Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/January 2014: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
+1`
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Cricket World Cup five-wicket hauls/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Nippon Professional Baseball players to hit for the cycle/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Nippon Professional Baseball players to hit for the cycle/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Detroit Red Wings award winners/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Detroit Red Wings award winners/archive1}}

Latest revision as of 07:58, 23 January 2014

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Crisco 1492 07:58, 23 January 2014 [1].

List of Cricket World Cup five-wicket hauls

[edit]
Nominator(s): —Vensatry (Ping me) 05:32, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A list on fifers taken in world cup matches, modeled based on the centuries list. Look forward to your comments and suggestions. —Vensatry (Ping me) 05:32, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Lemonade51 (talk) 16:45, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
See Wikipedia:REF#Newspaper_articles. Traditionally when it comes to newspaper-published articles, the location is included; that's one thing I learned at university. It isn't needed for web sources though. Lemonade51 (talk) 14:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No issues —Vensatry (Ping me) 16:33, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Lemonade51 (talk) 16:45, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:41, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Quick comments
  • Would prefer to see Economy given to same precision every entry.
  • Table caption currently says "List of World Cup centuries".
  • Probably need to say that Won means the bowler's team won etc.
  • Caption says "Mcgrath", should be "McGrath".
  • Barry Wood and Geoff Lawson are dab links.
  • "County Ground, Northampton, Northampton " really don't need that first Northampton (compare it to the other County Grounds you have listed).
  • "he managed five" prefer "he took".
  • You could link 1979 Cricket World Cup Final etc in the lead.

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

—Zia Khan 23:09, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments–
  • "...the third match of the tournament." which tournament? If it is referred to the 1975 then put "Five bowlers—Gary Gilmour, Ashantha de Mel, Glenn McGrath, Vasbert Drakes and Shahid Afridi—have performed this feat twice in the history of the tournament." at the end of the paragraph. I would do this either way if it was 1975 or not!
  • You have linked Bangladesh in the lead as well as in the footnotes, but not the other teams/countries?
  • "...in the semi-finals and finals..." → final? You may link the semi-finals and final to their corresponding articles.
  • You may also link the tournaments accordingly.
  • Check sorting for the runs and economy columns. —Zia Khan 04:51, 11 January 2014 (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 promoted by SchroCat 15:19, 20 January 2014 [2].

List of Nippon Professional Baseball players to hit for the cycle

[edit]
Nominator(s): --TorsodogTalk 06:12, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When User:Killervogel5 started updating the article "Hitting for the cycle" he wanted to make it more comprehensive beyond just MLB. To help him out I put together a list of NPB cycles. The list was always in good shape but I wasn't able to find a reliable source for the cycle list so I never pursued a FL. I was finally able to find one though so I cleaned it up a bit and put finishing touches on the list. I think it looks good now. Let me know what you think! --TorsodogTalk 06:12, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just happened to come back to WT:MLB today totally by chance and I'm so happy to hear that you finally got this nominated! Please let me know if and when it passes - I'll come back for a command performance just to get the cycle to featured topic. Cheers. — KV5 • Talk • 22:21, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 07:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • Table listing cycles by players should have table caption "Nippon Professional Baseball players who have hit for the cycle, the date of its occurrence, team, league, and opponent" (matching the MLB list)
  • In the "Cycles by player" section, the pics at the right should be aligned thumb/right/upright (again matching the MLB one). This is to ensure that all the pics are at the same width (more aesthetically pleasing)
  • The general refs should have {{refbegin}} and {{refend}} at the top and bottom of the section, respectively. This will shrink the text so that it'll be the same size as the inline citations text.

—Bloom6132 (talk) 18:12, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More comments –

  • The first two entries on the list have the league as "Japanese Professional Baseball", but this redirects to the article on professional baseball in Japan. Shouldn't this link to Japanese Baseball League instead? If yes, then pipelink it.
  • Are JPB/JBL considered to be the antecedent to the NPB (the same way the American Association is considered part of MLB)? Or are they viewed as separate major leagues? If it is the latter situation, then delete the first two entries.
  • Ah, great catch on the Japanese Professional Baseball slip-up. Those links were definitely supposed to be Japanese Baseball League. And the JBL is definitely antecedent to NPB. The change was basically a rebranding and restructuring that occurred in the 1949-1950 off-season. NPB still counts all records and stats from the JBL days. --TorsodogTalk 23:58, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

—Bloom6132 (talk) 07:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Final comment –

  • Any ref that originates from a news source or newspaper should utilize the cite news template instead (just change "web" to "news" at the very beginning of the template). The "newspaper=" parameter should be used instead of "publisher=" (e.g. for The Japan Times) and replace "work=" with "agency=" (e.g. for Kyodo News)

—Bloom6132 (talk) 12:30, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolves comments from K. Annoyomous
Comments from --K.Annoyomous (talk)
  • WP:ALT: For lists, the alt text for images should identify the subjects. The image of Alex Ochoa is not chosen because he is "a dark-skinned man...", but because he is Alex Ochoa.
  • In the lead, Ochoa's full name should be used in the first sentence, and be wikilinked.
  • "...the same feat...": Is the feat hitting a cycle or hitting a cycle in both leagues? How it is read now is that the feat is hitting a cycle in both leagues.

--K.Annoyomous (talk) 20:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Fixed the second two, but I just took the alt text from the MLB equivalent of this article. It doesn't use any names for its alt text. You're saying that the alt text for all of the images here should use the names of the players? --TorsodogTalk 01:26, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - If you ever have time, it would be great if you create articles for all of the players, especially the Hall of Famers. Other than that, great job on the list, and I look forward to seeing more from you! --K.Annoyomous (talk) 08:02, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - nicely done. Only a few comments, which isn't enough for me to oppose.
  • In the key- "Player recorded a natural cycle" - this sounds awkward to my ears- "Denotes a natural cycle"?
  • The italic text thing in the Cycles by franchise section seems like it would run afoul of WP:ACCESS - is it even necessary, given that you give the active dates of the franchise?
  • Refs 7,8,11,12,13 are missing the "Kyodo News" publisher bit that you include in 14,15,16
  • Consider archiving your online references via a service like web.archive.org or webcitation.org- online refs have a nasty tendency to move, change, or get deleted years later, leaving the list with dead references.
--PresN 03:36, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • All fixed! However refs 8, 11, 12 and 13 aren't actually from "Kyodo News" articles. It isn't the publisher of The Japan Times, they are a Japanese news agency similar to the Associated Press. The Japan Times runs articles from them time to time. Should I include the actual publisher of The Japan Times, which is The Japan Times LTD, to alleviate the confusion or is that unnecessary? --TorsodogTalk 21:04, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments from Crisco 1492
  • I specifically left those dates out as to not clog up the lead with more and more dates. I figured they are in the table so why throw 4 more long dates into the mix if I didn't have to. Thoughts?
  • Good point! Different games. I will change to specify.
  • Western order. I'll look into this and see what kind of template notes are available.
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 promoted by SchroCat 15:19, 20 January 2014 [3].

List of Detroit Red Wings award winners

[edit]
Nominator(s): Rejectwater (talk) 00:29, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, well, what do we have here but yet another Detroit Red Wings Featured List nomination. What is with these guys? This time around we have List of Detroit Red Wings award winners, easily the longest of the bunch and arguably the most impressive (in terms of what the team has accomplished). The team and it's players have taken home 158 awards so far; if a Red Wing hasn't won it, it probably isn't an active NHL award. The list has undergone peer review where all concerns were addressed. save for one regarding a tagging issue with one of the images. I am unconvinced that is a critical issue, but if others feel it is we can address it somehow. Also, I currently have an open FL nomination for List of Detroit Red Wings general managers, however I believe that given the status of that nomination I am within the standard that "[u]sers should not add a second FL nomination until the first has gained support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed." As always I look forward to reading, addressing, and responding to your comments. Regards, and thank you for your time. Rejectwater (talk) 00:29, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • My two cents is, if you have the time, give it another look. It's a fairly long list and if there is one thing I know about reviewing articles, it's that there is always something that can be improved upon. Kind regards, Rejectwater (talk) 01:41, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The article is well cited, comprehensive, and laid out fine. All the images have alt text (even if some of them are a little short, like Ted Lindsay). Good article, deserves a star. Anthony (talk) 16:21, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for your kind words and support. The alts were all recently updated per my understanding of WP:ALT, especially the Bush/Blair and Queen Elizabeth examples. The Ted Lindsay image you mentioned is just a picture of Ted Lindsay, and so that is all the alt text says. Kind regards, Rejectwater (talk) 23:54, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Not a lot left for me to complain about. I have only some small nitpicks, none of which would prevent me from casting my support now. Solid format and structure to the article, and incorporates some ideas that I really should go back and update List of Calgary Flames award winners with.
  • "...and are one of the Original Six teams of the league." - This reads as if it is meant to be taken literally, as in the Red Wings were one of the NHL's first six franchises. Easily fixed by putting "Original Six" in quotes, thus changing the implication.
  • The Red Wings are in an odd situation where, if they should reach the Stanley Cup Finals from the Eastern Conference, could have won the Wales Trophy for three different reasons. I think it would be useful to add and end note explaining that the Wales Trophy was first a divisional championship trophy, then a regular season championship, and now dedicated to the Eastern Conference championship. Especially since we know someone will come along and "fix" this. Also as a suggestion - and only if you (and others) think it a good idea: the Wales Trophy section could be split into two rows, the first showing when they won the American Division, and the second had the most points.
  • Question: Do the Red Wings hand out team awards, similar to those awarded by the Flames? Near as I can tell from their media guide, they don't, but I would like to make sure as you are obviously an expert on the team! Resolute 00:40, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Calgary list - it's funny you say that because it was that page and List of New York Islanders award winners that served as the inspiration for this page.
  • Original Six - fair enough. Done.
  • Wales footnote - I have thought about the note explaining that also and will add it in soon. I don't think the idea of splitting the award into two rows is a good idea; the footnote should explain things sufficiently.
  • Team awards - no, I am not aware of anything like that. As you say, there is no mention of any such awards in the team media guide. For a publication that includes the team's all time record in games played on Halloween, I trust that not being in that guide means there aren't any.
  • Thank you for your kind words, input, support, and for taking the time. Regards, Rejectwater (talk) 10:06, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments from Crisco 1492
  • Their most recent team trophy was the Clarence S. Campbell Bowl in 2009, taken in honor of being the champions of the Western Conference. - You just mentioned they are part of the Eastern conference. How can they be champions of the Western Conference?
  • their uniform number retired - what's a good link for this? Retired number, maybe?
  • The section #Individual awards could do with standardising how you write numbers (numerals or words)
  • The second paragraph of #All-Star Game selections needs at least one citation
  • Jack Adams Player 1959 none - What's this supposed to mean, no years playing with the team? If he was a manager for the team, then you should give a footnote clarifying how he was involved with the Red Wings. Other people in a similar situation as well.
  • The Red Wings have also made the number 6 of Larry Aurie and the number 16 of Vladimir Konstantinov no longer available for issue, however those numbers are not considered to be officially retired - so why are they not available?
  • Look for duplicate links between sections, like Gordie Howe, First and Second Team All-Stars, Stanley Cup, etc. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • West vs. East; have added footnote that explains this.
  • Retired number - added wikilink
  • How numbers are written - I believe I have standardized the entire page in this regard. Numbers are written out using words in prose sections and in numerals in tables. There is one exception: the retired numbers section. In that section uniform numbers are displayed as numerals which is the way they are used and displayed (ie, Steve Yzerman wore 19, not nineteen). More to follow. Regards, Rejectwater (talk) 22:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • All-Star Game selections citations - done.
  • Hall of Fame/none - added footnotes for individuals in question. Rejectwater (talk) 01:31, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have added explanations for Aurie and Konstantinov.
  • Duplicate links - the page is currently set up as one link per term per prose section with unlimited links in the sortable tables. You are saying there should be no more than one link per term for the entire article? Regards, Rejectwater (talk) 00:17, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from --K.Annoyomous (talk)

  • Descriptions should be unsortable
  • Is it possible for you to add (#) beside the names to denote how many times the player has won the same award?
  • Why fix the widths of the tables? The tables will appear just as good without the fixed widths :D

--K.Annoyomous (talk) 12:25, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Descriptions, unsortable - I disagree. Is there a policy at play here or is this your preference?
  • Getting rid of the function certainly doesn't add value. I take it then, that this is your preference. Having no knowledge of any pertinent policy that would apply here my preference is to leave it as it is. Rejectwater (talk) 00:29, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, there is no policy that states that descriptions must be unsortable, and this may be a personal preference; however, the descriptions are not data, and this may only be my opinion, but I just find sorting non-data to be redundant. I also don't recollect any other tables that sort their descriptions except for the two in this article. It would be nice if there was a third-party to comment on this matter. --K.Annoyomous (talk) 22:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • add (#) beside the names - yes, it is possible. I am unsure of the value of this and fear it would clutter the table(s).
  • It won't clutter the tables, seeing that they are all wide enough. The reason why I had them on the featured lists have I have contributed to is because I, and assuming that others do as well, would like to know how many times each player has won said award. It gives readers a sense of how successful each player was during his time with the Red Wings.
  • What I am thinking for this is two additional columns. One for times won by individual and one for aggregrate team wins. This would allow sorting. Readers could see which award has been won the most by individuals, won the most by the team overall, etc. Let me know what you think. Rejectwater (talk) 00:29, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The huge empty areas are visually unappealing. I can see that you want the table all the same width, but just look at all that extra unneeded space in the Number of selections column for NHL First and Second Team All-Stars! The Team trophies table looks squished, so a fixed width is unnecessary for that specific table. --K.Annoyomous (talk) 08:56, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfixing the width of the tables doesn't get rid of any unused area. The tables simply stretch to fill all available space. Fixing the width limits the size of the table, it doesn't expand it. I have fixed the team trophy table to be the same size as the others. Rejectwater (talk) 00:29, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, it depends on the table. If we remove all the fixed width settings, some tables would stretch to fill the whole screen while others would be tiny. The unused space you are concerned with would be empty whitespace on the page rather than empty space in the table cells. Huge, huge chunks of empty whitespace in many sections. Of course, that also depends on the screen resolution and size of the window the browser is being viewed in, which cannot be controlled for... except by fixing the width as a percentage. Rejectwater (talk) 00:41, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "Team trophies" table now looks out of place with the resolution that I have (1366px width). I suggest that that table alone be left unfixed so that it is visually appealing for common resolutions (~1280px and up), unless there is a better solution. Also, why is this particular table unsortable? I was assuming that it was because the table is short enough for the sorting function to not be needed, but then I saw the table for "Other awards", and that one is sortable. --K.Annoyomous (talk) 22:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the "Number of selections" column that I mentioned, how about shorten the column title to "Selections" and fix the width to 1%? I think that will resolve the gigantic empty space in that column, and will make the table look more even. Try that out and let me know what you think. --K.Annoyomous (talk) 22:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comments (well, ignorant questions mainly)

  • Lead says "awards and honors" but the title is simply "award winners", should this be moved to "award and honor winners"?
  • "captured the Stanley Cup as league champion" is there another way to win the Stanley Cup other than to be league champion?
Not any more, but the Cup predates the NHL, it was originally a challenge trophy and for a time it was a championship trophy for the winner of a series between PCHA/WCHL/WHL and NHA/NHL. It was possible to be NHL champions and not win the Stanley Cup. While both of those eras predate the Wings it is part of the Cup's history.
  • " team's most decorated player" should that be "individual player" or is he both?
Not sure I understand.
  • " leads goaltenders with three wins of the Vezina Trophy as the league's best goaltender" repetitive use of goaltender.
Looking at the lead it appears that it is broken down by position so I'm not sure how to re-word in the current format and use the official description of the trophy. I thought about changing the first instance to netminders of goalies but I'm not sure how encyclopedic either one is.
  • "uniform retired", I imagine we have a suitable link for this in the lead.
Linked
  • "1954–55" etc wrap onto two lines for me, suggest use of the {{nowrap}} template to prevent this from occurring.
Added nowrap all of the dates on the team awards table.
  • Also, for non-experts, is there a link to "regular season"?
Linked
  • Lindstrom is missing his diacritic. So is Borje.
There is a compromise at WP:Ice Hockey that diacritic are used on all bios and pages for leagues where that are commonly used. But not used on pages based on leagues that do not use them (most North American based pages). I added pipe links to avoid redirects.
  • Sorting on Description, since it's free text, is a little pointless.
Removed sorting ability
  • I would have thought Plus–minus should be separated by an en-dash, not a hyphen.
These are how the pages are named. I'm not sure what the proper format would be.
  • In Safari, "Number of selections" column is far wider than any other, yet it contains only two digits at most.
Shortened to Selections, which reduces the column size a bit, but I'm not sure how to make it smaller.
  • If "Babe Siebert Memorial Game" is so notable, why no article?
No one has made a page for it yet. Being it's from 1939 the sources are more difficult to find (majority offline) and its less likley to be worked on due to age.
  • " with the Lester Patrick Trophy. The Lester Patrick Trophy" poor prose alert.
Changed second mention to The trophy as to not repeat back to back.
  • Image captions which are not complete sentences should not have a full stop.
Removed.
  • Would imagine you could try 3 columns in the refs since so many point at the book and a single page ref.
Changed to 3 columns
  • Ensure retrieval dates are all formatted the same.
I think that they are all now the same
  • Similar applies to publication dates.
Same as the access dates, though I may have missed one.

Will do a proper review when I get time. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:43, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Randomly came across the FLC and I noticed that there was no activity from the nominator. The above list seemed pretty straight forward and I didn't want all of their hard work to go to waste or the comments not to at least be addressed, so I figured I'd address them quickly. Cheers. --Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 06:01, 15 January 2014 (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 promoted by SchroCat 14:35, 15 January 2014 [4].

List of Sega CD games

[edit]
Nominator(s): Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 01:45, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spurred on by the successful promotion of List of Sega 32X games a few months ago, I've taken on another Sega Genesis add-on games list as I push forward for a Sega fourth-generation featured topic. This one was much harder, as the Sega CD games library is at least five times as large as the 32X library, and because of the large number of Japanese-only releases, doing an individual game page for each item on this list would be next to impossible. Thankfully, in addition to Allgame's awesome list of North American and PAL releases, Sega of Japan has a pair of master lists (in Japanese, no less) for this console that made sourcing this list possible. With Sega CD now a GA, having an accompanying FL of its games would be an excellent feat, and during the course of this candidacy, of which I believe the list is in excellent condition and ready for promotion after all of my hard work into it, I'll do whatever it takes to make that happen. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 01:45, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by LightLowemon
  • Definitely needs a link to Sega CD somewhere in there
  • ...released in Europe and other regions... - how about released in PAL regions
  • The first paragraph is almost an exact cut and paste of the lead from the Sega CD article, not sure if there are any rules against this though, but it seems to me that it's a bit cheap, and the information doesn't actually discuss the games as much as the unit. In theory while they should be similar, I don't think they should be the exact same.
  • In early 1991, Sega announced the Mega-CD for release in Japan in late 1991, North America (as the Sega CD) in 1992, and in Europe in 1993. You've already mentioned this not two sentences earlier.
  • Sega of Japan, partnering with JVC... I don't think this whole sentence is really necessary, as it relates solely to the console and not the games.
  • ... the expansion only sold as many as 2.7 million units worldwide[2] and was often criticized for its severe hardware limitations.[3] - Reference 3 says it sold 6 million and nothing about its hardware limitations, and in fact few references even talk about the severe hardware limitations, stating the issue was in the game library and the system didn't add anything to the user experience, this may have been due to the hardware limitations, but no where says that. One reference even complements it as "solid tech", the worst I could find was comments on poor FMV handling and colour limitations.
    • Reference 3's sales number of 6 million has been shown systematically to be an inaccurate number. We've discussed the numbers of several sales figure postings for Sega's 16-bit era at Talk:Sega Genesis, and in particular I've worked with Indrian on ensuring that these numbers are accurately sourced. In this case, the existence of a 2.7 million number by the end of 1994, sourced to Sega itself by way of Man!ac Magazine, a German publication, shows that the GamePro number cannot be accurate. I'll remove the bit on the "hardware limitations", it's cited in some other material but perhaps console criticism is too much console criticism to maintain a focused list lead. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 02:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Need a link to the 32X in the second paragraph.
  • Ecco The Dolphin -> Ecco the Dolphin
  • Reference for criticising the lack of depth of game library.
  • Like the first paragraph the second and third are basically word for word the Sega CD section under Game Library, except for The Sega CD contains a large library of over 140 titles.
    • See my reasoning above about the lead; I pretty much rewrote the entire Sega CD article a while ago before it attained GA status. If specific changes need to be made, I can make them as need be.
  • Personally, I don't find the table very sort friendly as far as regions go, I know it's a similar style as to the other featured lists, but I'd rather something similar to List of PlayStation 3 games where each region had its own sorting. At the moment if I wanted to look for games in Japan, I have games that were released in Japan only, scroll down to NA JP, scroll down further to NA PAL JP and if there were any that were PAL JP only I'd have to scroll down again.--Lightlowemon (talk) 06:11, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, Lightlowemon. I'm sure you're helping to make this a stronger list through such feedback. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 02:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I'm not ready to give a vote until other editors weigh in, I'm only a new voter so I'd like to see what others think about the article, and specifically the lead. --Lightlowemon (talk) 01:14, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair enough. I'm still always glad to have some honest feedback, and could always use more. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 01:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SupportComments

  • I would also like to see the three regions broken out into their own columns, kind of like List of Square Enix mobile games (I know that list is a bit shorter) - the way it is now, the sorting on the regions column doesn't really work, because you can't sort by all games released in NA, since ones where it was also released in JP don't sort with ones that weren't.
  • " the expansion only sold as many as 2.7 million units worldwide" - "as many as" sounds weird to me here, since it's usually used in a positive way but it's used negatively here. Maybe "up to 2.7" or "a maximum of 2.7" or "at most 2.7" instead?
  • The links to compact disc|audio CDs and central processing unit in the lead are redirecting.
  • A bunch of game titles/developers are redirecting; while some seem intentional, others don't (like Bari-arm) so check them.
  • Can you get any more details on reference 2, like ISSN or author?
  • Consider archiving your references via web.archive.org or webcitation.org- while the sites themselves are unlikely to disappear completely, there's nothing stopping them from changing information and messing up the article- GameSpot reformatted all their video game pages/links just last month without leaving behind redirects or keeping all the information, and there's nothing stopping IGN/1UP.com from doing the same.
  • Thanks, I'll consider it. I know Sega's changed their sites around a little bit, so it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility they might. I'll probably work on this last, though, just so I can focus on the important ones to this FAC first, and then do the archiving.
  • Looks good, switching to support. Minor redirects and unarchived refs aren't criteria that would block my support. One follow-up point though- now that it's just "2.7 million units as of the end of 1994", the "While" at the beginning of the sentence doesn't make much sense- you're not contrasting that it was known for a couple games with the amount it sold, you're just presenting two facts. --PresN 19:33, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll weigh in on this during this weekend.--SexyKick 17:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference review since there aren't a ton of these, I went through their formatting and found it to be consistent. I've read through the entirety of most of them, and skimmed the one or two I hadn't read. I find all referenced information accurately cross checks. Very good.--SexyKick 10:25, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • SupportYou're very welcome, and I somewhat agree with the other things potentially being excessive. They were just the things I felt interested in that weren't there. Since the 32X ports of Sega CD games were noted, I thought it might be nice if I could know which got improvements. I really like the improvements in 3 Ninjas, and Ecco the Dolphin, but they blow me away in Batman Returns. So I like seeking out the titles that were on both, but I do see the potential excessiveness.--SexyKick 05:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments (please note that I am not reviewing in my capacity as delegate)
  • Why is Sega CD bolded? Last I checked, that was deprecated for lists
  • Overlinking: Japan, North America, etc.


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 promoted by SchroCat 14:35, 15 January 2014 [5].

66th Academy Awards

[edit]
Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk) 18:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating the 1994 Oscars for featured list because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I read the requirements and criteria. I also followed how the 1929, 1989, 1990, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, 2009, 2010, and 2012 Oscars were written. --Birdienest81 (talk) 18:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not a big fan of the new awards table layout, why the change? Those who've seen my reviews elsewhere may know I'm also not a fan of inconsistency across related articles.
  • The multiple awards table should end with a colon.
  • Good work overall. Reywas92Talk 06:15, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed: I reverted the table to an older format. I also added the colon.
--Birdienest81 (talk) 05:37, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Reywas92Talk 04:56, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 23:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • Winners and nominees: Double word in "at at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater in Beverly Hills".
  • Presenters and performers: In the first item listed, "Annual" probably shouldn't be capitalized in the activity note.
  • Ceremony information: Double period by ref 20.
  • More double punctuation by the first usage of ref 21.
  • Last word of "featuring a saluting" should be "salute" instead.
  • Critical reviews: A period is needed after the first quote from Janet Maslin.
  • All caps in ref 37 should be removed. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed: I fixed everything you suggested above. I added the word "ceremonies" to the phrase "As with previous he produced".
--Birdienest81 (talk) 06:37, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed: I switched the words and added slight more info about the show's theme.
--Birdienest81 (talk) 23:22, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Great work! No issues so far.--Jagarin 20:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Although I consider the tables for multiple nominations and awards unnecessary. As for this list, good work!--Earthh (talk) 22:23, 13 January 2014 (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 promoted by SchroCat 17:32, 14 January 2014 [6].

List of Adventure Time episodes

[edit]
Nominator(s): Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:01, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Second time is the charm. I am nominating this article because I feel that it meets the requirements. Modeled after List of Regular Show episodes and List of The X-Files episodes, this list features all of the episodes of Adventure Time that have aired, complete with references for production codes and Nielsen Ratings (where available). In addition, the article features a lede that has been tailored to give a brief summary of the article, as well as other information about the series. I feel it is ready for this promotion.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:01, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Does the list satisfy 3a if the series is still ongoing? This was an issue I've faced before. Aside from that, why are there missing viewership numbers? DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 08:32, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    I have actively been updating this list since November of 2012. While there is a slim chance I would have to step down, I think there are other editors out there who would update the list as the show went on. Besides, List of Regular Show episodes was promoted, and while OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a valid argument, I think its a good analog to show that it can be promoted. Also, the reason there is missing viewership numbers is simply because they are missing; no site has posted them, so unfortunately, they can't be added. It's sad, but what can you do?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Ruby2010 (talk) 17:33, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments -- this list is looking really good; just generated a few concerns below:
  • Recommend adding a link to the fifth season in the lead
  • "...and then re-added by different sources." -- can you expand on this a little? It's pretty vague (was it by fans?)
  • Is there anything you could add about why Cartoon Network picked it up?
  • "The show has received positive reviews from critics..." -- not sure one review can back up this assertion; this really needs more support.
  • Fixed.
  • Looking good, but I suggest you WP:CITEBUNDLE those citations (for the good reviews and Annie awards).
  • It seems odd that there are missing viewership numbers for such recent episodes -- usually those ratings are well-documented. I suggest you again go through TVBTN and Highbeam; I will do the same and let you know if I find anything.
  • Somebody suggested to me recently that all TV by the Numbers links really should be archived, as they often recycle their old URLs. I realize that you have a lot cited here, however, so I would understand if you were reluctant to do so. Just a thought! Ruby 2010/2013 05:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, I really should go through some of my articles and do this, especially the ones with the oldest links... But anyways, I am happy to now support this one for promotion. Nice work! Ruby 2010/2013 17:33, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Paper Luigi (talk) 18:07, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - It's a very well-made list.
Resolved comments from Holiday56 (talk) 13:26, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments – Happy to offer some thoughts. List is pretty solid and well-done; just a few minor quips.
  • "Larry Leichliter & Hugo Morales & Pendleton Ward" should be changed to "Larry Leichliter, Hugo Morales, & Pendleton Ward" in order to keep the formatting consistent with the season tables.
    Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:01, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Go With Me" – "With" shouldn't be capitalized
    Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:01, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps "viewers" could be changed to "U.S. viewers"? Might as well denote which country the viewer counts pertain to, as leaving that little detail out may confuse some into thinking that those are worldwide ratings figures.
    Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:01, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 11 – One reference reads "AnnieAwards.org. ASIFA-Hollywood." and another reads "AnnieAwards.org. International Animated Film Association." Italicization should be consistent for both, as well as the publishers (ASIFA-Hollywood or International Animated Film Association?)

Holiday56 (talk) 16:24, 8 January 2014 (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 promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC) [7].[reply]

Bibliography of E.W. Hornung

[edit]
Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 15:56, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

E.W. Hornung was a tireless writer between 1897 and his death in 1921. A friend of Arthur Conan Doyle (whose sister he married), and Oscar Wilde, he is probably best remembered for his four books featuring the gentleman thief A. J. Raffles and his partner Bunny Manders: the fictional counterparts of Doyle's Holmes and Watson. - SchroCat (talk) 15:56, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Lemonade51 (talk) 16:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Remove spacing between dashes 1866–1921
  • "...A Bride from the Bush, was published in 1890, and Horning used his Australian experiences as a backdrop to the story" and "In 1899 Horning published The Amateur Cracksman", Horning or Horung? Not sure the latter sentence is correct; he didn't publish the short stories, Methuen Publishing did.
  • "his first novel, A Bride from the Bush" His
  • Not sure the column-width parameter '30em' under the notes and references section is necessary.
  • Hmmm, crosschecked the "Death of Mr. Hornung" article and it was published in 1917, not 1918. If it is any use to you, the other poem stated in the death notice—"Bond And Free" was issued in the Times (Tuesday, Sep 25, 1917; pg. 9). Lemonade51 (talk) 01:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Lemonade51; all points now covered, I think. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 05:03, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Fine list. Lemonade51 (talk) 16:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Lemonade51: very much obliged for your thoughts and time on this! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 06:43, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Cassianto (Talk) 14:12, 02 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –

Cassianto comments

  • I don't see a link to the main Hornung article?
  • Would it be fair to say that people would know Sydney is in Australia or visa versa? Would we say London, England?
  • "Hornung had first first work published in 1887..." – Two firsts? Even with one removed, the sentence would sound odd so this may need looking at. I would think that it would be: "Hornung had his first work published in 1887...".
  • "Hornung dedicated the book to Doyle..." -- Doyle who? Doyle, as far as I can see, hasn't been introduced yet.
  • "Hornung's fragile constitution, further weakened by the stress of his war work, Hornung visited the South of France for his and his wife's health in 1921." -- This will need looking at. Maybe it should be: "Hornung's fragile constitution was further weakened by the stress of his war work. To aid his recuperation, he and his wife visited the South of France in 1921."

Support – per above resolved comments. I will leave the technical stuff to those who know. Superb work as always! -- CassiantoTalk 07:34, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support – I rarely engage with FLC, and have had to refresh my memory about the criteria. I believe this article meets them all. A few minor quibbles, not affecting my support, but possibly worth considering:

  • "In 1893 …his friend Sir Arthur Conan Doyle" – not Sir Arthur until 1902, and you don't need two blue links to him in successive paras.
  • Quite right - the second link was an oversight after dealing with one of Cassianto's comments: now tweaked to show "Hornung dedicated the book to his friend, the writer Arthur Conan Doyle" on the first instance, and slimmed down and de-linked on the second. - SchroCat (talk) 17:16, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ypres – worth a blue link, perhaps
  • Blue links in tables – I notice you link things on every occurrence (e.g. seven "Cornhill Magazines" in succession). Is this the usual protocol for tables? Fine, if so. I merely mention it, but there's quite a lot of bright blue hitting the eyeballs.
  • Info-box - "Books - 2"? Non-fiction books, it turns out. Perhaps clarify

That's all from me. I am sceptical about info-boxes as a rule, but the one here is a great benefit – pithy and elegant. Bravo! – Tim riley (talk) 16:18, 2 January 2014 (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 promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 10 January 2014 (UTC) [8].[reply]

List of Pune Warriors India cricketers

[edit]
Nominator(s): ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 07:39, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it meets the criteria. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 07:39, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comments from Harrias talk
  • The dashes in batting average should sort at the bottom, at least for the cases when the player has not batted.
It is already like that.
Do you want them to sort at bottom while in ascending order or while in descending order? ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 10:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the best bowling average (40.07) should sort top, then down through the numbers to 0.00, and then the dashes. Harrias talk 10:20, 24 December 2013 (UTC)  Done[reply]
Resolved comments from —Vensatry (Ping me)
Comments from —Vensatry (Ping me)
  • Alt text should name the subject per WP:ALT
  • "Sourav Ganguly had captained Pune Warriors India in highest number of matches" -> Sourav Ganguly had captained Pune Warriors India in the highest number of matches
  • The use of colon in "Ashok Dinda had the best bowling figures..." is wrong, rather semi colon should be used. Also in the last sentence of the first para colon is incorrectly used. There should be a pause between the figure and the following text.
  • It's better to place the last sentence just above the table (in italics)
  • You don't have descriptions for "ave", "Wkt" and "BBI" in the key.
  • You have "Centuries scored" listed in the key but not in the table, though none of the players scored a hundred.
  • In the table yo;ve linked "Bowling" and "Fielding" but not "Batting".
  • Why is ESPNcricinfo (in the publisher parameter) linked in ref #4 alone?
  • "See also" section should be placed above your notes and references.

—Vensatry (Ping me) 18:58, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 12:25, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments (re-visit)

  • Link publisher (CricketArchive)in ref #8
  • For Batting average, dashes should appear at the top while sorting by descending order
  • The IPL template is not needed here as it doesn't link here.

—Vensatry (Ping me) 06:52, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 15:27, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Zia Khan 15:26, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments—on prose only,
  • The best bowling average among bowlers who had bowled more than 20 overs was Yuvraj Singh's: 22.93. No need of column (:).
  • Link bowling figures (bowling analysis).
  • ...while only conceding 18 runs. No need of while only.
  • In the 1st and second Footnotes: This doesn't includes → include
  • inning/s → innings
  • Link not out in the Footnotes.
  • Period at the end of the third note.

Zia Khan 01:01, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 10:11, 24 December 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 promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 10 January 2014 (UTC) [9].[reply]

List of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine cast members

[edit]
Nominator(s): Miyagawa (talk) 15:25, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article is a follow up to the previously promoted List of Star Trek: The Next Generation cast members. I recently changed the format of the DS9 article in line with changes another editor made to the TNG one, and as seen on other FLs such as List of Grey's Anatomy cast members. The DS9 article is fully cited to reliable sources. Miyagawa (talk) 15:25, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, very good formatting and tabulation, appropriately referenced throughout, one fair use image used with appropriate fair use rationale given on image page. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 07:41, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - nice and solid, like the TNG list. A few comments:
  • In footnote 7, link io9, and mark it as the work, with Gawker Media as the publisher.
  • In footnote 28, unlink tor.com, set it as the work, and put Tor Books as the publisher.
  • In the references, link Pocket Books.
  • Consider archiving your online references with a tool like web.archive.org or webcitation.org, so that website drift/decay doesn't wipe out your cited information in the future. --PresN 23:34, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks - I've linked those as suggested and added all the archive urls. I should know how much of a pain the star trek official website is as I'm always fishing things out of the archives that they don't have online anymore. Miyagawa (talk) 19:42, 7 January 2014 (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 promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 10 January 2014 (UTC) [10].[reply]

40th Daytime Emmy Awards

[edit]
Nominator(s):  — SoapFan12 (talk, contribs) 12:09, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that it meets the every single criteria. Also, I believe it to be well sourced and clear. After much tweaking and further adjustments I feel that it is worthy of being a Featured List. I believe this list is worthy, considering I worked on it with promoted Featured lists in mind. If you oppose, please address your issues here so they can be resolved. If you oppose, please address your issues here so they can be resolved.  — SoapFan12 (talk, contribs) 12:09, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Birdienest81 (talk) 16:44, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • For the presenters and performers, awards as roles seems awkward. Add the phrase "Presenter(s) of the award for..." before each award. For example, with Erica Slezak's role, rename it as "Presenter of the award for Outstanding Drama Series"
  • The table with the key dates seems unnecessary since the awards already has occurred. The Oscar ceremony lists and the 29th Golden Raspberry Awards does not have any list for key dates. I also do not think casual readers care about such technical aspects such as DVD's screeners and such. If you want to mention that stuff, I think it would be better served if the procedures and timeline of voting were presented in a paragraph format with prose. Otherwise, it should be dropped completely.
  • Not necessarily important, but maybe order the presenters by appearance from first to last (if possible).
--Birdienest81 (talk) 04:06, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: The list looks really good. Well done.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 16:44, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • How can programs which won Emmy awards not even be linked?
  • Since, these programs do not have their own article and I would of linked them however due the FL criteria I did not wanted to have too many red links.
  • Done.
  • ″recognizes... strange quotation marks.
  • Done.
  • "the Beverly Hilton Hotel" is actually called "The Beverly Hilton".
  • Done, however do I still include the ″hotel″ part from "The Beverly Hilton"?
  • No need to link major geographical entities like California.
  • Done.
  • A.J. Hammer -> A. J. Hammer.
  • Done.
  • "won the most awards, with a total of four wins" won... wins, "a total of", some redundancy in this sentence.
  • Done.
  • "the winner of the category is shown first" with a double-dagger. If you're going to explain that the winner comes first, then include the fact it comes with a double-dagger and dispense with the "key".
  • Done. I am not sure, if I have done it right.
  • Image captions which are not complete sentences should not have a full stop.
  • Done.
  • "Giada De Laurentiis " has a capital D in De.
  • Done.
  • Our article suggests The Price Is Right has a capital I for Is.
  • Done.
  • "Millionaire" has no question mark.
Done.
  • Use consistent image widths.
  • Done.
  • Done.
  • "and Introducers of" Introducer is not a proper noun.
  • Done.
  • "Robin Meade served has one of the hosts," typo.

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:38, 15 December 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 promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 10 January 2014 (UTC) [11].[reply]

List of municipalities in Alberta

[edit]
Nominator(s): Hwy43 (talk) 19:38, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it is a complete and comprehensive list of all municipalities within the Province of Alberta (Canada) completed to the same standard as the recently FLC promoted equivalents for other Canadian provinces, namely List of municipalities in Manitoba and List of municipalities in Ontario. Hwy43 (talk) 19:38, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Dudley Miles
This is an excellent list. On a quick look, I have a few minor quibbles.
  • "Alberta's 357 municipalities cover 99.8% of the province's land mass and are home to 98.6% of its population." This implies that 1.4% of the population live in 0.2% of the land mass which is not in municipalities. How is this?
  • "in some cases, Metis settlements." "In some cases" sounds vague. I would explain it or leave it out. Also, I know you link Metis, but it is so unusual (at least to me) that I would prefer an definition in brackets.
I've wondered about this as well. With these individual province articles all using a navbox, List of municipalities in Canada should be created with something. 117Avenue (talk) 03:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've been thinking of creating something for a while now, but have been focused more so on FLing the provincial lists first with Mattximus. Do you want to create something 117, or do you want me to take a crack at an interim stub for now? Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've created a redirect for now, I don't want to distract you from FLing. 117Avenue (talk) 06:46, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Was thinking this as well, it would be a nice finale to bring this to featured topic. The List of municipalities in Canada would be easiest to create once the provinces are complete. Mattximus (talk) 16:16, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to always be that guy, but, as you know, this list is extremely duplicative of List of communities in Alberta, and again with Specialized municipalities of Alberta, List of municipal districts in Alberta, List of cities in Alberta, List of towns in Alberta, List of summer villages in Alberta, and List of census agglomerations in Alberta. Yes, those include a little bit more info and some former municipalities, but I don't see why the same datasets should be copied three times. I was a bit confused by seeing identical information in different places, and duplication and redundancy can pose the problem of the pages falling out of sync when changes are made, so I would encourage a simple merge. The communities list appears to already have everything that's in this list, plus the unincorporated settlements. Reywas92Talk 14:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • See this recent deletion proposal that resulted in a speedy keep. You are correct there is duplication. However, what you may not have yet seen is that all the data in the tables at the main articles is transcluded to the List of communities in Alberta article, so thus far there is no duplication with risk of pages falling out of sync when changes are made. For this list article, the specialized municipality and Metis settlement table data are both transcluded from their main articles as well. The intent was to implement complex customized transclusion to do the same from the main articles for the urban and rural municipalities as well, but I haven't mastered that yet. I do intend to investigate this further as redundancy has been a concern that I've voiced previously.[12][13] In the meantime, as you've also noticed, the main articles do contain more information for each municipal type (more columns, additional sections, lists of former municipalities, etc.), which would bog down this summary list article of all varying municipality types and require splitting back to the current state. Hwy43 (talk) 04:45, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I had this criticism as well for a prior nomination. Especially with articles like list of towns, villages, districts etc that you mention I'm still on the fence. I have sympathy for list of census agglomerations (which are very different) and list of communities which is like a catch all. What convinced me was WP:NOTPAPER. As long as each page adds *something* that is not found in this list then why not? I believe the list of municipalities is probably the best and most useful page out of the lot you mention, as municipalities are actual governing entities with borders and tax payers and elected officials. Something like census divisions are just for statistical purposes, and communities is a mishmash, so I'm glad this is the one that is being nominated, for what it's worth.Mattximus (talk) 23:31, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Mattximus
Comments from Mattximus (talk) 23:34, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The page has a lot of maps, many of them are quite good. But I'm wondering for simplification sake (and formatting will look much better), is it possible to merge the 3 maps found just under Rural municipalities into one, and leave it on the right so text can follow on the left?
  • Can the Specialized municipalities table be sortable?
  • Question Are the metis settlements actual municipalities (or function like a muncipality?) The paragraphs indicate it's both a community and municipality, is this correct?
  • Municipalities are communities (incorporated communities) but not all communities are municipalities (as there are unincorporated communities). It can confuse nonetheless though so I have removed the reference to "community" in that section. Hwy43 (talk) 23:26, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have replaced all the Metis with Métis. Hope that's ok.
  • Would you consider a hybrid? Keep Metis for any reference to any document that spells it as such, but when talking about the people without specific reference to document as Métis?
  • I do not have any view which is best but I think the same should be used throughout. Showing the name two different ways would be confusing for readers, who might think it means two different things. Dudley Miles (talk) 13:40, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Layout is much better with the merged maps. Excellent list. Mattximus (talk) 16:58, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A very good list. I have not tried to make my comments resolved as one of them led on to comments by other editors. By the way, is there a template for making comments resolved? Dudley Miles (talk) 18:24, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:24, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Image captions which are complete sentences should take a full stop.
  • Not keen on the placement of a lot of the references, there's no reason a reader can't wait until the end of a sentence to find the reference for the fact being stated.
  • Are "acts" of law italicised? Question really since many on Wikipedia are not.
  • Italics removed for now – I treat legislation titles like book titles as they were traditionally published in hard copy. I'm having second thoughts about removing though. Hwy43 (talk) 04:36, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why has Metis lost its accent?
  • "summer village" or "Summer Village"?
  • Latter is only used once and is used correctly in its context. It is capitalized here because it is forming part of the official legal name of the subject municipality. Hwy43 (talk) 04:36, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...is a type of urban municipality" what is this bringing to each section since each time you say exactly the same thing?
  • Four paragraphs and yet you manage to mention "specialized municipality" 13 times, it makes for bland reading.
  • Do we really need land areas in the prose to be accurate to 1/100th of a square kilometre? It looks really awkward.
  • Would recommend you use something more explicit than "List" for all the lists, just in case someone wants to link to specific sections of the article.
  • PDF references with multiple pages should cite the page (or page range) relevant to a reference.
  • Partially done – added pages to all those where appropriate, with the exception of five of the sets of municipal profiles (cities, towns, villages, summer villages and municipal districts) as the amount of unique relevant pages are excessive (16, 108, 93, 51 and 64 respectively) and none of them are sequential (so a range can't be used to avoid listing every single unique page).

    Adding pages aren't appropriate to the balance of PDF references based on the content they support. For example, the entire Special Areas Act and Metis Settlements Acts stipulate governance of the their respective 3 and 8 municipalities, so no need to page-range their entire PDFs. Same applies to the various multi-page orders in council and the like that entirely support the applicable content presented in the article (e.g., name changes/previous names, incorporations, dissolutions, amalgamations and status changes). Hwy43 (talk) 22:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref 24, 41 etc need to be fixed for en-dashes rather than spaced hyphens per WP:DASH.

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:33, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Nice piece of work: I couldn't spot any issues with it and I happily support it. - SchroCat (talk) 19:52, 5 January 2014 (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 promoted by Hahc21 10:02, 10 January 2014 (UTC) [14].[reply]

List of light cruisers of Germany

[edit]
Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk) 10:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another in my series of German warship types, this comprises the light cruisers built from the 1890s to the 1940s. This is the capstone for this topic. It passed a MILHIST ACR last month. Thanks to all who take the time to review the list. Parsecboy (talk) 10:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments

Support Comments

On first glance I find nothing wrong with the list, although list is a bit of an understatement. However, I found some minor points that should be addressed:

  • The first sentence - though accurate - seems unnecessarily complicated to me. Maybe we could drop the reference to the different historical periods as they are reflected in the names of the navies mentioned?
    • Sounds fine to me.
  • The second chapter is titled World War II-era, but covers mostly the inter-war period. Maybe it should be called Post-World War I-era or something alike.
    • Well, they all saw action during the war, which is primarily what they're notable for. The same could be said for the WWI-era section, since the vast majority were built before 1914. Parsecboy (talk) 18:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the paragraph on Emden (1925) the phrase "by the reformed Reichsmarine" is used. As someone else pointed out, it should be re-formed, as it is rather questionable that the Reichsmarine saw the errors of its ways and repented.
    • Good catch.
  • In the paragraph on the Leipzig-class, Gotenhafen is mentioned. Maybe it could be extended by the present-day name, Gdynia, Poland. And a time reference would be in order.

ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 17:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A good list. A few minor comments.

  • "foreign stations" - I think this should be defined.
    • In the lead? There are too many places to list them in the lead, and simply adding something like "in the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific oceans" seems vague to the point of uselessness. Parsecboy (talk) 17:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "five members of the succeeding Königsberg and Leipzig classes" - presumably members means ships but it sounds a bit odd to me.
    • It's a pretty routine way to refer to the ships in a class.
  • "A further six ships of the M class were planned in the late 1930s, but the outbreak of war forced their cancellation." Why would war force their cancellation rather than making proceeding with them a higher priority? (I see this is explained below but I think a revised wording would be helpful).
    • Because once war breaks out, the most pressing needs get priority of construction (in this case, U-boats). Again, I think spelling this out is too much detail in the lead.
  • Brummer class. "And to further aid them in their offensive minelaying role, they were designed to resemble British cruisers." Why did resembling British cruisers help them - for disguise?

Dudley Miles (talk) 14:41, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    • Yes - if you spot a ship in the foggy, squally North Sea that looks like a British ship, you won't open fire immediately, which gives the German ships a bit longer to escape. Added "to help conceal their identity." - does that clear it up any? Thanks for reviewing the list. Parsecboy (talk) 17:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support typically excellent work. Would only have one wish, that the tables were all formatted the same, but it may be a screen width issue that shrinks the Karlsruhe section and Cöln section compared to the others. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:38, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, TRM. I've checked the tables on my desktop, laptop and smart phone and they all looked fine on those screens, but I guess that wasn't enough ;) I added {{clear}} templates after the images so that should keep them from pushing the tables over. Parsecboy (talk) 22:21, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I see the article is written in AmEng, but is it normal to have a non-US date format used as well? - SchroCat (talk) 09:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Germany uses day-month-year format so that's what I went with. Parsecboy (talk) 10:51, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lovely - learn something new every day! Many thanks - SchroCat (talk) 16:52, 5 January 2014 (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 promoted by Hahc21 10:02, 10 January 2014 (UTC) [15].[reply]

List of international cricket centuries by Herschelle Gibbs

[edit]
Nominator(s): —Vensatry (Ping me) 05:21, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Herschelle Gibbs is among the greatest ODI players of all-time. With 21 ODI centuries, he leads his countrymen and has played many match-winning innings in both Tests as well as ODIs. Given my current FLC has gained substantial support with most of the remaining concerns being addressed, I guess this nomination is permissible —Vensatry (Ping me) 05:21, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Chris for your time —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:03, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:36, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Perhaps link South African cricket team in the opening sentence.
  • Not sure you need (pictured) in the image caption, it seems clear to me....
  • AMI Stadium is a dab link.
  • I fixed your WP:DASH problems...

The Rambling Man (talk) 14:43, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Support: another very nice piece of work. - SchroCat (talk) 06:47, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Zia Khan 12:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments' —

Zia Khan 00:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support good work. Zia Khan 12:26, 26 December 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Featured_log/January_2014&oldid=591994101"