Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/July 2008: Difference between revisions
m + basic templates |
+4 |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{featured list log}} |
{{featured list log}} |
||
{{TOClimit|limit=3}} |
{{TOClimit|limit=3}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Boston Celtics head coaches}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Los Angeles Lakers head coaches}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Indianapolis Colts head coaches}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of heads of government of the Central African Republic and Central African Empire}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/NBA first overall draft pick}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/NBA first overall draft pick}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of submissions for the 79th Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of submissions for the 79th Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film}} |
Revision as of 07:10, 4 July 2008
- 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 User:The Rambling Man 07:10, 4 July 2008 [1].
I think this list does meet featured list criteria. If you guys have any questions or comments, I would try to answer them.Gman124 talk 17:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - I originally created this, and then improved it a little after Gman nominated it. I think it meets the criteria. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 17:21, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as nominator. --Gman124 talk 18:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- No need to overlink NBA Finals in the lead.
- Done by Milk's Favorite Cookie
- "while the 1959-to-1966 domination of the NBA Championship" - not keep on the wikilinking here - perhaps "the domination of NBA championship from 1959 to 1966..."?
- 1959–1966 - I think 1959–66 is better.
- "The current coach ..." - "As of June 2008, the coach of the ...." - provides a milestone.
- Games Coached - Games coached.
- Done by Milk's Favorite Cookie
- Year ranges in the Achievements col need to take en-dash.
- No need for italics in present.
Done --Gman124 talk 17:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep the terms per my third comment also - like the achievement year ranges - YYYY–YY.
Done --Gman124 talk 17:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Put a bullet point before the general ref.
Done --Gman124 talk 17:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "basketball-reference.com" vs "Basketball-Reference.com"
- Done by Milk's Favorite Cookie
- No need to overlink NBA Finals in the lead.
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments (more)
- "while the domination of NBA championship from 1959–66, with eight straight titles" and "The franchise won eight consecutive NBA championships from 1959–1966" - a little repetitive.
- Can you make the GC, W, L, W-L%, etc columns the same width? Would be aesthetically improved.
- Auerbach's image caption should be Celtics, not celtics.
- Heinsohn's image caption should take en-dash, not hyphen.
- Fitch caption should link to Fitch, use an en-dash and have a period.
- Did all comments --Gman124 talk 18:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments (more)
- Although I haven't seen it on other head coach lists, is there a reason why Playoffs doesn't have a W–L% col?
- Added W–L% col for Playoffs. --Gman124 talk 18:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Auerbach caption should have a comma after Celtics.
Y
- Fitch's caption needs a "the" between "won" and "1981" and needs to have "year" capitalised.
Y
- Auerbach's Coach of the Year years in the table need an en-dash, not a hyphen.
Y
- You have single and double daggers in the key but not in the table.
Y
- Although I haven't seen it on other head coach lists, is there a reason why Playoffs doesn't have a W–L% col?
The Rambling Man (talk) 18:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support This looks pretty good now after Rambling Man's issues were resolved. Gary King (talk) 18:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment This page is orphaned. There are no links to any article in the mainspace. I think you should add a link in the main article at least.--Crzycheetah 18:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Added. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 18:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- Is it possible to get a more interesting lead sentence? People can look at the title to see what page they're on. Also, if you keep it as is, remove the bold link per MoS.
Y
- Bill Russell, Tom Heinsohn, Tom Sanders, Dave Cowens, K.C. Jones, Chris Ford and M. L. Carr have
allplayed andheadcoached for the Celtics. Some redundancies.Y
- Support All my issues have been addressed, nothing else wrong that I can see. Good work! Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support The only thing I want in this list is that the years of term be linked.
Done Annoyomous24 (talk) 22:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Also the years of championships/coach of the year to be linked. Annoyomous24 (talk) 00:32, 1 July 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 07:10, 4 July 2008 [2].
I worked on this article in my sandbox then moved it. I think this list does meet featured list criteria. If you guys have any questions or comments, I would try to answer them. (Annoyomous24) (talk) 22:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Perhaps force a TOC with Help:TOC so people don't have to use a scroll bar to get to the bottom of the page.DONE! Gary King (talk) 01:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Are there any public domain pictures that can be added to the article? DONE!
- "1948 - 1960." Check out WP:DASH DONE!
- "The Lakers are generally regarded as one of the NBA's most successful franchises." Says who? Reference please DONE!
- The article contains some sentences that are lifted straight from List of Los Angeles Lakers first and second round draft picks. For next time, you should attribute the revision and author in the edit summary, per WP:REUSE (or my interpretation of it -- and it doesn't hurt to do it just in case.) DONE!
- "The franchise got its official name from Minnesota's nickname, Land of 10,000 Lakes." Why? Explain why a team in the most south-western state of America takes its nickname from one of the most nothern. DONE!
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment—The lead section is the bare minimum. Please read MOS on dashes, carefully. Not a single pic? It doesn't have to have one, but I'm surprised that there are none to be found. DONE! TONY (talk) 09:16, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Shouldn't the tables be sortable? Do we really need to colour code it (its quite unsightly)? Further, colour-coding on the basis of Hall of Fame seems to classify the coaches in a POV way: the guys in orange are better than the ones that aren't. Just the * and † should be enough. DONE! indopug (talk) 11:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- WP:DASH again - in the image caption - in fact, it'd probably be just as well to write "to" rather than use the en-dash here. DONE!
- Put (NBA) after National Basketball Association. DONE!
- "formally known" do you really mean formally or do you mean "formerly"? That's a question, not a criticism by the way! DONE!
- First para of lead is too choppy for me, the prose needs work, in particular "The franchise got its official name from Minnesota's nickname, Land of 10,000 Lakes because at the time the name was revealed, the Lakers were in Minneapolis" DONE!
- Also, why link franchise on the second instance? DONE!
- Why is the Key in smaller text? DONE!
- "Games Coached"->"Games coached" DONE!
- Remove the spaces between the W and the hyphen and the L and replace the hyphen with an en dash. DONE!
- >No need to relink coaches in the table after their first linkage (e.g. Kundla). DONE!
- Why are Awards in bold? DONE!
- See WP:DASH for the records, e.g. "380 - 240" should be "380–240", also for the years, so "1948 - 1958" should be "1948–58" etc. DONE!
- Be consistent with leading zeros on the percentages - either all or none. DONE!
- Add a bullet point before the only general ref. DONE!
- Ref 2 needs
accessdate
etc. DONE! - Ref 3 needs isbn if available. DONE!
- Is there a "Category:Basketball lists" or similar to which this can be added? DONE!
The Rambling Man (talk) 07:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for commenting on this featured list candidate, The Rambling Man. (Annoyomous24) (talk) 20:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator: please don't strike out reviewers' comments; let them do that. The lead is a little better (not great), but two things:
- Read MOS on unspaced en dashes; all of the en dashes I see should be unspaced. That might help the next issue a little, too. DONE!
- Column-width management; seriously bad effect in some columns (W–L, etc), Can you take up more horizontal space (there aren't even side pics to stop you). Try "Ref." in the last column to save space there. Once these two things are done, I'm OK. DONE! TONY (talk) 04:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please DO NOT strike out reviewers' comments, as you have been asked/reverted a number of times. Put "done,
Done, or something similar to show you have addressed each comment, as requested by the instructions at WP:FLC. It is really hard to know whether what you have sticken is because they're done or because you've ignored them, and reviewers often read previous revewers' comments to avoid repetition. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- First of all, I read somewhere to not put the
Done template do represent the request being done as it will slow down the loading of the page. Second of all, Crzycheetah striked out some of the requests that were finished so I thought striking out represents being done. Third of all, I was never asked to not strike out the request. (Annoyomous24) (talk) 22:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- First of all, I read somewhere to not put the
- {{done}} shouldn't be used at WP:FAC or WP:PR, and that is one of the rules of nomination at those two places. Here, though, it's not disallowed. I noticed Tony1 has also requested that comments not be stricken out, above. I don't believe CrzyCheetah has stricken anything here. The history doesn't have his name listed. Anyway, it's all good now. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- For the second and third sentence I wrote above your previous one, I meant the featured list candidate for List of Los Angeles Lakers first and second round draft picks. Sorry for my confusion since I sometimes forget which one I'm on. Annoyomous24 (talk) 22:37, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I also dont see Tony1 asking me not to strike out. Annoyomous24 (talk) 22:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You don't see Tony1's comments regarding striking out because you undid them. I have struck my comments that I thought were resolved. I will never strike your or someone else's comments.--Crzycheetah 06:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I see it now. Crzycheetah, I never undid them, I just didn't see it since I was scanning the page. Annoyomous24 (talk) 20:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You don't see Tony1's comments regarding striking out because you undid them. I have struck my comments that I thought were resolved. I will never strike your or someone else's comments.--Crzycheetah 06:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- The lead is too short, especially the first paragraph. DONE!
- Why do you pipe-link the "Dynasty" page as "franchise"? DONE!
- "franchise got its official name" - I don't think got is the right verb here. DONE!
- I disagree with the above reviewer, I believe that HoF and tenure should be color-coded as well. Not to be indicated by those weird symbols only. DONE!
- Citation #5 should be note [a]. DONE!
- Some other general reference should be added to check the basketball-reference.com. We should not rely on one source.
- What new info did you take from the refs in the "refs" column that you could not take from the general reference?
- PLEASE, do not strike out or undo any of my comments. Thanks!
--Crzycheetah 06:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I took the year of when they won a Championship and checked if they coached for another team from the refs in the "refs" column that you could not take from the general reference. Annoyomous24 (talk) 20:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why are the term years unlinked? DONE!
- Basketball-reference.com still remains the only reference for this list. There should be more than one. DONE!
- Why do you need to know if they coached another team? Thankfully, you didn't add that info to this page, but still why did you provide those refs?
- I took the year of when they won a Championship and checked if they coached for another team from the refs in the "refs" column that you could not take from the general reference. Annoyomous24 (talk) 20:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
--Crzycheetah 23:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Because some of the coaches spent their entire coaching careers with the Lakers and on the list, it denotes it. Annoyomous24 (talk) 23:54, 03 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support The only thing I don't understand is the last part in the lead: have all played and head coached for the Lakers. I never knew that "head coach" may be used as a verb. I suggest reword that part better.--Crzycheetah 06:01, 4 July 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 07:10, 4 July 2008 [3].
Well I finally got around to creating this article and I've doubled checked everything to make sure it is worthy of FL status. The only thing I've seen wrong with it is that it has 1 red link (Joe Thomas). I was going to create an article but I know absolutely nothing about him and there are minimal references for him. Besides FL criteria states "minimal proportion of red links." so it should be okay. HoosierStateTalk 14:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, as nominator. HoosierStateTalk 14:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment What makes Sports Ecyclopedia a reliable source? Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 18:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- Opening sentence is boring, a verbatim copy of the title of the list with "This is a ..." added.
- (17 total) is confusing.
- "March of 1984" -> March 1984.
- I prefer to explain NFL before using it as an abbreviation.
- "...by at least one major news organization. Additionally, Ewbank and Shula are members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, having been inducted in 1978 and 1997 respectively." - citations?
- W/L records need an en-dash, not a hyphen.
- "managing to win 2 games, and finished the season at 2-12" - two and tenses change mid-sentence.
- "Then 2005 Tony Dungy was forced to miss the 15th game of the season due to personal issues and Jim Caldwell was named as the one game interim.[4]"- this is nowhere near English I'm afraid. Copyedit required.
- Loses in the Key should be Losses.
- W – L doesn't need the spaces.
- Confirm all coach awards are cited.
The Rambling Man (talk) 20:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done I believe I covered everything. HoosierStateTalk 21:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Looks good Gary King (talk) 04:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments Just 2 for now.
- "This is a complete list of Indianapolis Colts head coaches." I would hope it is complete if it's featured. Repeating the article title is also a boring way to introduce the article. Try no use something which engages the reader.
- Most of the other FLs of this genre don't use a bullet to identify those who spent their entire career with the team. Try to be consistent with those.
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done, Also after looking at the other articles like this, I noticed there isn't really any consensus on how to show coaches that spent their entire career with their respective franchise. So I just removed the symbols and stuck with color solely. HoosierStateTalk 06:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You can't do that per WP:ACCESS. If you use colour, you must use a text based marker for those who are colourblind or have a black and white monitor, or who are accessing a printed version of the article. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Duh! I knew that, it's fixed. Backing up to when I used the bullets, I was using the Green Bay Packers version of this article as a guide and they had bullets so it ended up the same way over here. HoosierStateTalk 06:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You can't do that per WP:ACCESS. If you use colour, you must use a text based marker for those who are colourblind or have a black and white monitor, or who are accessing a printed version of the article. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Prose is ordinary; MOS breaches.
- Please read MOS on en dashes.
- "He also led" --> "; he led". And please remove the ugly "Additionally".
- Sentence case in table text (e.g., "Games Coached"). TONY (talk) 09:40, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Keith Molesworth became the first coach of the Baltimore Colts in 1953 but he was reassigned to a different position with the team following the season." No: "... 1953, but was ...".
Done, all fixed. HoosierStateTalk 20:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment
- Not all done - en-dash needed instead of hyphen in the lead.
- No bold links in the lead.
- Prose, as Tony said, is very plain.
- Why no article for Thomas? Makes the linking out from the list incomplete, which is a pity.
The Rambling Man (talk) 11:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done, everything you commented on is fixed. The only thing is, I only changed the lead of the article a little bit. I honestly don't know what else I could do to make it better. I looked at every other FL list like this and they're all similar to what this list has. HoosierStateTalk 22:25, 3 July 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 07:10, 4 July 2008 [4].
This list is based on List of heads of state of the Central African Republic and Central African Empire. Enjoy! Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 20:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments by Baldrick90
I really enjoy lists like these, keep up the good work. Here are a few comments to start with. I wish you luck on your nominations and I will probably support once these are addressed.
- Please don't write centreafricain with a capital c, just like in your other list I reviewed here at flc.
- In the table, either write both "territorial autonomy" and "Independent" with a capital letter or not.
- Capitalized. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You should probably add ", Prime Minister" to the name of David Dacko in the table.
- Could you create an article for Operation Barracuda? I noticed it in your other list too.
- This is on my to-do list. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Since there are just two red links, I would recommend you create articles for both the "Operation Barracuda" and "Civic forum".
- Same as above. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I am somewhat confused about the latter. In the notes section of Malendoma I read "Democratic Forum". Am I correct the Democratic Forum and the Civic Forum (capital f?) are the same party? If not, please explain.
- They're not. It's weird, but Malendoma founded the Democratic Forum, but ran as a candidate of the Civic Forum party in elections. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I wonder if the term "Nonpartisan" is American. I only know it as a military term and have never heard someone use it in European politics (I am Dutch). Do you know any alternatives?
- Independent is frequently used as an alternative, but it's not the same. Nonpartisan usually means that the person hasn't declared a political affiliation. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "prime minister" in the notes section of Élie Doté should be "Prime Minister".
- Why is "September 2006" wikilinked? The reshuffle apparantly wasn't notable enough to be mentioned in this particular article. I would remove this link and just use [[September 3]], [[2006]]. This makes note 38 completely redundant. Also, I don't think "Central Africa" should be used to refer to the country, Uganda and Congo (to name two) are also in Central Africa.
- Ref 38 was actually AFP press report, but I messed up one of the parameters. Also, link to September 2006 removed. I think I had copied that link over from Doté's article. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why was Domitien removed from office?
- Koyambounou has been in office for almost a year and two months. Nothing to comment on?
- Nothing significant during his term (as far as I can see in LexisNexis). I did include a bit about his prior occupation. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Same goes for Dacko's first term and the second term of Patassé.
- I think it's worth a mention that Doté has served the longest term of all.
- Added to image caption. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Two footnote links don't work: C and I. It's always a good idea to check those.
- Note that you put a footnote in front of a reference in this article. Like here: "October 22, 1993[I][12]". You do the opposite in your list List of Sultans of Zanzibar: "(..) or 1840,[2][A] Sa'id (..)". Please be consistent.
- I did that on sultans because [2] was a reference for "1840", while [A] is a note regarding the inconsistency with dates. I didn't want to have [A][2] because it wouldn't make sense to the reader. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Where are the accessdates?
Baldrick90 (talk) 22:32, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weird, I couldn't get the accessdates to work before, so I thought they didn't work on {{citation}}. It looks like I had this problem because I included an accessdate for a non-URL citation. :) Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Good! TONY (talk) 04:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Criteria 2 (info in lead woefully inadequate) and 6 (visual appeal lacking in shambolic column widths).[reply]
- (1) Essential information: is it a representative democracy? How do these people become PM/president? Is there an assembly? Just a few sentences filling in the context from a mechanistic point of view is important. And parties are mentioned in the key and the table, but the lead has to foreground this: has policy ever been at issue, or is it all personality-based, stab-in-the-back stuff? If it has been a contest between colonialists and independence promoters, or between landowners/corporations and other societal interests, please tell us IN THE LEAD. At the moment, it's just a mystery and a collection of meaningless names and parties. Not featured stuff.
- The Central African Republic is a republic. They hold elections, both presidential and legislative. But this doesn't appear to have been stated, still. TONY (talk) 04:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC) The President names the Prime Minister and I believe the National Assembly votes on the candidate (not sure about this, I'll check). The parties differentiate in their ideologies. MESAN was the ruling party for decades before other parties were allowed to enter the political scene (most of this happened during President Kolingba's rule in the 1980s). I'll add these details. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- (2) Tons of horizontal space wasted in the second and third columns, and then the Notes column squashes large amounts of text into many many lines, thus creating wasted vertical space in the table. Need to do some width "forcing".
- I reduced the width in the second and third columns. Better? Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- (3) Too many words in the "Notes" column. Start by removing the names from each opening, since they are entirely redundant. Use the stubby grammar of note-form, like this:
Founder of the MESAN party;[1] negotiated for the independence of Oubangui-Chari and named the country the "Central African Republic".
Not this:
Boganda was the founder of the MESAN party.[1] He also negotiated for the independence of Oubangui-Chari and named the country the "Central African Republic".
Notice that I've removed the redundant "also". The subsequent "also" is required, though. TONY (talk) 04:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll start simplifying. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- I don't think the section heading "List of Prime Ministers of the Central African Republic and Central African Empire" is strictly necessary given the nature of the article (i.e. we already know it's a list of heads of government of the CAR etc etc etc) so just "List of Prime Ministers" would suffice.
- Heads of governement, heads of state, Prime Minister - these seem to be used interchangeably, can we be more consistent. I find it a little confusing.
- The Prime Minister is the head of government, while the President is the head of state. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- And this is a list of Prime Ministers only, right? Also, you have the legend "For heads of state with multiple affiliations..." above the table, the table has no heads of state in it, does it? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, it is only a list of Prime Ministers. Just noticed the legend a few minutes ago, fixed that. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- And this is a list of Prime Ministers only, right? Also, you have the legend "For heads of state with multiple affiliations..." above the table, the table has no heads of state in it, does it? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The Prime Minister is the head of government, while the President is the head of state. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Any reason why the names are bold?
- I just wanted to draw the readers' attention to names. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- And why is "Prime Minister" repeated in every row (apart from the acting Prime Minister which could be added to the notes column)?
- Alright, removed. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Consider merging the tables. You can add a colspan'ed row for changes of the name of the country. This would then alleviate the repetitive heading rows. Also, getting rid of "Prime Minister" from the name col, squeezing the Entered/Left office columns up, you can make the Notes column wider which will reduce the length of the table. Particularly if you follow Tony's advice on making the notes more note-like.
The Rambling Man (talk) 09:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Tables merged, removed "Prime Minister" from name column, width reduced in second and third columns, notes column wider. I'm simplifying the notes, as well. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
I have to disagree with you Rambling Man. A table merged like this one is terrible to look at. Please have another look at List of heads of state of the Central African Republic and Central African Empire. Now tell me, which is clearer? Isn't that what a table is supposed to be? I would really opt for the same layout in both CAR lists, like this:
- Prime Ministers of the Central African Republic (1960–1976)
- Prime Ministers of the Central African Empire (1976–1979)
- Prime Ministers of the Central African Republic (since 1979)
- Please check the colour codes of both lists. In the presidents list, the nonpartisans have a different colour. While you're at it, wikilink "Nonpartisan" in the Bozizé row.
- Done and done. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 21:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for clearing up the Civic/Democratic forum issue. I do however think it would be best to leave it out. Apparantly the Democratic Forum has no article here on wp and we aren't told anything about its significance. It's also confusing, not just the similar name but also the fact he founded it in 1990 and became pm in 1992. Why did he abandon the party he founded? In this context it adds only confusion, I would suggest leaving it out or adding relevant information, either in this notes section or by creating an article for the Democratic Forum. Baldrick90 (talk) 20:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, that seems like the best thing to do here. Kalck (2005) only mentions Democratic Forum in passing. There's nothing else written about it. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 21:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment
I see that Rambling Man suggested to rename the section to "List of Prime Ministers", but I actually think "Heads of government" would be a better section title; I especially dislike having the words "List of" in a section title. The question that should be asked is whether or not the section is about Prime Ministers (or Heads of government), and if it is, then simply state that, rather than preceding it with "List of".Gary King (talk) 04:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Heading changed to "Heads of government". Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Baldrick90
- It strikes me you use so many French language sources and yet do not claim any knowledge of the language on your userpage. I decided to randomly check out one French link (ref 35) and believe you may not understand it sufficiently. The article says he was 'directeur général' of the UBAC. This does not (necessarily) refer to the BDEAC and BMPC. By the way, the correct spelling would be director-general and not director general. The following sentence tells an interesting fact: Gaombalet was fired (French: limogé - this means breaking up (as in a relationship) and is used here informally and metaphorically) by general and president Kolingba in 1981, just after he became president. Then we are told he worked for the BDEAC in the Republic of the Congo (his function is not mentioned) and he returned to the CAR in the early nineties to 'dirige' (lead, direct) the BMPC (again, we don't know his function, he could be the CEO or just be a member of the executive board, I suggest you leave out the function and just say he lead the BMPC).
- It seems I mistakenly wrote BDEAC instead of UBAC. I've fixed this now. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 15:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If you want any help translating French sources you can always ask me (I learned French in grammar school) but ofcourse it would be best to contact a native speaker.
- Thanks for the offer. Could you verify that the French refs I use actually correspond to my "translations"/interpretations? Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 15:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please have a look at the article on Célestin Gaombalet. It translates 'La Banque de Développement des Etats de l’Afrique Centrale' as 'Development Bank of Central African States'. You translate BDEAC as such: 'Central African States Development Bank'. I think there should be one translation used. I have found the official translation here (see section 'ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS'). It should be 'Development Bank of Central African States'.
- Alright, fixed. I found my translation on another Wikipedia article. See this. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 15:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- His full name is 'Célestin-Leroy Gaombalet'. Your article says 'Le Roi'. I presume you know that translates as 'The King'. You are correct phonetically :-).
- Hmm...that bit of text was in the article before I started working on it. Fixed, though. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 15:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Also note that if you use his full name, it should be 'Célestin-Leroy'. That dash is used in most sources referring to him, including a lot of reliable sources such as Amnesty and the website of the European Union. It should be noted that a lot of reliable sources do not include the dash. Célestin Leroy Gaombalet has 1490 google hits, Célestin-Leroy Gaombalet 2040. What do you make of it? Baldrick90 (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well it seems if you search the dash version, you get results which include the non-dash. I will use the dash, I guess. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 15:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
- Please don't open with "This is a complete list of the heads of government of the Central African Republic and Central African Empire." You need to engage the reader, rather than repeat the title of the article
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Reworded. Good? Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 03:28, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The image at the top of the article seems unnecessarily large. I suggest adding the upright parameter to the thumbnail specs, as follows: [[Image:Elie Dote.jpg|right|thumb|upright|Former Prime Minister [[Élie Doté]] has served the longest of all Prime Ministers of the Central African Republic (2005–2008).]] --Orlady (talk) 00:25, 25 June 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 20:27, 2 July 2008 [5].
I took my time and improve the list. Since I believe it meets all the featured list criteria, I hope this list will get featured.—Chris! ct 00:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Some comments (I'll add to this as I look through the article):
- In the second paragraph, is there some way of clarifying that the dates in parentheses are the years when the players were drafted, and not the years those players won the MVP awards? Zagalejo^^^ 03:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like the refs formatting is inconsistent. Zagalejo^^^ 04:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I fixed that. All refs are now using the cite web template.—Chris! ct 19:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I'm satisfied with it. Zagalejo^^^ 02:55, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment
The bold text if a link is going to be used in it, per WP:BOLDTITLE.Gary King (talk) 04:44, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I readd a link for the NBA in the fourth paragraph. It is pretty far down though. Perhaps it is a good idea to add a new sentence or reword the first sentence to include a link for the NBA.—Chris! ct 20:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note Just wanted to inform all of you that I might be out for the next few days and might not be able to attend to any issues regarding this FLC during that time. Hopefully, editors who are attached to this FLC or the NBA Wikiproject will be able to fix any problems raised by other editors when I am away. I will return to this FLC as soon as I can. Thanks in advance.—Chris! ct 20:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I really don't like that dark yellow colour. Could you use a lighter colour like the scheme used here? As well, it would be great if you could highlight which players won the Rookie of the Year award. Simply have 3 colours, 1 for all stars, 1 for RotYs and 1 for all stars and RotYs. I've got to admit, I really don't like the column layout of the table. It should go Year | Name | Nationality | Former club |NBA team |Everything else similar to the NHL #1 pick page. -- Scorpion0422 19:46, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- First, I changed the color. Then I add several new colors for other awards. I will add RotYs award later when I have time. As for the column layout, I didn't do anything on that because I think the current arrangement is better. For draft info, team name is very important and therefore shouldn't place on the far right.—Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- Any reason why the school col is far too wide? In fact, quite a few columns are too wide.
- I tweaked the column. —Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Add the abbreviations PPG etc to the key instead of as footnotes. It makes the table easier to understand without having to flick to footnotes.
- Fixed —Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- RPG, PPG, APG cols don't sort correctly.
- Fixed —Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If you want to include a blank row for 2008 (and personally I wouldn't) then you should at least footnote it with why it's blank.
- Fixed —Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "The first three players listed below..." they'll only be the first three if you haven't resorted the table.
- Fixed by another editor —Chris! ct 01:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You link NBA in the first sentence and then link National Basketball Association in the last. I'd use the full version in the first sentence with a (NBA) after it and then not link the second instance at all.
- Fixed by another editor —Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
date
field in the {{cite web}} template should be of the YYYY-MM-DD format so it gets converted correctly and consistently.
- Fixed —Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Is there a Basketball lists category to which this could be added?
- Fixed —Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Move the footnote links next to players names and nationality to the notes column
- Well, that won't be a good idea since the footnote links are used to explain the draft picks and the nationality of that player.—Chris! ct 01:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Explain the abbreviations for PPG, RPG and APG in the key section.
- Fixed —Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Please read MOS on spelling out numbers. "6-time winner", etc.
- Fixed —Chris! ct 01:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why is a dictionary word such as "media" linked? See MOS. Generally, avoid linking the names of anglophone countries (I see at least two), and other countries that are sure to be well-known to almost all readers. Your lead is getting very blue.
- Fixed. I also remove several repeated links. —Chris! ct 01:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why "Nat." in the column heading, rather than "Country"? Isn't the space enough for that full word? If not, borrow waste from other columns.
- Fixed. I use "nationality" because that is the word used by the creator. Since "country" and "nationality" are really interchangeable in everyday usage, I don't see the point of changing it around. —Chris! ct 01:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please use sentence case for your column headings, not title case. "College/High school/Former club" is like alphabet soup.
- Fixed —Chris! ct 01:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Criterion 6: Can you find a less vomity colour than that bright yellow? I need sunscreen.
- Fixed —Chris! ct 01:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise good. TONY (talk) 09:30, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Coments college, Position, and Selected by columns should not be overly-wikilinked. Link them only the first time they appear.--Gman124 talk 23:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. —Chris! ct 19:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- One more color shouldn't be the only indicator for the All-Star. --Gman124 talk 02:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't what else I could use to indicate the All-Star. Perhaps an asterisk will work.—Chris! ct 19:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I try to add another color or symbol, but that just makes the list more confusing. I think it would be best to stick to the current arrangement.—Chris! ct 19:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think Asterisk would work. --Gman124 talk 19:39, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I try to add another color or symbol, but that just makes the list more confusing. I think it would be best to stick to the current arrangement.—Chris! ct 19:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't what else I could use to indicate the All-Star. Perhaps an asterisk will work.—Chris! ct 19:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- I think the list should be named List of first overall NBA draft picks.
- I will rename it.—Chris! ct 01:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The second paragraph bothers me because the years in the bracets could mean draft year or year of the MVP winning.
- Yeah, I mentioned that above. The years refer to the years they were drafted. I think we could just remove them from the lead, because the list is already there to provide that information. Zagalejo^^^ 23:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The second paragraph bothers me because the years in the bracets could mean draft year or year of the MVP winning.
- I will remove the years now if it causes confusion.—Chris! ct 01:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In the sentence "Duncan is an American citizen, but is considered an "international" player by the NBA because he is originally from the U.S. Virgin Islands, and not one of the fifty states.", the District of Columbia is also not considered as a state but is also not considered as international so you should some how fix up that sentence.
- Good catch. I was responsible for that phrasing. I've added a mention of Washington, DC. Zagalejo^^^ 23:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In the sentence "The Basketball Association of America became the National Basketball Association after absorbing teams from the National Basketball League in fall 1949.", the last words should be in the fall of 1949.
- I wrote that one, too. I've added the missing words. (I don't think there's anything wrong with "fall 1949", but "the fall of..." seems to be the more common expression, so I'll just go with that.) Zagalejo^^^ 23:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the Lebron James picture is too big. you should make it to around 150-175px.
- In the sentence "Duncan is an American citizen, but is considered an "international" player by the NBA because he is originally from the U.S. Virgin Islands, and not one of the fifty states.", the District of Columbia is also not considered as a state but is also not considered as international so you should some how fix up that sentence.
- I resized it to 150px.—Chris! ct 01:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In the key, every first word should be capitalized. So "points per game" should be "Points per game".
- Since the list is sortable, I think you should link all of the team and clubs.
- Not sure what you mean, all of them are linked.—Chris! ct 01:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Not all the colleges were linked. I've taken care of that, though. Zagalejo^^^ 02:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Not sure what you mean, all of them are linked.—Chris! ct 01:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If everything I requested is finished, I'll support.
Annoyomous24 (talk) 23:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Annoyomous24 (talk) 1:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- 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 User:The Rambling Man 12:05, 2 July 2008 [6].
I think I must thank the FLC contest for getting me involved here. Hopefully, this is the first of many more :p Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 08:04, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Could you include the year of the 79th Academy Award in the lead? I couldn't find it anywhere. Thank you. Eklipse (talk) 11:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Added. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 19:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Why does the table have "|- style="border-bottom:3px solid #CCCCFF""? I find it goes against the layout of a standard wikitable, and just brings a lot of unneeded attention to it. Gary King (talk) 17:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 19:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- Image in lead has a fragment for a caption so no need for full stop, and if you follow WP:MOS#Images, you should use a minimum of 300px for the lead image.
- "each country is invited by the Academy" - really? Is it an open invitation? In fact, judging by the next sentence there's a select number of countries invited - what dictates this shortlist?
- "Finland's submission" is repeated in one sentence.
Otherwise, pretty faultless from my point of view. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 19:33, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Try to engage the reader by avoiding the repetition of the article title as the first sentence
- I'd like it to be mentioned in the first paragraph that the 79th Awards occurred in 2007.
Otherwise it's all good. -- Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed both. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support The facts about the two "not counted" films are repeated. IMO those aren't interesting enough to warrant mention in the lead and think the footnotes are sufficient. Can you fix the sorting of "Result" so that "Won Academy Award" comes first rather than last? I don't think any of those external links meet WP:EL for this list. Colin°Talk 12:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Should Guillermo del Toro be sorted under T rather than D? Colin°Talk 21:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed the lead mentions and the sorting and I cut out the ELs. And I think "D" is where del Toro should be sorted because we refer to his surname as "del Toro" (in his article also) and not simply "Toro", although I could be wrong. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 00:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment There really are no standards for colouring, but perhaps you should follow the {{award-won}} and {{award-nom}} templates, which use green for the winner and pink for nominees. -- Scorpion0422 22:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- On the FLC for the Japanese submission lists, I was originally using {{award-nom}} for the nominees, but another user indicated that pink was a more suitable color for the rejections. I think the present is alright. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 00:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speaking of which, the color for the winner's cell is too similar to the pink used for the non-nominees - any chance of making it more distinctive for the sake of contrast? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 22:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The "Won Academy Award" one? I can't see how yellow/bronze can't be distinguished from pink IMO. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 07:37, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Because they are adjacent colors which start to become indistinguishable when they are pastelized (which lowers contrast), especially when viewed on a monitor with lower brightness. Additionally, it generically wouldn't be a bad idea to have the winner as a non-pastel color, for the sake of extra distinctiveness. Lastly, is there a reason why you're following one color scheme for the List of country's submissions for the... articles and another one for the List of submissions for the Xth Academy Award for... articles? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 03:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've changed the color for the award winner. And I don't see any color difference between any of the articles I've nominated... Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 05:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Because they are adjacent colors which start to become indistinguishable when they are pastelized (which lowers contrast), especially when viewed on a monitor with lower brightness. Additionally, it generically wouldn't be a bad idea to have the winner as a non-pastel color, for the sake of extra distinctiveness. Lastly, is there a reason why you're following one color scheme for the List of country's submissions for the... articles and another one for the List of submissions for the Xth Academy Award for... articles? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 03:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The "Won Academy Award" one? I can't see how yellow/bronze can't be distinguished from pink IMO. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 07:37, 28 June 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 12:05, 2 July 2008 [7].
This list is in honour of the 2008 draft, which started today and concludes on Saturday. For those who think this may cause a lack of stability, please note that the first pick was selected earlier and there won't be any changing information. Anyway, the list is fully sourced and most of the concerns will be addressed by me. I will be going away on June 28, so any comments after that date will be addressed by Maxim. -- Scorpion0422 05:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Lol, I got drafted. :D Maxim(talk) 12:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Looks pretty good to me Gary King (talk) 06:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- Should "entry draft" and "amateur draft" be capitalised as proper nouns? entry draft definitely links to Entry Draft.
- Done.
- Fourth entry in the key says "Player..." but none of the others do. Could just leave it as "Never played.."
- Fixed.
- "Comite des jeunes (Rosemont)" links to a borough of Quebec, not a school etc.
- Fixed.
- And Montreal Jr. B links to Montreal - misleading linkage. Check the others.
- Fixed.
- I would also consider making a key for the league acronyms, especially as CZE really just means Czechoslovakia.
- I was going to, but I'm not sure if it's necessary, since every league has a wikilink.
- Centrally align all league acronyms.
- Done.
- Ext links link looks like it's missing a ).
- Fixed.
- Can the list be added to an NHL lists category?
- Yes it can.
The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for taking a look. -- Scorpion0422 22:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Use {{flag}} instead of {{flagicon}} for the flags, for those who have graphics turned off. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done, by Scorpion. Maxim(talk) 15:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- why are the Amateur/junior/former club, Position, Selected by, and League column overly-wikilinked? Link them only the first time they appear. Gman124 talk 22:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment
- I think List of first overall NHL draft picks sound better.
- "Picks" is not encyclopedic tone, and it may confuse a reader who's not as familiar with sports. Choices is much more clearer.
- Since this list is srtable, I think you should link everything on the list.
- Makes sense if the list is sortable.
Done.
- Makes sense if the list is sortable.
- You should delete the link to List of NHL second overall draft choices since it has not been written yet.
- The picture of Sidney Crosby is too big. You should shrink it a little to around 200-250px.
- Done.
- If all of this is done, I'll support.
- I think List of first overall NHL draft picks sound better.
Annoyomous24 (talk) 22:49, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of linking to the NCAA for DiPietro and Murphy, should you link to Hockey East and CCHA respectively like what seems to be the standard across all the draft articles?Roman Hamrlik's league should link to Czechoslovak First Ice Hockey League as the Czech Extraliga was not founded until 1993. Also, you should put "Czech" rather than "CZE" as the pipped link for this. You didn't use "SWE" or "RUS" for the Swedish or Russian leagues.Do we need to have everything wikilinked here? I'm not sure the MOS on this, but it seems to me that linking Goaltender, Defenceman, and Forward each and every time isn't necessary. Same for leagues and teams.- The list is sortable so the "first time" link varies, and having seemingly random links scattered is unsightly and can potentially be a timesink. (12:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC))
According to this, Nacka HK was part of the Elitserien when Sundin was drafted, not HockeyAllsvenskan.Check your disambiguations, there should be no links to dab pages (ie: Stefan, Fleury, Hamrlik, Quebec Remparts) and make sure to have no dios in the article (ie: Houle)I personally think the flag beside Hamrlik should be a Czechoslovakian flag, as that was the nation at the time in 1992. (Use TCH for this in the template)
- Those are all of my concerns with the article, some you may disagree with, but for the most part I think these are some pretty decent requirements. After these are addressed, you have my support! – Nurmsook! (talk) 01:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All else was fixed. Maxim(talk) 12:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support All of my concerns have been addressed, you have my support! As for the overlinking, I never even noticed that it was a sortable table...makes perfect sense now! Thanks. – Nurmsook! (talk) 07:35, 1 July 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 12:05, 2 July 2008 [8].
This list is based off of List of New York Jets head coaches (a featured list) and List of San Francisco 49ers head coaches (a featured list candidate). Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 21:53, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support This looks good to me. Gary King (talk) 06:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak OpposeThe first paragraph needs a lot of work and some citations. I understand that teams play eight home games. Many would be confused on whether they are now playing all their games in Toronto. It is not even clear to me whether they will play a home game in Toronto every year going forward. You may want to mention that they formerly played at the War Memorial Stadium (Buffalo) (aka The Rockpile) although I am not sure if other coach lists make mention of current and former stadia.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:36, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]- I don't know how that text got garbled. I guess I wasn't thinking straight when I made this edit. Eh, screw it. I'll just remove the entire stadium bit. It's not even included in any of the other head coach lists. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 16:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- O.K. Can you find at least one citation for the first paragraph to satisfy my need to see at least one in each paragraph.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:21, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I added a ref for the last sentence of the first paragraph. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 20:05, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- O.K. Can you find at least one citation for the first paragraph to satisfy my need to see at least one in each paragraph.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:21, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know how that text got garbled. I guess I wasn't thinking straight when I made this edit. Eh, screw it. I'll just remove the entire stadium bit. It's not even included in any of the other head coach lists. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 16:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support My minor problems above have been resolved.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - Seems to meet all criteria. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 21:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- "Games Coached ->coached" and "Loses -> Losses" in the key.
- Regular Season ->season.
- Any reason why present is in italics?
- To bring to the reader's attention that Dick Jauron is the current head coach. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 19:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think that's obvious from the word "present" and from the fact he's last on the list and from the fact you have a dedicated paragraph in the lead stating such. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright, fixed. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 19:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've gotta find something to talk about... ;-) The Rambling Man (talk) 19:10, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright, fixed. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 19:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think that's obvious from the word "present" and from the fact he's last on the list and from the fact you have a dedicated paragraph in the lead stating such. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- To bring to the reader's attention that Dick Jauron is the current head coach. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 19:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- ref [24] needs
date
.
The Rambling Man (talk) 18:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- The opening sentence doesn't engage the reader as it's simply a repetition of the article title
- Rewritten. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Move the note links in the Term column to the reference column
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:18, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That's just going to confuse the reader. The notes are positioned to help the reader understand certain coaching circumstances. Moving them to the references column will just make things complicated. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please recast the opening sentence so that it does not mostly or fully repeat the title of the article. Please note the standard set by Criterion 2 of the featured list criteria, which states that the lead should have "an engaging lead section", and the Bold title and Establish context sections in the styleguide for lead sections. The opening is just where we need to capture readers' attention by contexualising the list, not irritating them with straight repetition of what they've just read.
- Rewritten. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why upper-case L for loss, in the Key? TONY (talk) 09:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No particular reason. Don't see why it can't be capitalized. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please ensure the GC, W, L and T columns are all of the same width (for both Season and Playoffs), it looks awful. Why colour the table, if there is already a *? indopug (talk) 11:43, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Added widths. I don't see what the problem was before. The table normally would just have colors, but per WP:ACCESSIBILITY, I've included an asterisk to denote HoF status. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:34, 23 June 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 12:05, 2 July 2008 [9].
previous FLC (04:12, 1 June 2008)
This is a co-nomination with AndonicO (talk · contribs). The major concern (and the only reason for the oppose I believe) as that this list was different from other "head coaches" lists. Anyways, that concern has now been resolved, and I believe its ready for another shot. Thanks in advance for the comments. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 21:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support (as nom) « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 19:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't believe we're allowed to support ourselves (at least, we aren't on FAC...). · AndonicO Engage. 19:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment "See also" goes before "References" per WP:LAYOUT. Gary King (talk) 06:04, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. · AndonicO Engage. 19:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- Lead image can be up to 300px according to WP:MOS#Images so have a fiddle to see what looks best.
- Isn't it better to leave the size unspecified, so that user preferences can be displayed? · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well it depends - the manual of style recommends just the lead image to be at least 300px. With other images yes, I agree, use
thumb
only (andupright
for portrait images). The Rambling Man (talk) 06:12, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well it depends - the manual of style recommends just the lead image to be at least 300px. With other images yes, I agree, use
- Isn't it better to leave the size unspecified, so that user preferences can be displayed? · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Five paragraphs in the lead is too much - WP:LEAD would probably recommend three, max, and it looks relatively easy to me for you to merge them.
- Done. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "There have been a total of six Red Wings..." a bit of redundancy here. Why not just "Six Red Wings..."?
- Done. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Leading zero or no leading zero for your %? Be consistent either way.
- Done; are the percentages usually cited as decimals? Because 0.8% is pretty low... shouldn't that be written as 80%? · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think you'll find if you read the WP:MOS, decimal numbers should take a leading zero (e.g. 0.8 rather than .8) but it does make an exception for sporting percentages where your 80% would normally be written .800. Hope that makes sense. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done; are the percentages usually cited as decimals? Because 0.8% is pretty low... shouldn't that be written as 80%? · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd reorder the citations numerically [1][4] unless you have a specific reason for [4] being more important.
- Done. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Scotty Bowman has also won it twice, but he was the coach of the Montreal Canadiens when he won this award for the first time" - not keen on the English here.
- Done. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Games coached" and "Losses" in the key.
- Done. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No spaces between the en-dash and the W/L, repeat for table.
- Is this what you mean? · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove spaces between years and en-dash per WP:DASH.
- Done. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Regular season (not Season).
- Done. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No need to relink Adams.
- Done; left a re-link in the table. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why is "Detroit Cougars/Detroit Falcons" section combined?
- I've got no idea about that, so I'll leave it to MFC. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The Detroit Falcons only lasted two years. And they had the same coach (Adams) through the Cougars, and the Falcons. I really can't think of a useful reason to split it. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 01:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure I agree - the reason to split it is to clarify that the franchise existed in three guises. So you'd only have two extra rows to add in if it was only one coach throughout. It would make it clearer to the non-experts and also to the experts if AndonicO's comment is anything to go by! The Rambling Man (talk) 06:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The Detroit Falcons only lasted two years. And they had the same coach (Adams) through the Cougars, and the Falcons. I really can't think of a useful reason to split it. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 01:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've got no idea about that, so I'll leave it to MFC. · AndonicO Engage. 01:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:41, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay then - done. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 15:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, with one comment. Change the "References" section to "Notes". Other than that I can't see anything to complain about. Cheers, Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Ditto with Julian. Can't find anything to comment on. Everything looks in order and meets the criteria. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That's because on the last FLC, you only had one reason to oppose ;) « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 17:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Nice work, the list looks great. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 22:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment—Can you please change the colouring of the separators/headers of the Cougars/Falcons/Wings? The dark red, with the bright yellow hurts my eyes. Maxim(talk) 14:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose—fails Cr. 6. It does not make good use of colours. Maxim(talk) 21:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed... « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 22:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you think of the team colours? Maxim(talk) 22:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Really nice, thanks. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 22:39, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you think of the team colours? Maxim(talk) 22:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed... « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 22:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose—fails Cr. 6. It does not make good use of colours. Maxim(talk) 21:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- "There have been 27 head coaches in franchise history" should be "There have been 27 head coaches in their franchise history"
- What's with the picture in the key?
- I think the year should be linked in the list including the term and the year of the award.
- Where are the shootout loses?
- The subtitles in the list should be the same colors as the colors of the Detroit Red Wings.
- If all of these are finished, I'll support.
Annoyomous24 (talk) (talk) 23:02, 29 June 2008 (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 User:Gimmetrow 12:30, 2 July 2008 [10].
Worked on this article in my sandbox then moved it. There aren't any pictures for the coaches becauseI could not find any images uploaded on Wikimedia. --Gman124 talk 16:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Use en dashes for year ranges (in the lead—it looks like they are properly applied in the table) per WP:DASH
Y
- Missing a period in "season[2]"?
Y
Gary King (talk) 18:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Force a TOC with Help:TOC
Done
- Otherwise, Support
Gary King (talk) 18:00, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- Confusing with Dallas Chapparels mentioned first - mention Spurs first and say something along the lines of "...and former franchise incarnation..." (or similar)
Y
- "of the original version of the " - reads odd to me. Why not something like "...who played in the ..."?
Y
- "...in Dallas. In fact, ..." a little chatty. Drop the "In fact" and merge the sentences.
Y
- Order citations numerically if possible.
- They are ordered like that automatically. --Gman124 talk 13:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, you can reorder the ref names. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:14, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Gman124 talk 15:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, you can reorder the ref names. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:14, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- They are ordered like that automatically. --Gman124 talk 13:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Expand, link and then place (NBA) after the first use of National Basketball Association.
Y
- The lead contains virtually nothing about the head coaches (except Popovich). It needs to focus on the men, not the franchise.
Y
- Surely "Loses" should be "Losses"?
Y
- "Regular Season" can just be "Regular season" and the W &ndash L should lose the spaces in the table.
Y
- No-one elected to the BHOF so axe it from the key.
Y
- 2002-03 needs en-dash (in the coach of the year).
Y
- present doesn't need to be in italics.
Y
The Rambling Man (talk) 12:38, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- I reworked the first two sentences slightly to say what the Spurs do, and to avoid repetition of the Dallas Chaparrals.
- "The team suffered from poor attendance and general disinterest in Dallas;" The team was disinterested in Dallas, or the Dallas people were disinterested in the team?
Y
- "The team suffered from poor attendance and general disinterest in Dallas; therefore, during the 1970–71 season, the name "Dallas" was dropped in favor of "Texas" and an attempt was made to make the team a regional one, but this proved a failure and the team returned full-time to Dallas in time for the 1971–72 season." Very long sentence. Should be broken into two
Y
- "and were coached by Gregg Popovich." No need for "and were"
Y
- "were coached by Gregg Popovich.", "2007 NBA Finals under Popovich.[1] Popovich is the franchise's all-time leader", "Popovich won the NBA Coach of the Year" Too many "Popovich"s. Perhaps some could be simply "he"
Y
- "and Gregg Popovich spent their entire coaching career with the Spurs." No need for his first name here.
Y
- Did you try Flickr for some free-use pics?
- I have never used that and also don't know what that is. --Gman124 talk 18:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It's a web-based image repository where some contributors license their images in a way that's compatible with upload and use on Wikipedia. Have a look at flickr.com The Rambling Man (talk) 18:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have never used that and also don't know what that is. --Gman124 talk 18:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:32, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- So after I find an image, do I have to upload it to wikipedia? and what license would that be? --Gman124 talk 18:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It would be the same licence the picture has at Flickr. See Wikipedia:Upload/Flickr. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I looked at Flickr and can't find any free images. --Gman124 talk 18:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Gman124 talk 00:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- All the refs links at the end of the lead look a bit odd, could they be placed anywhere else?
- They are for the last sentence, so I don't know where you would want me to move those. --Gman124 (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Couldn't the years in the "Term" column be linked?
- Do you mean like link to the season pages, because all season pages for Spurs don't exist yet, I will once they do. --Gman124 (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "San Antonio Spurs National Basketball Association" is there a word missing here?
Y
- No image.
- as far as I know, there isn't any free images for use on Wikimedia projects. --Gman124 (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Gman124 talk 00:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- as far as I know, there isn't any free images for use on Wikimedia projects. --Gman124 (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Buc (talk) 07:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose- Basketball-reference is your only source. You need at least one more general reference. We can't rely on just one reference.
Y
- That nba page is one loooong page, can't you find another shorter source?--Crzycheetah 22:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What do the refs in the "references" column give to this list? All the info in the table is provided by the general reference, so why are there individual references from the same website? At least provide refs from a different website.
- added one ref for Larry Brown and one for Popovich --Gman124 talk 22:22, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why did you add more? I was actually saying to remove the older ones because they don't give more info than the general reference.--Crzycheetah 22:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Gman124 talk 14:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why did you add more? I was actually saying to remove the older ones because they don't give more info than the general reference.--Crzycheetah 22:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- added one ref for Larry Brown and one for Popovich --Gman124 talk 22:22, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ref#13 should be note [a].Y
- Basketball-reference is your only source. You need at least one more general reference. We can't rely on just one reference.
--Crzycheetah 17:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the term years should be pipe-linked to the seasons because some people believe that 1996, for instance, is the 1995-96 season while in reality, it is the 1996-97 season. The links are needed to avoid this confusion.--Crzycheetah 07:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done added links to terms. --Gman124 talk 16:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support--Crzycheetah 03:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the term years should be pipe-linked to the seasons because some people believe that 1996, for instance, is the 1995-96 season while in reality, it is the 1996-97 season. The links are needed to avoid this confusion.--Crzycheetah 07:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- You should find a picture somewhere to put up on the list.
- "The franchise won their first NBA championship as the in the 1999 NBA Finals coached by Gregg Popovich." should be "The franchise won their first NBA championship in the 1999 NBA Finals while being coached by Gregg Popovich."
Y
- In the sentence, "He is the franchise's all-time leader in both regular season and playoff games coached and wins.", I think "He" should be "Popovich".
Y
- You should link "2002–03 season".
Y
- In the sentence, " Larry Brown is the only member of the franchise that has been inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame as coach.", the last words should be "as a coach."
Y
- In the sentence, "Cliff Hagan, Max Williams, Bill Blakely, Dave Brown, Morris McHone, Jerry Tarkanian and Popovich spent their entire coaching career with the Spurs.", the last words should be "spent their entire coaching careers with the Spurs."
Y
- "Games Coached" should be "Games coached".
Y
- If all is finished, I'll support.
Y
Annoyomous24 (talk) 23:30, 29 June 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 16:40, 1 July 2008 [11].
I'm nominating this list for featured list candidacy as I believe this list meets all the criteria, a list similar to this List of Masters Tournament champions has already passed feature status and this list is similar in style. Thanks in advance or your comments NapHit (talk) 17:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments There's a few accessibility issues: information shouldn't be described only by images (the flag icons) or colors (the amateur/playoff things). Some sort of text-based equivalent is needed. But, that doesn't necessarily mean you have to get rid of the flag icons and the colors, but by themselves they aren't enough. Also, the year column should be centered. Also, it would be good to separate footnotes and citations into separate sections.Drewcifer (talk) 18:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There is text for the colours which indicate playoffs, every colour has an accompanying footnote. I'm opposed to the idea of using the text for flags, as its quite clear by the flag what country it is and many other lists such as List of UEFA Cup winning managers have used this format and passed featured list status. NapHit (talk) 18:38, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Adding text is encouraged for accessibility reasons, per WP:ACCESS, where in some cases Wikipedia articles are read without images (such as for mobile devices). Gary King (talk) 18:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok I've fixed the flags they now all have the three letter after the flags. NapHit (talk) 16:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks good. Also take a look at the other issues I brought up, since those have yet to be addressed as far as I can tell.. Drewcifer (talk) 21:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done it all now I think NapHit (talk) 17:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks good. Also take a look at the other issues I brought up, since those have yet to be addressed as far as I can tell.. Drewcifer (talk) 21:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok I've fixed the flags they now all have the three letter after the flags. NapHit (talk) 16:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Adding text is encouraged for accessibility reasons, per WP:ACCESS, where in some cases Wikipedia articles are read without images (such as for mobile devices). Gary King (talk) 18:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks great. Drewcifer (talk) 19:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Use something like {{flag|USA}} to show some text. Gary King (talk) 18:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- You can make the lead image bigger (as long as the resolution supports it) per WP:MOS#Images - it encourages lead images to be at least 300px (I think 250px in this case as the image isn't that big).
- Try a more imaginative lead sentence than saying "This is a [TITLE OF LIST]".
- "Tiger Woods holds the distinction of being the most strokes under par for 72 holes. He was 12 strokes under par (-12) when he won in 2000.[6]" consider merging these two sentences.
- "(n/a) = Information not available" looks odd as it's bigger than the rest of the legend. Also, why is not available in italics? (n/a) isn't...
- You need to explain E for even par.
- I see it in ref 7 (explanation of E), but you need a space before the E.
- ref 28 appears to be missing a full stop.
The Rambling Man (talk) 07:30, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've fixed everything you mentioned except the image size which balloons in size when I put 250px in instead of upright. NapHit (talk) 16:07, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments Just a couple for now.
- Remove "The following is a list of U.S. Open (golf) champions." which simply repeats the article title, and open with something that engages the reader.
- done NapHit (talk) 13:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- besides the salmon, blue and green shaded cells, you need some kind of marker to identify, per WP:ACCESS. Asterisks, daggers and carets would be fine.
- done NapHit (talk) 13:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:48, 23 June 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 16:40, 1 July 2008 [12].
Hello, another Victoria Cross recipients list. This is similar to the featured lists List of Victoria Cross recipients of the Royal Navy and List of Victoria Cross recipients of the Indian Army. It is comprehensive, it works (sorting all sorted), it is referenced and it as pictures. As such, I feel it meets all the criteria, I hope you agree. Thanks. Woody (talk) 19:13, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Use en dashes for page ranges in the references per WP:DASH. Gary King (talk) 21:20, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed thanks. Woody (talk) 21:30, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
More comments:
- Force a TOC please, so people don't have to scroll down to get to the References. Help:TOC will help you with that.
- "1857-02-24." – I assume this is the publication date in the references. If so, wiklink it, otherwise, some people might not recognize that this is a date.
- "Chapter 8 pp.68–90" – use a semicolon as a separator before the page, especially if you are going to do that with the previous reference
Gary King (talk) 21:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have fixed the refs, though I haven't added the __FORCETOC__ as frankly, to me, it looks stupid. There are only two sections to this; Recipients and References and the TOC becomes slipped in between the Lead and the
==Recipients==
Do you feel this is absolutely neccessary? Woody (talk) 21:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Yes; its usefulness outweighs its aesthetic effect. I usually strongly recommend adding it if the article is long enough to require that I scroll; it provides a quick glimpse as to what the article contains. For instance, if I visit this list, and am curious to know if there is a See Also section because I'd like to see similar topics, how would I know – without scrolling to the bottom? The TOC will tell me. Gary King (talk) 22:33, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You think people find it hard to scroll to the bottom? See also sections aren't a prerequisite for FA, indeed, they are seen as topics that should be expanded upon in the text. If you want similar topics, go to the navbox which isn't in the TOC. In fact, the recipients heading isn't actually neccessary so all it would be is a hyperlink to the references section. As far as I am aware, it is limited to three sub-headings for a reason. This isn't an article, it starts off with list of... so to the perceptive reader, they can get a quick glimpse of what it contains. It is personal preference as far as I am concerned. Perhaps a note on WT:FLC to gauge opinion? Woody (talk) 23:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes; its usefulness outweighs its aesthetic effect. I usually strongly recommend adding it if the article is long enough to require that I scroll; it provides a quick glimpse as to what the article contains. For instance, if I visit this list, and am curious to know if there is a See Also section because I'd like to see similar topics, how would I know – without scrolling to the bottom? The TOC will tell me. Gary King (talk) 22:33, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have fixed the refs, though I haven't added the __FORCETOC__ as frankly, to me, it looks stupid. There are only two sections to this; Recipients and References and the TOC becomes slipped in between the Lead and the
- Support This looks good now. Gary King (talk) 07:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- WP:MOS#Images recommends lead images be no smaller than 300px so feel free to force the Sevastopol picture up a bit.
- The Crimea War page says it started in October 1853 (or am I missing something?)
- "large scale" should probably be "large-scale".
- "sale of commissions" forgive my utter ignorance but I don't know what this means at all. Can you expand on it a touch for non-experts?
- Anything special about recipients who had multiple dates of action?
- I probably said it before and you doubtless gave me a good answer but you could include a few portraits of the recipients down the right hand side of the table, just to make it aesthetically more pleasing.
- Sebastopol links to a disambiguation page.
- Balaclava links to the ski-mask.
- For George Strong, why is individual year linked?
That's it from me. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed the image, fixed large-scale, Sebastapol, Balaclava and Strong link. Does the addition of the wikilinked Sale of commissions assuage your concerns?
- In terms of the start date of the Crimean War, Britain and France declared war on Russia on 28 March 1854. As with any conflict the preceding events and skirmishes are seen by some as part of the War, not by others. On the British side, 1854 is seen as the start date. See Talk:World War II for a lengthy argument on the start dates of wars.
- In terms of multiple dates, special in that they were recognised for multiple acts of bravery, not that uncommon in the early (first 40 years) of the VC. I have added links to their gazette entries.
- Images: We have been through this before ;) If images were placed on some of the more cramped VC articles, then they would get very cramped at lower resolutions. When I go down in resolution, there is simply no room to put them in other articles. With this article, I don't get that problem, but, there is a shortage of pictures for Crimean War recipients. Woody (talk) 21:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments left on talkpage
- Notes left on Talk:List of Crimean War Victoria Cross recipients by User:Anthony Staunton. Woody (talk) 23:37, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Good work as normal, and the previosu queries seem to have been addressed. David Underdown (talk) 11:08, 1 July 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 16:40, 1 July 2008 [13].
Self-nom: I greatly expanded and worked on this list, and believe it meets the criteria. RedThunder 20:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Use en dashes per WP:DASH for numerical ranges such as "1908-present" and "1901-1907".
- I don't think any of the years need to be linked. They don't add much more for the reader to help understand the article, and per MOS:UNLINKYEARS.
- Unbold all that bold in the lead. Perhaps bold "team captains for the Boston Red Sox" but remove any links in all bold text, per WP:LEAD.
- "as the Sox.[2]" – remove italics, and change to "as "the Sox".[2]"
Otherwise, Support.
Gary King (talk) 17:56, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- "From 1912 to the present, the Red Sox have played in Fenway Park" - beforehand (i.e. from the start of this list?)
- "Most fans simply refer to them as the Sox." - prove it, or else it's WP:OR.
- "This role has been particularly important during eras and situations in which managers and coaches have been precluded by the rules from interacting with players on the field while the game is in progress." - again, prove it. Sounds good but needs citation.
- Gaps in captains from 1923 to 1940, 1942 to 1966, 1967 to 1969, 1989 to 2005... needs explanation otherwise the list looks far from complete.
- Dick Hoblitzel caption needs no period as it's a fragment.
- Ref 16 has a spare period.
That's ma lot. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Perhaps you could add explanations about why there were several long periods where there was no captain. Also, you should add at least one reliable source list of captains. The sources prove that those individuals were captains, but they don't prove that there wasn't anyone else, which is why a list source would be great. -- Scorpion0422 22:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Wagner and Yastrzemski should be in different rows for each time they captained.
- Authors for references 9 and 16 please
- Reference 13 is a footnote
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC) Comments[reply]
- What does the opening sentence offer? "The following is a list of team captains for the Boston Red Sox American League franchise". We can gather this information from the article's title
- Find a way to engage the reader, other than "The following is a list of team captains for the Boston Red Sox". Articles don't begin with "The following is an article about blue iguanas."
- An explanation and references for why there are no captains in the periods when there aren't. Right now it could be that you don't know and put that there as an easy way to get around it.
- Apologies, I didn't see that ref 6 covers everything. You can remove it if you want! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This shows the average reader that everything is covered with sources, contrary to what some believe about Wikipedia, so I think I will keep it there. RedThunder 16:02, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Apologies, I didn't see that ref 6 covers everything. You can remove it if you want! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The New York Times, Boston Herald and Boston Globe are publications, so they should be italicized in the references. And wikilinked.
- Ref 16 still needs doing. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Comment[reply]
- How and why were there times when they had no captain? Buc (talk) 07:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There were periods of time where there was no captian awarded on the team, but no source says why. The book only says "no captain period of time. RedThunder 21:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The "this is a comprehensive list" thing is bad. Don't force the bolded title thing. Drewcifer (talk) 16:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done RedThunder 21:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- Why say no captain in 1923 when you have two in the table that captained in 1923? Same for '42 and '69.
- Carl Yastrzemski row is repeated.
- what about 1984?
- I know you've sourced the lack of captains but it needs to be explained in the lead as well - it's unusual. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment How did Harry Hooper become captain when he wasn't even active? Annoyomous24 (talk) 22:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- In the sentence, "They are a member and current champions of both the Major League Baseball’s (MLB) American League Eastern Division and of the American League (AL).", They are a member shouls be They are members.
- This list should be names List of Boston Red Sox captains.
- You should divide the captains from the Boston Americans by putting Boston Americans above the captains from the Boston Americans and Boston Red Sox below the captains from the Boston Americans.
- If all of that is finished, I'll support. Annoyomous24 (talk) 22:27, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - Well done! Annoyomous24 (talk) 22:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Repeat comment
- What happened in 1984? No captain? It needs noting.
- "No captain 1924–1940[6]" but then the next row says Foxx started in 1940...
- Same for "No captain 1990–2005[6]".
- Clear these up and I'm done. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 1 July 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 07:52, 1 July 2008 [14].
previous FLC (04:49, 30 May 2008)
Renomination (self nomination): I believe I have addressed all the concerns of the previous FLC , which were mainly referencing issues, visual appearance issues, and thoroughness of some explanations. The only exception is that Crzycheetah still experiences a long scroll bar due to some templates (which have been identified, but there's no work around that I know of). I've contacted the author of the templates, and had no reply from him in a month. I've contacted the Village pump and no one even gave a comment. I've tried multiple things and none of them worked. Since this is IMO, a minor visual annoyance that seems to be exclusive to Crzycheetah (I tried at least 10 different computers with different OS and different browsers), and that I gave it my best try, I am resubmitting the list of baryons. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 03:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- That is one really long signature you have (over a dozen lines!)
Remove bold from linked text or links from bold text per WP:LEAD.
Gary King (talk) 16:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Reply to User:Gary King:
- But the bold is there because of WP:LEAD...
- Yeah I noticed my sig was incredibly massive. I'm trying to find a better way to do things. Headbomb16:17, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
More specifically, per WP:BOLDTITLE, "Avoid links in the bold title words." Gary King (talk) 16:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support This article looks good now. Gary King (talk) 01:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
Any reason why triquarks is in italics? Seems unique."Spin, orbital angular momentum , and total angular momentum" remove space before the second comma.Refs [4] and [5] need to be the other side of the full stop.First image in isospin section has a full stop in the caption - not needed as it's a fragment."this wasn't known" was not - avoid contractions."anti-quark" or "anti quark" - consistency required.Remove spaces between Particle name and reference in the table.Use proper notes in the table rather than your own version."The specific values of the name hasn't been decided yet. Will probably end up to something close to Σb(5810)" avoid contractions, second sentence should be written as English, add a full stop at the end and avoid phrases like "end up to something close to..." - non-encyclopaedic."Some controversy exists about this data. See references" Specifically which references?"Charmed Theta" should be "charmed Theta" for consistency with the rest of the table.For web references, best to use {{cite web}} and fill in as many parameters as possible, such asaccessdate
,author
,title
etc.First and last non-specific references appear to use a hyphen to separate page ranges (if that's what they are) rather than the en-dash.Further reading can also use the {{cite web}} template.Isn't category:Particle physics a sub-category of category:Physics? If so you can axe the latter cat.
The Rambling Man (talk) 07:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've implemented most of them now.
- Any idea about how to handles notes automatically? If I use <ref> tags, they get mixed up with the references, and I really want them to be immediately under the table.
- About {{cite web}} for the web references... it's already used...?
- I'll implement {{cite web}} for the further readings section later today. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 15:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I tried using {{citeweb}}, but I found it made things kinda ugly. Plus it's kinda misleading to use {{citeweb}} since it's not a citation. I hope you don't mind, and if you do mind, then check the other featured lists. I tried 10 and I haven't seen one that used {{citeweb}} for external links.Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 14:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, notes. Yeah, I'll go dig up an example. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:37, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Here you go - List of Governors of Ohio shows how it's done. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- <ref name=PDGProton>Yao et al. (2006): [http://pdg.lbl.gov/2007/listings/s016.pdf Particle listings—Proton]</ref> doesn't look like it's using the template to me...! The Rambling Man (talk) 15:37, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll look into the List of Governors of Ohio later today.
- These refs were done like this on purpose. The reason is all these refs are actually the same document, but the Particle Data Group chopped it up in these sections for the online version so you don't have to download a 1200 page PDF everytime. The "true" ref is Yao et al. (2006) (with the full ref given below). The link is given as a convenience, not as a "citation". Dunno if that made sense.
- Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 15:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, understood. Not a huge deal, just a little confusing. You could manually add accessdate style text to make it appear like a cite web...? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- * Yeah, I guess I could. I'll think of something. Again that'll happen later today.
I also noticed that <ref name=ParticlePhysicsOverview>{{cite web |url=http://filer.case.edu/sjr16/advanced/extras_particlephys.html |title=Physics Particle Overview — Baryons|accessdate= 2008-04-20}}</ref> probably needs to be reformated into something cuter for the short ref version, and put in the "full reference" section. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 16:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- * Yeah, I guess I could. I'll think of something. Again that'll happen later today.
I've addressed everything you've listed. Hopefully this was everything, but if you have anything else that makes you iffy about placing a bold support, someone on this page, go ahead and mention it. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 15:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Very nice list! Some minor things:
In the parity section you write the wavefunction as |psi(x)> but the wavefunction is, of course, the complex number <x|psi>, which you should call psi(x). If you consider the given function of x as an element of Hilbert space then you could still denote that function by a Dirac ket, but then the argument x should not be used in the ket (an argument in the ket, like a time variable, means that for every value of that argument you have some different element of Hilber space). So, I would just replace the Dirac ket by psi(x).
It would be nice if you could show how isospin symmetry of strong interactions explains certain branching ratios in strong decays. So, you give an example of some particle X that decays into another particle Y. You apply a ladder operator on both sides and then X becomes some other particle but Y becomes some linear combination of two other particles, the absolute value squares of the amplitudes are the relative decay probabilities. This kind of argument is very easy to follow for people who know only the very basics of quantum mechanics but haven't seen any complicated particle physics stuff yet. Count Iblis (talk) 18:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You're right about the ket thing, and I've changed it. It was an abuse of notation on my part (bad Headbomb, bad baaaaaaad Headbomb).
- As for the isospin symmetry explaining the branching ratios, I don't know anything about that. I've fiddled around with the ladder operators, but only to check if my wavefunctions were consistent, and to "crack" what the hell was isospin. I've been thinking of adding a decay section, but I think that would be more appropriate for an article on decay, or perhaps for the baryon article (which needs a lot of work), as that is not required to make sense of the list of baryons.
- Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 19:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I really don't want to comment much on this one because I feel that to support or oppose something that is far beyond my comprehension is unfair. However, the opening sentence, "This is a list of known and predicted baryons." is rather uninspiring. Something more engaging should be used to interest the reader, rather than a copy of the article title. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well I wrote it with non-experts in mind. Two months ago I didn't know one thing about baryons other than there were made of "three quarks". I wrote the list as a way to understand what there were, what made them tick etc... Being a n00b at baryons allowed me to write the explanations from the perspective of a guy who didn't "get it" until a minute ago, so can see why someone is confused by the usual explanations. I can't say that you'll get everything in a quick read, but you'll certainly "get it" a lot more than if you read any of the reference provided. If I did my job right, you should never feel lost, even in a quick read, and while you might not "get" why something is important (parity comes to mind, since it's just something that some info about the shape of the wavefunction), sitting there and reading things carefully should make nod along the way, rather than pull your hair and wonder if I'm speaking in Swahili. It's surprisingly not that complicated and I'm really pissed at the authors of particle physics textbooks to explain things in ways that are completely unhelpful which make it sound much more complicated than it really is.I've had the list reviewed by many particles physicists (at least 4), both on wiki and outside of wiki, so I wouldn't be too worried about factual accuracy if I were you. I can guarantee you the lists themselves are complete, accurate, and up to date as I took great care to find a reference for absolutely everything that is written in those lists. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 06:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- OK. Well it's 12.30am right now so I don't want to read it while I'm feeling tired! I'll do it in the morning after some sleep! :) Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Cool beans. If you come up with a better intro line, don't be afraid to mention it. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 07:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You could just axe the first sentence entirely. It adds virtually nothing that isn't in the title of the list and in the remainder of the lead. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright, it's slashed. Not sure it's my preferred version of things, but I can live with it. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 11:43, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sentence is back, but is "detached" from the lead. This should make all of us happier than a kid in candyland. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 14:47, 23 June 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 07:52, 1 July 2008 [15].
This is the discography of British rock group Kaiser Chiefs. I am nominating this list because I believe it to be complete and well referenced. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 17:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Disambiguate the link "War Child". Gary King (talk) 18:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 18:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments - a well put together list though, the chart positions have no references to reliable sources, also the release of the DVD, and the notes in the EP section cannot be verified as they too do not have references to reliable sources.--SRX--LatinoHeat 21:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 03:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Further Comments - Looks more verifiable, but the Video album needs a ref to a reliable source.--SRX--LatinoHeat 14:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Any details/information about the DVD release can be found in the general references section. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 03:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Further Comments - Looks more verifiable, but the Video album needs a ref to a reliable source.--SRX--LatinoHeat 14:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 03:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "one music DVD on B-Unique Records." Why are you in particular pointing out the label this was released on? Perhaps this should read video album instead.
- "Eil.com" is not a reliable source.
- "Contained b-sides, live recordings and an exclusive remix." Not a necessary piece of information.
- "Contained a documentary, live performances and music videos." Weird tense, fragment sentence (no f stop required) - Perhaps this note isn't neccessary.
- Instead of having the title "DVDs", have "Videos". This would make more sense, as why would any thing below the title "DVDs" not be in the DVD format, as you have noted.
- You say "discography of the Kaiser Chiefs", but then you say "Kaiser Chiefs are currently recording..." Where is the "the". Consistency?
That's me. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 12:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I've added all your comments into the article. Thanks for your suggestions. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 13:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Music video directors need reliable sources.
- Done. All the video directors are referenced using their official websites or their production company sites. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 16:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic work so far. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 15:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment
- Keep all the Title columns of the same width.
- Can you expand the lead? See: The Strokes discography or The Libertines discography. indopug (talk) 15:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Expanded lead. Hopefully I got everything. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 16:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Your dates have to be in the [[1 January]] [[2008]] format throughout
- What about the Misc. section title width? For consistency name the Song column in misc and music video to Title.
- I think remove applying a width to the Year columns as they have the same widths as the individual years. Remove align center too for the years too casuse they get kinda redundant. indopug (talk) 03:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Again, hopefully I fixed everything. All the title columns are the same width now. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 04:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm nervy about using the band's own site for sales information. Self-published sources are discouraged and there is clear personal interests involved.
- I found another website that verifies the sales from their official website. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 02:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Is Acharts.us reliable?
- I believe it to be. I have checked their charts against charts published from other official websites and they all appear to be correct. Charts from the UK cannot be found online elsewhere (unless you use everyHit.com). -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 02:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You might want to use Webcite on the band's official site etc. These often change without warning. indopug (talk) 10:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I don't think contactmusic is accepted as a reliable source. indopug (talk) 02:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Again, hopefully I fixed everything. All the title columns are the same width now. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 04:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll have to remove it then because I cannot find another "reliable" source to support the sales. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 15:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have found an article from The Times which contains the album's sales in the UK. I have used this to replace world sales because another reliable source cannot be found. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 15:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Expanded lead. Hopefully I got everything. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 16:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks very good! Drewcifer (talk) 02:06, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 05:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments Good work so far. A few suggestions:
- I highly recommend redoing the citations using citation templates, since a few of them seem off format-wise. Though you did do a fairly good job of it by hand.
- They look fine to me. It's the same format I have used in past discography FL's. I guess I could go over them all again. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 04:42, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There's not need to repeat the chart sources in the general references, since you do that through in-line citations as well.
- Consider bolding the album titles in the "Studio albums", "Video albums", and "EP" tables.
- The "EP" seciton should be called "Extended plays" not EP. Same with the first mention of an EP in the lead.
- Was "Lap of Honour" released in Japan or only in Japan. May want to make that clear.
- The Year columns need to be center-aligned. This isn't a big deal in most of the tables, but for some reason the years in "Miscellaneous" table look a little funky to me.
- I think that's only because it had its width set to 33. I removed it, must be better now. indopug (talk) 02:51, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- British Phonographic Industry should be wikilinked in citation #6.
- B-Unique is called "B-Unique" in the first table, but "B-Unique Records" in the last one.
- Is it really necessary to wikilink "interviews" in the lead?
- "It did well on the charts" is a little opinion-y. I think the sentence is stronger without. Drewcifer (talk) 21:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Added your suggestions. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 04:42, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't force the bolded title in the lead.
- Is there a particular reason "You Can Have It All" isn't in the singles chart? I know it's "limited edition" and all that junk, but it's still a single. You can specify it's availability very easily with a footnote while still including it in the singles table. Drewcifer (talk) 19:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 19:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Further Its looking very good now; I just have minor points.
- There's a lot of redundant code: assigning width to the Year column is unnecessary as the width of "Year" and "2008" (any year for that matter) is the same. align="left" is redundant as it is the default setting to align it that way. See my edit to the singles table.
- rowspan="1" is redundant too.
- <br> should be <br /> to allow XHTML compatibility
- There are still a few; ctrl+F for <br> and then replace.
- I think BBC.co.uk and Billboard.com should actually be BBC and Billboard in the references.--indopug (talk) 20:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I still see quite a few. Again, use ctrl F. indopug (talk) 11:30, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 03:06, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Went over it again. I believe I got them all this time -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 16:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nice work. indopug (talk) 17:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 05:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it "Kaiser Chiefs are currently recording their third album", or "Kaiser Chiefs is currently recording their third album". There's only one band, but it sounds odd as "is". I'm unsure of this. A wikilink to discography in the first sentence would be nice, but I think everyone else has covered the things to be resolved.
Support Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oops.. make that Conditional support. The ordering of sections should follow the ordering of the infobox. Or vica-versa. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 19:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Still conditional, as I'm unsure whether "Kaiser Chiefs are currently recording their third album" is correct, or "Kaiser Chiefs is currently recording its third album". There's only one band, but it sounds odd as "is". I'm unsure of this and have asked at WT:MOS#Is a musical band referred to in the single or plural tense?. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:20, 1 July 2008 (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 User:The Rambling Man 07:52, 1 July 2008 [16].
Nishkid is trekking the African safari as part of the FLC contest. Hope you enjoy the list! Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 23:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment "1886, The Sultan of Zanzibar" – Lowercase the "the", unless it's part of the title? Gary King (talk) 00:46, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Weird, I had taken this article off FLC before your comment (I still had some issues I had to work out). Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 03:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh okay; I suppose I had the window open before you closed it, and then I edited it afterwards. Gary King (talk) 07:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Weird, I had taken this article off FLC before your comment (I still had some issues I had to work out). Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 03:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: Excellent list!--Dem393 (talk) 20:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- "This is a list of the Sultans of Zanzibar." We know this from the article's title. Please find something more engaging for the reader.
- Zanzibar needs wikilinking on it's first use (but not where it's bolded)
- It was already wikilinked on first non-bold use. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "In 1832[1] or 1840,[2][A]" refs should go after punctuation. Perhaps also try "Some time between 1832 and 1840,[1][2][A]"
- The ref here does not need to be placed after the punctuation. That MoS guideline only regards the placement of a ref directly after or before a punctuation mark. So, "In 1832[1] or 1840[2][A]," wouldn't be appropriate, but "In 1832[1] or 1840,[2][A]" would be. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why wikilink plantations, but not cloves? I would think cloves is more important
- Link added. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Do the sultans names need to be bolded in the table?
- No, but I've stuck with this convention on all my lists. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename the notes column as comments, and create a notes column for the footnotes and references
- Unnecessary. Clumping up notes/references in a single column just makes matters confusing. It's better to have the refs and notes where they are relevant. "Comments" doesn't seem like an appropriate title for a column, as it gives off the aura of personal commentary (when it's not, really). I think the current title is appropriate. I'll rename the "Notes" heading to "Footnotes". Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but did they gain independence from Great Britain, or the United Kingdom? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- UK, fixed. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 19:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- 1832/1840 in lead probably needs explaining in the lead rather than footnoting since it's quite confusing.
- Yeah, per Matthew, I would imagine it to be the UK.
- Why is each sultan's name in bold?
- Just a personal preference. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 19:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Rule in the table need not be capitalised.
- "This treaty essentially turned..." - what does "essentially" add/mean here?
- ref [8] seems incomplete.
- ref's [20] and [21] don't have a p. in front of page numbers.
The Rambling Man (talk) 18:35, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.