listed aren't very significant). Most of the events occurred between March-May 2014 and the start of the current phase in October 2014. I believe the list meets the stability criteria because it "does not change significantly from day to day".

The choice for the sections is basically a breakdown of the timeline by activity and roughly based on the phase of the search.

  • March 2014: Search in Southeast Asia and events related to the initial investigation and reaction. The shift to the southern Indian Ocean occurs on 17 March and the rest of the month is aerial searches in a very remote region (refer to map).
  • April-May 2014: Although the aerial search continues, the focus during this time is the acoustic search and the sonar survey by Bluefin 21 which are both carried out from ships
  • June-September 2014: The period between the end of active searching (Bluefin 21 search ended 28 May) and the start of the next phase in October
  • October 2014-present: Current phase of the search (underwater phase)

AHeneen (talk) 17:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Quick comment Why did you choose to only include the timeline of the aftermath in this list? The title implies a complete timeline. Littlecarmen (talk) 08:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

That's not an issue that crossed my mind during the preparation for the FL nomination. The timeline began as a split of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370#Timeline of events, which listed events in the aftermath of Flight 370's disappearance. At the time, I was preparing the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article for a GA nomination; it seemed reasonable to split the unwieldy aftermath timeline but retain the timeline of events during the disappearance because the latter was integral to understanding the sequence of events during the disappearance. That explains the origin of the article's scope.
A tremendous amount of conflicting and erroneous information concerning the details of Flight 370's disappearance was released/published in the aftermath of its disappearance (an interim report in March 2015 finally set the record straight on a number of details). I believe that the disappearance timeline—Malaysia Airlines Flight 370#Timeline of disappearance—is a necessary part of that article's "Disappearance" section (the heart of that article) and should not be removed. I don't think this carries any weight here, but for what it's worth, the parent article has received 591841 page views in the last 90 days versus a paltry 7718 for the timeline article. The disappearance timeline could be added to the timeline article, but then the content would be duplicated in both articles (an unacceptable content fork). So, if necessary, I would prefer that the article be moved to Timeline of the aftermath of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. AHeneen (talk) 15:56, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I wasn't suggesting that you add more info to this article, I just think the title may be a bit misleading and should be changed. Littlecarmen (talk) 18:47, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • There's nothing in policy that you have to remove the information from the main article to include it here. If such important information is missing, it's a 3A violation. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:19, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I am concerned that duplicating the disappearance timeline in both articles would be considered a content fork. As explained above, I think the timeline of the disappearance is necessary in the parent article, which I'd like to bring to FA status someday. I would rather the timeline article (the FL candidate) be renamed to focus on the aftermath than to include the disappearance timeline in both and see it removed from the parent article in the future (if the issue is raised). AHeneen (talk) 01:24, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I'd recommend you read the first paragraph of the page you linked to. First, content forks are defined as duplicated articles (not sections). Second, there's this pair of sentences: "... as an article grows, editors often create summary-style spin-offs or new, linked article for related material. This is acceptable, and often encouraged, as a way of making articles clearer and easier to manage." WP:SPINOFF likewise allows a more detailed discussion of the timeline of the flight itself in this article (with a summary in the main article). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:38, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • It was the last sentence I am concerned about...that the presence of the content in this article would lead to the disappearance timeline in the parent article being reduced to summary style. That said, I will add the disappearance timeline to this article. I should be done in a couple hours. AHeneen (talk) 05:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • If a summary is done properly, there shouldn't be any issues. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I have added the section "Disappearance (8 March 2014)" to the article, which should (hopefully) address the above comments. I have asked the editor who recently performed a copyedit of the article to please copyedit the newly-added section. Aside from that, there is one reference that should be changed: Ref #13 (CNN) is one webpage that contains several documents from the preliminary report...I don't have time right now, but I will change these refs to link to the individual documents (which I recall are available on a Malaysian government website). AHeneen (talk) 10:15, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

List of India cricketers who have taken five wickets on Test debut[edit]

Nominator(s): Lugnuts, Vensatry (ping) 20:50, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Credits to User:Lugnuts for creating the basic article. I expanded the lead and tidied the table up a bit. Happy to have him as a co-nom. With just eight players, the list might look short, but this is a never-ending list. We've had a discussion regarding this in the past. Look forward to your comments Vensatry (ping) 20:50, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Comment Wouldn't this list be more complete if it was called List of cricketers who have taken five wickets on Test debut and just include all 100 or so members, rather than divide it into countries with only 8 people? Mattximus (talk) 17:28, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Please go through the discussion in the link which I have quoted above. Besides, we already have two such FLs – Pakistan and South Africa Vensatry (ping) 18:39, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
I see, I won't oppose due to the discussion you linked, but I really think that an article containing all countries would be much more useful, as you could compare countries at a glance, with sortable columns. It would be a fantastic wikipedia page instead of several rather obscure tiny lists. I would vote to merge these independent lists into a single large one. Mattximus (talk) 21:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
At which point they'd become to large to manage, and split back out to their component parts. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
144 or so is not too many. I really think much is lost by splitting them up like this. You can't compare countries, sort by date, etc... Mattximus (talk) 01:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
@Harrias, The Rambling Man, Crisco 1492, Giants2008, and ChrisTheDude: Can you weigh in your opinion here? Vensatry (ping) 14:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Well, this was exactly suggested by The-Pope sometime ago. Seems good to me Vensatry (ping) 17:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I like Chris and Pope's idea. Down the line, perhaps that article could come to FLC as well. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Agree with all those above, that's a great idea. Mattximus (talk) 23:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @Lugnuts: Are you aware that I have included you as a co-nom? Vensatry (ping) 08:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Haha, oh yes, just seen that. Thanks! Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 08:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Support Nice work. I'll leave it up to you on the sorting, you're the better judge of which would be more appropriate. Well done. Harrias talk 13:08, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Older nominations[edit]

Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor[edit]

Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk), Cowlibob (talk) 20:25, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

We are nominating Oscars for Best Supporting Actor for featured list because I have worked on the list for several weeks to comply with Featured list standards. I strongly believe that this list has a potential to become a featured list. I followed closely to how the Academy Award for Best Actor and Best Actress lists and the Daytime Emmy Award acting lists were formatted. Birdienest81 (talk) 20:25, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Support: Looks good. But can I ask why you guys didn't include an age superlative section? I think it's good to maintain consistency with the Best Actor and Best Actress lists. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 02:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I forgot about that. That's not a big problem to add. I'm having finals on Tuesday, my Mom's birthday on Wednesday, and my own birthday on Thursday! However, adding an age superlative section is easier than fixing tables. It may take awhile, but I'll promise to get into it ASAP. Other you can gently ask Cowlibob if he wants to do it. Thanks for reminding me, Krimuk90! Cheers.
--Birdienest81 (talk) 03:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
@Krimuk90: Added in section. Thanks for the support! Cowlibob (talk) 03:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Happy birthday.--Jarodalien (talk) 07:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support: Well done again.--Jagarin 20:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Support with a minor concern:

  • "Brennan has received the most awards in this category with three Oscars" - Oscars is informal, try "awards". -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 13:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Done
--Birdienest81 (talk) 21:41, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Looks mostly good, though don't use links more than once within tables; it doesn't really provide any benefit. It would also help to have more diversity within the references. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:59, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • With all due respect, I've already taken up the issue about duplicate links with FLC delegates Crisco 1492 and PresN who said they will allow it if the list is made sortable (which I did). Furthermore, head FLC director Giants2008 even went to say that whether a table is sortable or not, there are special cases where normal overlink are bypassed so that repeat nominations can be linked for convenience purposes. If this can't have repeat links, then the other Oscar acting lists should be revoked FL status since there would be no consistency. If you disagree with me, that's fine, but I went through the process of asking the delegates and I do not want to be making a big deal out of this. As for the references, they are consistent with all the other Oscar acting awards lists I've done and similar to the ones from the Daytime Emmy Awards.
--Birdienest81 (talk) 16:28, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Just a note: the discussion was in the addressed Littlecarmen comments section above. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:30, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

List of Fringe episodes[edit]

Nominator(s): Ruby 2010/2013 20:15, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

This list includes all episodes of the science fiction series Fringe, which aired from 2008 to 2013 in the US. I've drawn from other television episodes lists for ideas on constructing it, so I hope it is near to meeting the FL criteria. Thanks in advance to any reviewers! Ruby 2010/2013 20:15, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

List of Gaon Album Chart number ones of 2011[edit]

Nominator(s): (talk) 10:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because this is a short but comprehensive and well-sourced list. (talk) 10:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Support The article looks good to me, with everything being referenced properly.--TerryAlex (talk) 16:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Lists of number-one albums by (category) are always interesting. Korean music is rising in the mainstream. Why 2011? This article more complete and better referenced than the articles for later years.Listmeister (talk) 16:33, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment. The article is well-referenced, but references to Gaon should always include an archive url since the site changes so often. Random86 (talk) 19:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I have added archived urls for some. Thanks! (talk) 01:38, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. It looks great and very well-sourced. --Carioca (talk) 22:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Bit surprised at how quick the supports are rolling in. Lead needs a good copyedit which I'll try and do later. Tables are not accessible, need rowscopes and colscopes. As nearly all the sources are in Korean, I can't comment on it being verified but as they're from the official site I presume it's accurate. Would be nice if there were some secondary sources which shouldn't be hard to find as this is a list of numbers ones. Why do some of the albums have alternate Korean titles and others not? Images need alttext. Cowlibob (talk) 20:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I haven't checked all the albums on this list, but many Korean albums actually don't have Korean titles, like Fiction and Fact (as can be seen on Melon: [2]). Random86 (talk) 21:40, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Most Korean albums in this list are originally titled in English. The original titles for Korean-titled albums have already been noted. Simon (talk) 05:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I have added colscopes and rowscopes as well as alttexts for images. Thanks for your comment! Simon (talk) 05:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
@: I'm confused by the "one of which..." sentence. If Into The New World topped the chart in Week 2 of 2011, what topped the album in Week 1 of 2011 as the table starts with Into the New World. Could be useful to sort the artist column so e.g. All of SNSD's number ones would be lined up. Ideas for expanding the lead, you could mention the top three best selling albums, did the albums that sold well win any notable awards/ recognition or break any records? Were any of the albums the best selling album ever for that particular act? Cowlibob (talk) 02:53, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Cowlibob: The first week of 2011 counted by Gaon is December 19–25, 2010. I'm rather confused whether this should be added. Simon (talk) 08:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
From which date till which date does the 2011 chart cover? Ideally you should have week 1 to week 52 if Gaon use December 19-25, 2010 as week 1 then you should include it as week 1 of the 2011 chart which you can clarify with a note. After all this is a list about what Gaon classifies as 2011 not whether it is actually in 2011. Cowlibob (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Done with this. Thanks! Simon (talk) 09:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments I've got serious issues with this list as it currently is.

  • Like Cowlibob, I'm also concerned by the lack of secondary sources. Of the 67 references in this article, only one is not a primary source, and, since it's dated 2010, one can't really claim that it's actually about the subject in particular.
  • I'm still looking for third-pary sources. Simon (talk) 09:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Understandable. I have moved the page. Simon (talk) 05:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
  • The prose shifts between present tense and past tense rather awkwardly in places, e.g. "albums claimed" and "peaked atop", but then "are three acts" and "is the longest-running". You're mainly discussing past events in the second paragraph; MOS:TENSE therefore suggests using the past tense.

I think this article still needs a lot of work doing to it, and I wish all the participating editors the best of luck in improving it. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 21:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Fixed the tense. Thanks for your comments! Simon (talk) 09:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Oppose another set of dubious instant supports here.

  • "Sony Music Korea" is pipelinked to Sony Music which redirects to Sony Music Entertainment which has no mention of Korea at all. Is there actually such an entity as "Sony Music Korea"?
  • Yes, Sony Music Korea does exist. Simon (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Similar comment for Universal. And do avoid pipelinking to redirects, it's very clusmy.
  • Our article calls the band CNBLUE.
  • Done. Simon (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • "both spent four " -> "both of which spent four" or put a semi-colon in there.
  • Done. Simon (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • "a reissue of the album titled A-CHA sold 129,894 copies" whose album?
  • "Album of the Year at the Mnet Asian Music Awards in 2011" if these awards don't even have an article, are they notable enough to be mentioned in the lead of this article?
  • "T.O.P." is a redirect to a disambiguation page.
  • Done. Simon (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • U-Kiss is referred to as U-KISS by our own article.
  • Done. Simon (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Sortable table so links should be linked every time.
  • "Commencing date" should sort chronologically, not alphabetically.
  • I don't know how to sort date chronologically. Simon (talk) 10:19, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • It should probably also say something like "Week starting"
  • Repackage or Reissue? You use both terms for A-CHA.
  • Done. Simon (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Sung Si Kyung -> Sung Si-kyung.
  • Done. Simon (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Enough at this point. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: All of your concerns have been addressed. (the Mnet Asian Music Awards has its own article and therefore it is a notable award) Simon (talk) 08:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Not all of my concerns have been addressed. Please check them individually. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
@The Rambling Man: The date sorting has been fixed. Thanks! Simon (talk) 11:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Where are all the links in the monthly chart table? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:45, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: done now. Thanks1 Simon (talk) 04:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

List of accolades received by Kaminey[edit]

Nominator(s): —Prashant 14:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that it meets the FL-criteria. It provides a listing of the notable awards and nominations received by the 2009 caper thriller Kaminey, one of the best films in Indian cinema and best film of the previous decade.—Prashant 14:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

If that's one of the best films in Indian cinema heaven help Indian cinema..♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:47, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I still remember that Doctor! Especially this : "I've sure there's a lot of young working class males in India in which the classic action film would appeal to without song and dance numbers. I saw Kaminey a few weeks back and I thought the song and dance numbers ruined what would have otherwise been a good film. You can't produce a serious, gritty crime film and have them break out into that!" at Andha Naal‍‍ '​‍s GAR. Face-wink.svg Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Best film of the previous decade, Seriously? Vensatry (ping) 13:23, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Pavanjandhyala[edit]

Ahem, Okay. Here are a few issues i listed below which i expect the nominator to either rectify them or give an explanation regarding the same here if required.

  • "The film is set in the Mumbai underworld, telling the story of twins Charlie and Guddu Sharma and their rivalry" — it can be rephrased as Set in the Mumbai underworld, the film focuses on the lives of and rivalry between twins Charlie and Guddu Sharma
  • "Kaminey was released on 14 August 2009 to universal critical acclaim and box-office success, the film grossed over ₹710 million (US$11 million) from its ₹350 million (US$5.6 million) budget" — it can be rephrased as Made on a budget of 350 million (US$5.6 million), Kaminey released on 14 August 2009 to universal critical acclaim and was a commercial success, grossing over 710 million (US$11 million).
  • "Rated as the "Best film of the year" by multiple commentators, the film is now considered a cult classic." — two issues. Who are these "commentators""? Critics or celebrities or both? And it would be better to replace "the film is now considered a cult classic" with the film achieved cult status.
  • Manisha Rege is the author of reference number 19. Why isn't she mentioned?
  • Apasara Awards is wikilinked for the second time in reference number 25.
Done.—Prashant 06:40, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Now, it has my Support. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:26, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Kailash[edit]

  • say caper thriller film, not in italics.
  • I'd prefer, "Set against the backdrop of the Mumbai underworld". And is the link the desired one?
  • "The director co-wrote" - mention his surname.

More coming soon... Kailash29792 (talk) 14:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Done.—Prashant 15:32, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
What I asked was, "Mumbai underworld" redirects to The Indian Mafia, which is a single Indian crime organisation rather than the entire crime industry in the country. Is that still what you mean to link to?

"Removed.—Prashant 19:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC) My other comments are:

  • Is the translation of Kaminey deliberately omitted in the lead section?
Yes, that is already in the main article.—Prashant 19:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Is there any source that states the film got universal acclaim?
  • "Bhardwaj also composed the musical score" - do you mean soundtrack? Cos "score" means only background music.
After this, there are only minor issues left, all relating to prose, which I'll take care of. Once my comments have been addressed, this article has my support. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:19, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Done.—Prashant 19:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Support: Hope this article passes FLC. Kailash29792 (talk) 19:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Weak support Looks in good shape, I made some copyedits. I wish the nominator had not prompted me to review this again just 3 days after notifying me though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:10, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Comment – A separate list for a film with just 10 awards (that too most of the ceremonies being minor ones), for an accolades list seriously? If we talk about major awards, the film has just one award from Filmfare and NFA. Sreekar Prasad's Special Jury award wasn't exclusively for this film. Also, I see no mention about the prestigious Shantaram Awards, where the film received four nominations. I feel the list lacks comprehensiveness. That said, I'm not against the promotion of this list, as this seems to be a problem with a majority of the Indian film lists. Vensatry (ping) 09:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Added a footnote for Sreekar Prasad's Jury Award. As far as Shantaram Awards is concerned, not a single source is present for that.—Prashant 15:50, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) I'm not cooking up anything here. The sources lie before you as well. How can we trust that enough research has been made to write this article? Vensatry (ping) 20:13, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
You need to improve your googlefu, here's what I got by searching for Kaminey Shantaram. [[3]]. Source for four nominations. Cowlibob (talk) 20:01, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the source. I have added the V Shantaram Awards.—Prashant 20:32, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Considering a list with only 10 awards, I'mma abstain from supporting. Good luck though. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 12:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
@FrB.TG:This list has the similar number of award wins (16) and it is a featured list. Does it help?—Prashant 12:40, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Well in that case I support the nomination. However, Prashant!, there is still a problem with the list, which requires a fix, which I'ma do myself instead of suggesting it here. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 15:03, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • The table can't be sorted. What's the problem?--Skr15081997 (talk) 04:42, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Is there any problem with sorting? I cannot figure that out. Would you like to explain?—Prashant 12:24, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Try sorting the columns in both ascending and descending order.--Skr15081997 (talk) 14:48, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Is it alright now?—Prashant 06:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
No.--Skr15081997 (talk) 07:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
The sorting is similar to other Bollywood FLs, Would you like to be specific? Any suggestions?—Prashant 12:09, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I have done some fixes to the sorting. Skr, do you have a say? -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 16:14, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not able to sort the columns in both ascending and descending order. I have tried this with List of accolades received by The Dirty Picture. On that page when I click on the column headers, the list gets sorted. When I click again it is sorted accordingly, but here the columns get stuck on "sort ascending".--Skr15081997 (talk) 06:28, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I just checked and the problem does exist. I tried to fix it. But, was unable to do so. Do you have any knowledge about solving it?—Prashant 11:50, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

I think some name or strings entered in the list has caused this trouble.--Skr15081997 (talk) 12:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
How to find and fix it? Its tiring. Checked it yet again but, still the same.—Prashant 13:08, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Finally fixed the problem. Phew, now the table can be sorted easily. —Prashant 13:30, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support I myself made minor changes to the article and am glad to support it now.--Skr15081997 (talk) 06:09, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

List of accolades received by The Last of Us[edit]

Nominator(s): -- Rhain1999 (talk to me) 01:35, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets all aspects of the FL criteria, comprehensively covering the many year-end accolades received by The Last of Us. The content is similar in nature to other accolades articles (some of which are featured lists), proving to me that this list is good to go all the way -- Rhain1999 (talk to me) 01:35, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Support as nominator. -- Rhain1999 (talk to me) 01:35, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Note: nomination was not transcluded to WP:FLC, now done. --PresN 18:00, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Support Comprehensive and well-sourced list. (talk) 03:55, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Crisco comments
  • The lead should be reworked (in fact, I was ready to oppose over it). Lists written horizontally are just not engaging, especially when they all follow the same sentence structure: Subject - Synonym of win - Award title - Award-giving body. See List of accolades received by Frozen (2013 film) and List of accolades received by 12 Years a Slave (film) for better examples you can learn from... work can include pruning minor awards, collating multiple awards from the same body, etc. After all, the lead is to introduce the list, not give it in its entirety.
  • the most awarded game in history - This could be ambiguous; "received as an award" or "had awards given to". I'd rephrase — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your response, Crisco 1492. I went ahead and reworked the lead, as per your suggestions. Let me know what you think. -- Rhain1999 (talk to me | current FLC) 08:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the support! Your feedback was really useful, and I'll be sure to use it in the future (if I ever work on another article like this again). Also, thanks for the heads-up about my signature; I've just removed the link. -- Rhain1999 (talk to me) 10:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Mac DeMarco discography[edit]

Nominator(s): Littlecarmen (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria. I nominated it six months ago but the nomination didn't get enough comments/supports and was closed. I would be thankful for any comments and opinions! Thank you very much, Littlecarmen (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments I'm sorry you had to wait a month for your first comment here, but here we go:

  • Any reason why the mini-LP isn't noted in the lead?
    • Because it hasn't been released yet and the sentence it would be included in says "Mac DeMarco, a singer-songwriter from Canada, has released". I was going to add it once it's released but I could change the sentence and add the mini-LP if you think I should. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • "his debut extended play" you've already abbreviated extended play so use EP instead. This happens more than once in the lead.
  • "The EP sold out its 500-unit run. " is this explicitly referenced somewhere?
    • "and soon all 500 copies of the self-released EP were sold out." In the reference following the next sentence. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • "from contemporary music critics." don't think the link to music journalism is either appropriate or necessary.
  • "acclaim and peaked at number 26 on the Billboard Heatseekers chart and was" and and .... one too many run-ons for me.
  • "met with critical acclaim" repetitive.
  • Don't link United Kingdom, at the very least link the appropriate charts article.
  • Which country is each release date pertinent to?
  • "November 8, 2013[15][16]" why two refs for a single date? This happens more than once.
  • mini-LP release is not referenced.
      • But the refs are next to the date. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:25, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
        • I've moved the extra references next to the release formats. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:32, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Rock and Roll Night Club release is not referenced.
    • I was told previously that releases that have their own articles don't need references, but I've added them now. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Check reference titles for WP:DASH violations, i.e. don't use spaced hyphens, use spaced en-dashes.
  • Avoid SHOUTING in reference titles.
  • Another One is referred to in its link as an EP, which redirects to album which states it's a mini-LP. Bit messy.
    • I've changed it to the album link now, but do you think the article should be renamed to Another One (mini-LP)? Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

That's it for now. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments! Littlecarmen (talk) 10:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

List of United States ODI cricketers[edit]

Nominator(s): Blackhole78 talk | contrib 22:18, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it meets featured list criteria. I based the format of this article on List of Bermuda Twenty20 International cricketers which was just recently promoted. Blackhole78 talk | contrib 22:18, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Support Good work. Hope this nom gets more attention. Cowlibob (talk) 01:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Support Nice work! I also nominated a list recently. It would be great if you could take a look at it and leave some comments here :) Littlecarmen (talk) 07:52, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Comments from Crisco
    • Too many "2004"s in the lead.
    • Thirteen players have represented U.S. in ODI matches, of whom nine have played both games. - I'd nix either the "have" in "have played" or change the "both" to two. If you're saying both, that implies there will be no further games, whereas "have played" suggests that there will / may be further games. Personally, I'd go with "Thirteen players have represented U.S. in ODI matches, of whom nine have played two games." since the rest of the paragraph is in the pluperfect.
  • I'd probably have both sentences about Lambert be close together. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Just for clarification. Chris Woodrich=Crisco 1492. Cowlibob (talk) 05:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Support I've made a couple of minor tweaks to the lead, but all in all a good list, well done. Harrias talk 13:05, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

List of Miami-Dade Transit metro stations[edit]

Nominator(s): –Dream out loud (talk) 03:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that it meets all the criteria at WP:FLCR, and is on par with similar lists at WP:FL#Transport. I previously created the FL-class page List of SEPTA Regional Rail stations, and I feel that this list is equal to that one in quality and criteria. –Dream out loud (talk) 03:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Support a decent list, my main concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • and the Historic Overtown/Lyric Theatre station MOS:SLASH recommends to avoid slashes
The slash is in Historic Overtown/Lyric Theatre station is part of the station name and article title so MOS:SLASH doesn't apply. –Dream out loud (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • connecting Metrorail with the Tri-Rail commuter train, and a 1.4-mile (2.3 km) extension of the northern terminus to Palmetto in 2003 This is a bit awkward; can you rework? I'm not sure what the piece after "and" means.
I re-read it a few times and it makes sense to me. The sentence refers to two new extensions of the system, anad the second part of the sentence is the second extention. –Dream out loud (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • There's a new Ridership Technical Report out; can you update to March in the lead and table? I don't know the release schedule, but you might want to wait until the next technical report is released; I don't know the release schedule, but I assume it should be out soon.
See paragraph below. –Dream out loud (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Note 3: Currently closed for construction until mid-2015 do you have a citation for this, and can you be more specific? It's mid-2015 now.
  • Do you have a reference for note 4?
Resolved Reference added. Station is closed until "summer 2015" but as per WP:SUMMER, I said "mid-2015" instead. There is no re-opening date available yet, so I instead changed it to read when it first closed. –Dream out loud (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • You link South Florida Business Journal in reference 15 but not in reference 9.
ResolvedDream out loud (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Reference 18 has an interesting page number. Is this proper?
Yes, this is because it is page 1 of the Broward section of the paper (referring to Broward County, as opposed to Miami-Dade County in which Miami is located) –Dream out loud (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
ResolvedDream out loud (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
ResolvedDream out loud (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Comments
  • I'm concerned about using ridership figures from just one month. For example, the College stops are less busy during holidays, and presumably there will be some spots which will be more popular during vacations. The use of exclusively "weekday" figures, not including any weekend figures can be misleading too: Miami International Airport is almost as busy at the weekends as weekdays, but this isn't the case for most other stations, so the use of these limited figures can be misleading. Unless you can expand them to properly represent the overall use of the stations, I'd recommend getting rid of them completely. Otherwise, a good looking list. Harrias talk 08:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
MDT releases ridership figures on a monthly basis, but I couldn't find any reports that note ridership averages throughout a year. I could update it for the most recent month, but it would have to again be updated the following month. I can also remove the column entirely if other editors feel that would be appropriate. Other FL-class station lists only use weekday ridership data, which is why that column is included and does not feature weekend ridership. (e.g. BART, MetroLink) –Dream out loud (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)


Nominations for removal[edit]

Chris Brown discography[edit]

Notified: Candyo32, the initial nominator for the pages promotion in 2010

I am nominating this article on the basis of it's lack of citation in certain areas.

More specifically:

  • The overly-long lead does not feature one single reference to back up its content.
  • The entire Mixtapes section is unsourced.
  • Three Promotional singles have no references to prove they are promotional singles, as opposed to Other charted songs.
  • Several (25 to be exact) Guest appearances are unsourced.
  • In several instances throughout the article, in the US charting column, charting placements exceed the number 100, without extra reference, while the main reference for the column does not support these placements of 100+, as any US placing between 101-125 charts on the Bubbling Under Hot 100 Singles, not the Billboard Hot 100, and required independent reference.
  • Untidy referencing throughout the article, a specific example being the UK charting references in Other charted songs.

I definitely think this article has declined in quality since it's promotion five years ago, it certainly wouldn't pass if re-assesed today. Azealia911 talk 23:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

List of Canadian federal general elections[edit]

Notified: Wikipedia:WikiProject Elections and Referendums

I am nominating this for featured list removal because of a complete lack of citations. Recently we demoted all the individual provinces featured list as they all had the same issue, being nominated in 2006. On those pages I informed Wikipedia:WikiProject Elections and Referendums but no one had the time or interest to update the citations. It is also written in a style no longer used. For example "This article provides a summary of...", "For federal by-elections... see List of federal by-elections in Canada. For the eight general elections of the Province of Canada held in 1843 to 1864 before confederation in 1867, see List of elections in the Province of Canada." All found in the lead which seems to end by 1993. Mattximus (talk) 01:23, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Delist Unfortunately, this like the other Canadian election lists needs a serious overhaul. The lead needs additional references as well as a rewrite to confirm with current standards of prose. There should also be information on more recent elections. The tables also need to be updated so that there is in line citations of election results to show that they are all referenced which is not the case presently. Cowlibob (talk) 06:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

List of Claymore chapters[edit]

Notified: Example user, Example WikiProject

Unsourced English release dates. Summaries no longer adequate, complete, or completely missing. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 03:04, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

The English dates can be sourced, as for the summaries I haven't read the series so it would have to be from someone who has knowledge of it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:25, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@DragonZero: English dates are now sourced, know of someone who is familiar with the series? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
None at all. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 03:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
some of the summaries are clearly promo material by the publishers and are used by retailers. I assume they were added after the FL status was given.SephyTheThird (talk) 05:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@SephyTheThird: Such summaries would very likely be in violation of copyright and should be removed at sight even if that means leaving nothing behind but empty cells. Goodraise 02:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree completely.SephyTheThird (talk) 06:40, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Well unless there is someone out there who has read the series and can source the summary better, at this time sadly I vote to Delist. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

List of Zimbabwe national cricket captains[edit]

Notified: Harshhussey, Mattinbgn, The Rambling Man, WikiProject Cricket

This is Wikipedia's oldest remaining Featured list, but unfortunately it has a number of issues, though admittedly ones that can probably be resolved without excessive effort. To assess it against the criteria, I would say it primarily suffers against criteria 3a and 4, but it has problems with a number of them.

  • The lead is mostly unreferenced.
  • The article is out of date; Zimbabwe are playing Test cricket again, and the statistics in the tables are out of date.
  • The tables lack row and column scopes, and I wonder if the Test table would benefit from being sortable.
  • Which bring me onto the format of the Test table; although it is the normal format for these lists, I don't know how useful it is as a format, it seems clunky to me.

Hopefully we can work on this to bring it back to the standard needed, but I fear that without interest, it would fall out of date again soon even so. Harrias talk 09:02, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

  • I agree that the Test matches table looks bad IMO, there must be a neater format.
  • Most of the article is out of date, lead is out of date, and needs actual sourcing.
  • It could all be made sortable.
Unless someone want to continually maintain and update it, it seems like it's eventually going to lose FA status- in it's current state I think it should be delisted. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:57, 7 May 2015 (UTC)