Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/March 2013: Difference between revisions
Razr Nation (talk | contribs) +1 |
Razr Nation (talk | contribs) +1 |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Featured list log}} |
{{Featured list log}} |
||
{{TOClimit|3}} |
{{TOClimit|3}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Maya Angelou/archive1}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Distinguished Service to Music Medal/archive1}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Distinguished Service to Music Medal/archive1}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of African American United States Senators/archive2}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of African American United States Senators/archive2}} |
Revision as of 16:58, 7 March 2013
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was not promoted by Hahc21 10:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because it's one of the last steps in the long process of the establishment of a Maya Angelou featured topic. It's very ready to be declared a FL. The sources are strictly accurate. Please enjoy. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 06:24, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Weak oppose based on a quick run-through....
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
Comment what would you like to do Christine? If you're going to overhaul it, I'd suggest a withdrawal. If you're going for GA, then obviously this nomination is no longer relevant. Let me know what you think. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have started to overhaul it, see here [3]. It's my intention to continue, and to perhaps finish in a few days. All it's required is reformatting the information in a list and writing up a short blurb about each honor. The sticking point I can see here is the honorary degrees. It's never going to be a definite list, not without some primary research. If the reviewers think that's in the way of this being a FL, then I'll withdraw, work on the formatting, and submit it to GAC. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey, well let's give it a few days and see where we go from there. No stress. Oh, and we have {{incomplete list}} for a reason! No problem with that being used.... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Dude thanks! Appreciate it. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Update: so I've finally completed formatting/expanding the table. Please tell me if the formatting's off or can be improved. For those who have a better grasp at tables than I have, could you please tell me what we can do about the image of MA with Pres. Obama, and how we can increase the size of the table? Thanks. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:20, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Dude thanks! Appreciate it. ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey, well let's give it a few days and see where we go from there. No stress. Oh, and we have {{incomplete list}} for a reason! No problem with that being used.... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I would convert the table into a wikitable. Some notes are not referenced as far as I can see.--Tomcat (7) 12:09, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikitable done. The references in the far-right column ("References") correspond to everything in its row. If I have to cite every cell, I'll just remove that column. That seems like over-citing to me, though. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:04, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as references for the claims in the second columns likely exist, I see no reason to view the content as original research. I think everything is in order. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 20:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- "African American" normally hyphenated or en-dash, can't recall which.
- Hyphenated when modifying a noun or verb, as in "African-American writers". I re-checked, and the only error was the lead, which I fixed. Thanks for the catch.
- "Maya Angelou, reciting..." no need to repeat her first name.
- Got it.
- "the longest-running record (two years) on" sorry, was it a record or a book?
- A book; I changed the phrasing so that it's clearer.
- When I sort by year, the first sort shouldn't make any difference as the table should be originally in chronological order, but things move....
- No need for the References column to be sortable.
- Similarly, since the Notes column is free text, no need for it to be sortable.
- Fixed.
- Be consistent with your use of periods at the end of the notes.
- Pretty sure I got 'em all.
- Avoid using acronyms when you haven't explained them (e.g. NAACP).
- "1975.[49]" no need for those periods, any of them, in that section.
- Finished addressing all the above.
- Worth checking the refs still work....
The Rambling Man (talk) 20:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- All done; thanks. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:38, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was not promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC) [4].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Sycamore (talk) 15:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I took it to GAN and the editor who closed the Good Article nomination believed that it was more of a list and would be suited for FLC. A peer review was just recently closed after I had addressed all comments by the reviewer. While this article uses two primary sources, these are only to establish the exact wording of the description of the award and the complete list of recipients; other important information is sourced by third-party secondary sources. I believe that this list is now ready for FLC. Sycamore (talk) 15:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, are you able to make a table for the recipients, the years they recieved it etc etc? Otherwise, nice dataCoal town guy (talk) 15:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I certainly could. I currently have it as a three-column list because I thought at first that it was more attractive to have a shorter list than a long table, but if other commenters feel like a table would be better, it would be a simple change. Sycamore (talk) 16:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. With table or without it is a nice list. However, it can benefit from being decorated by a couple of photos of its recipients. Ruslik_Zero 16:46, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was not promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC) [5].[reply]
- Nominator(s): – Muboshgu (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When this page was nominated in 2009, it was quick failed, and it's clear to see why. Now, even though there are only eight "items" for this list, I believe that the additional sources discussing the topic and the quality of the page merits featured list status, once I address any concerns. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The opinion I expressed in the previous FLC still stands, and I do not believe 3b is met. I see no reason why this page cannot be merged into African Americans in the United States Congress, especially when looking at the similar and replaceable table at African Americans in the United States Congress#United States Senate. While the prose in that article needs working on, it is still somewhat redundant with this article's lead as well. Reywas92Talk 19:55, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand the argument that it doesn't meet 3b. I disagree, however. There are sources that discuss the fact that only 8 African Americans have been seated in the US Senate, enough so that I believe this meets 3b. I think the Senate and House are different issues, as pointed out by the gerrymandering of House districts to make majority minority districts. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose under 3b, the majority of this is covered elsewhere, as noted above. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:15, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was not promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC) [6].[reply]
- Nominator(s): ★ Bald Zebra ★ talk 12:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list status because I've been working on this for a few years (on and off) and taken it through a couple of peer reviews, and I feel it is now ready for a full review. ★ Bald Zebra ★ talk 12:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Most of the list is very nice, but I am opposed to the inclusion of the 'Other active teams'. First, I don't think youth teams in general are notable enough to be listed. [7] lists five teams in passing, but I see no reason why they deserve to be mentioned here. [8] mentions the first game for a local club, but I see no evidence that the team still exists. I am astonished that the Sheffield Vipers are included, as they are souced just to a Facebook page. This news article also mentions the creation of a team, without proof it is still active or why it's notable. Think about football/soccer teams in the UK, or American football teams (and even soccer) in America: there are way, way too many at all levels without notability to list every one. Although there are few UK Am. football teams altogether, that does not lower the bar for notability for inclusion. The rest of the list looks terrific and I support its nomination. Reywas92Talk 16:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you mean restricting the list to teams that are actually affiliated with a league? I certainly don't have an issue with that - consider that section gone. ★ Bald Zebra ★ talk 19:39, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 18:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone through the list and, as you suggested, there were a few stray hyphens lurking about. I believe I've dealt with all of them so the list should now comply with WP:DASH. ★ Bald Zebra ★ talk 16:08, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 23:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments –
I've decided to remove the Touchdown UK references until I can get hold of those page numbers - thankfully, all the statement which used this book are also backed up by other references. I can re-add them as soon as I can get hold of another copy. I believe this addresses all of the comments now. ★ Bald Zebra ★ talk 09:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.