Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/November 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:Scorpion0422 22:28, 11 November 2008 [1].

---

List of mergers and acquisitions by Microsoft

previous FLC

This is a massive, massive list. I submitted it seven months ago; it failed. This is what it looked like before. It has come a long way since then. Gary King (talk) 20:36, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Support - This is downright massive. Definitely featured list material. My only question is - do you have anymore prose? The whole body is chart.Mitch32^(UP) 21:47, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I think I pretty much bombarded the lead with prose. I think it's enough. Gary King (talk) 21:51, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Support - Prose checks out fine, so does the list and sources to my knowledge to meet WP:WIAFL, good work on such a massive list.--S_RX 14:43, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:49, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• No need of linking in the caption when you have already linked to those places in the lead.
• "and acquired 18 in firms in 2006"—What is an "in firm"?
• "including: UMT-Software and IP Assets, MotionBridge, Seadragon Software, Apptimum, Onfolio, Lionhead Studios, AssetMetrix, Massive Incorporated, Vexcel, DeepMetrix, ProClarity, iView Multimedia, Winternals Software, Whale Communications, Gteko, DesktopStandard, Colloquis, and Accipiter Solutions." Do you need to list every company? If you do, then "including" is the wrong word. See Wikipedia:MOS#Subset terms. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:30, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Done Gary King (talk) 17:04, 9 November 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:Scorpion0422 22:28, 11 November 2008 [2].

---

Rage Against the Machine discography

After a "little" cleanup, I think this ready for the battle. Cannibaloki 18:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved review by SRX

Review by SrX

• Rage Against the Machine is a Los Angeles-based band formed in 1991 by Zack de la Rocha, Tom Morello, Tim Commerford and Brad Wilk. - it should state in parenthesis who plays what in the band.
  • Don't added these details before, because I thought someone would ask me to remove them.
• The band is noted for its blend of rap, heavy metal, punk and funk as well as its revolutionary politics and lyrics. - how about The band is noted for it's blend of rap, heavy metal, punk, and funk; it is also known for it's revolutionary politics and lyrics.
  • Reworded.
• The full-length spawned the singles "Killing in the Name", "Freedom", "Bombtrack" and "Bullet in the Head". - full-length? Was the self named album full length, if so it should be noted before this sentence.
• Five singles were released from the album, the most successful being "Bulls on Parade". - how is "Bulls of Parade" most successful? Should be stated and sourced.
  • I removed the two sentences, even with references, sounds very strange and not add anything to in the text.
• Tables look fine, all publishers in the refs that can be linked need to be wikilinked.--S_RX 21:22, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Added only on the first occurrence. Cannibaloki 01:24, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Wrong, they all should be linked, you can't guarantee that the first occurrence of the ref will be clicked.--S_RX 15:04, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
      • Hmmmm, done. Cannibaloki 20:47, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Support - my review was resolved to meet WP:WIAFL.--S_RX 21:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Support Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "The band is noted for it's"—"it's"-->its.
  • Fixed.
• "whilst"-->although or while.
  • Fixed.
• "Their next full-length" Full length what?
  • Reworded.
• "The Battle of Mexico City, a video album composed of a recording of a 1999 live performance in Mexico City, saw release in 2001, and 2003 saw the release of a live album titled Live at the Grand Olympic Auditorium, an edited recording of the band's final two concerts on September 12 and 13, 2000 at the Grand Olympic Auditorium."-->The Battle of Mexico City, a video album composed of a recording of a 1999 live performance in Mexico City, was released in 2001. In 2003, a live album titled Live at the Grand Olympic Auditorium was released. It was an edited recording of the band's final two concerts on September 12 and 13, 2000 at the Grand Olympic Auditorium.
  • Reworded.
• Could some information about the lone see also link, 2001 Clear Channel memorandum, be integrated into the article? Dabomb87 (talk) 03:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Information about this fact were added, now it is up to you ascertain whether this same information are well written. =P Cannibaloki 15:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
    • I fixed the minor grammar issues, but I want to know how the memorandum affected the band's future albums and songwriting. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
      • Well, this happened when the band had already split, so I tried even if some of the members spoke something about, but so far not found anything. If you have something talking about this, please help me!
        • It's fine as is. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
          • Okay, thanks for help and ideas. Cannibaloki 01:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
• "Their first release was 1992's eponymous Rage Against the Machine"-->They released their debut album, the eponymous Rage Against the Machine album, in 1992;... Dabomb87 (talk) 15:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Done. Cannibaloki 21:03, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Note I did not evaluate the non-English sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:09, 4 November 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:Scorpion0422 22:28, 11 November 2008 [3].

---

List of awards and nominations received by S.H.E

If it can get one support, I'm sure it can get two. Or three. Preferably more. Pandacomics (talk) 04:48, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support per previous nom. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:15, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
• Weak SupportComment I think Template:Zh icon should be used for all Chinese references.—Chris! _ct 23:52, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

But with the use of the citeweb template, isn't that already done? (All Chinese-language refs in the References section have "in Chinese" in brackets.) Pandacomics (talk) 00:30, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I still prefer the Zh icon template since I think the refs would look better that way.—Chris! _ct 02:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Note I did not evaluate the non-English sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:02, 4 November 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:Scorpion0422 22:28, 11 November 2008 [4].

---

List of Nobel Laureates in Literature

Another Nobel laureates list. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:50, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

"Restart", nothing negative, but not enough to reach consensus
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Wow, I have only read books by two of those authors (Lord of the Flies by William Golding and several of Winston Churchill's books, although I have read some of the poems by Kipling and Yeats). Anyway, I would have preferred that you wait until the Chemistry one was finished, because some of the kinks in it are still being worked out. -- Scorpion0422 01:30, 17 October 2008 (UTC) Most of the concerns appear as if they have been addressed. The image issue looks like the only one that's remaining, and I'm fairly confident I can address any issues that come up. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 01:43, 17 October 2008 (UTC) Comments I copyedited the article and left some inline comments. Gary King (talk) 02:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC) Comment As an article, good work. The only issue I found was a hyphen used in a year range, which I changed to an en dash. However, I cannot support until the images have been checked. As an example Image:T-mommsen-2.jpg has a deprecated tag. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC) I replaced that particular image, and I'll try to find an image reviewer. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 02:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC) Comment Sources look good. It'd be nice if the entire article didn't rely on one source, however. Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC) Comment Have you gone through and made sure that all of the nationalities match the Nobel website? Random users tend to change them, so if you haven't, you probably should. -- Scorpion0422 01:35, 19 October 2008 (UTC) Finished double checking. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 22:03, 23 October 2008 (UTC) What is the status on the images? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC) Eco told me that he would do the images a while ago, but he's been busy. I've asked him again here, and I'm awaiting a response. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 03:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried contacting David Fuchs for an image check? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Did so. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 02:16, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• Sigh... there was a time when I wasn't known as an image guy and people didn't ask me about such things. What the hell happened? :P Anyhow, since this is such a pain in the ass and I'm playing DotA with some friends at the same time, I'll go in stages:
  • Image:Carducci.jpg - needs author and date so we can verify PD.
    • Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Image:Gerhart Hauptmann.jpg - image needs description, et al, redundant copy of image
    • Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Image:Karl Gjellerup.jpg - has no author.
    • Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Image:Carl spitteler 1905.jpg - same as above.
    • Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 20:05, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

That's it for that batch. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I've added more images in an attempt to be helpful. Feel free to shout at me if this was a bad idea. Ironholds (talk) 23:49, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• Yeah, a bad idea. So many of the images of the supposedly "free" images on Commons have bad sources and assertions of permission (PD 70+ being the most common for our case) that it's hard to find a good image. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 00:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

• Grrr when checking the articles of the guys without images, about half of them did have an image there. Why isn't it here too? Nergaal (talk) 00:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• Because the sources/permissions are bad or nonexistent. They're not used for a reason. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 02:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Images, Part II:

• Image:Wyczolkowski-portretReymonta.jpg - author for license?

• Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 19:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

• Image:SinclairLewis1930.jpg contradictory license

• Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 19:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

• Image:John galsworthy.jpg wrong license (no author)

• Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 19:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

• Image:FransEemilSillanpää.jpg duplicate licenses

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 19:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 21:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Think that's it for that bunch. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 19:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Part III:

• Image:Russell1907-2.jpg - since we don't have the author and it wasn't from 1730 or something, I don't think the PD-Art tag can apply.

• Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 01:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• Image:Juan Ramón Jiménez.jpg - deadlinks, don't know if the author-death applies

• Replaced. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 01:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• Image:Albert Camus, gagnant de prix Nobel, portrait en buste, posé au bureau, faisant face à gauche, cigarette de tabagisme.jpg - unsure about the claim, as there's no OTRS or similar verification.

• Added permission. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 01:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• Image:Sholokhov-1938.jpg no date of author death

• Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 01:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• Image:Eyvindj.gif no indication of date of publication.

• Cut. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 01:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

All other images check out. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 20:17, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Think that's it for that batch. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 01:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I think that the images all meet criteria now. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 03:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Support My issues have been resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Support - I'd like to see it featured. Irregulargalaxies (talk) 03:18, 10 November 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:Scorpion0422 22:28, 11 November 2008 [5].

---

List of Bleach episodes (season 6)

Nominating another episode list. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 11:29, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:57, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "and enters the real world world" I assume the repetition was not intentional.

• Fixed fixed. :) — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

• "Kon continues to flee from the Grand Fisher, despite receiving help from Lirin, Kurōdo, and Noba, he is caught." First comma should be a semicolon.

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

• "Kisuke Urahara appears and converses with Isshin concerning the arrancar under the command of former Soul Reaper captain Sōsuke Aizen, and the Visoreds." "concerning"-->about, I think.

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

• "Ikkaku fights Edorad, who is forced to release his zanpakutō after failing to predict Ikkaku's unorthodox fighting style." "predict" is not the right word, maybe counter or anticipate? (depending on the meaning)

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

• "Hitsugaya fights Shawlong, who overpowers him despite the fact" "despite the fact"-->even though.

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

• "Matsumoto receives confirmtion"—typo.

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

• "100,000 human souls in Karakura Town to create a key to the dimension the King of Soul Society lives in, and overthrow the king.At Urahara's shop, Chad is fighting against Renji's bankai as training, and Ishida trains with his father under Karakura Hospital." Space after the period, inconsistent tense ("fighting...as training" but "trains").

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

• "Matsumoto and Shōta mange"—typo.

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Dabomb87 (talk) 03:06, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Think that's it. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Note that I did not evaluate the non-English sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• Support prose and sources all look good, and its in keeping with the other Bleach episode FLs. Only minor nit pick is that I think that should be 21st not 21th? :-P -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

• In the lead, "Rolling star" → "Rolling Star" and "ALONES" → "Alones": per WP:MOS-JA#Capitalization of words in Roman script, WP:MOS-JA#Titles of books, CDs, movies, etc., and related guidelines, titles should use English title casing, and not only an initial cap or all caps.

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• Check the episode titles for title casing, as well.
  • Related to this, I believe the current opinion of those well-versed in MOS-JA is to title case rōmaji as titles as well, as they are also English, but I could be wrong.
    • I'm not sure what the current consensus is there, but you're free to adjust the title casing to what you believe is appropriate. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
• Episode 122 EnglishTitle: "Vizard" → "Visored", to match the rest of the list.

• Fixed. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

—tan³ tx 19:53, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Think that's it. — sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed English casing and one instance of name order, changed rōmaji to title case; no other objections. Support. —tan³ tx 02:38, 10 November 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:Scorpion0422 22:28, 11 November 2008 [6].

---

List of Philadelphia Phillies team records

previous FLC (07:25, 17 September 2008)

As before, I am nominating this list because:

1. I believe it meets the FL criteria.
2. it is a unique list and a unique topic.
3. this list could be a guide for others wishing to create lists of this type.

Because of its unique nature, this list was peer reviewed before nomination. To read the reviewers' input, please go here. In addition, this article has a previous FLC nomination, archived above. In response to the concerns which I was not able to deal with 1 month ago due to moving, I have removed sort facilities from this article because they seem to be more of a hindrance than a help. It would be sorting apples and oranges anyway at this point. Thanks in advance! KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 15:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Support Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "The 1915 Phillies, first of the franchise to make the postseason" This image caption doesn't make sense.

• Changed. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!

• "Hitting streak in one season and hitting streak over two seasons are considered two separate records by Major League Baseball." Add His before "Hitting". Dabomb87 (talk) 16:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• That doesn't make sense to me. "Hitting streak in one season" is the name of the record; there's no possessive pronoun necessary. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!

Comments from blackngold

• Intro needs non-breaking spaces on numbers followed by units (ie 19,035 games, etc.)

• Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• Lowercase "c" in Triple crown, per article title.

• Actually, because of title rules in the programming of WP, neither need to be capitalized. Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• "Statistics are current through 2007 season..." do any need updated? If not change to "2008 season".

• My B. Thought I got all the articles updated. Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
• That's all I got, it's a pretty simple list, but well put together. Blackngold29 17:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Yet another good Phillies list. Blackngold29 17:47, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks! Cheers from KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!

Resolved comments by NatureBoyMD

Comments from NatureBoyMD (talk · contribs)

• It looks great, but I'd really like to see some sorting. It would be nice to be able to sort so you could quickly see how many records are held by the same player, how many records were set in the same year, etc. All you'd need to do is take out the reference row and convert it to a short sentence with a citation at the top of the section. Or, you could just put the citation in the table header by "Statistic" or "Record".-NatureBoyMD (talk) 23:48, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• I'll take a look at it, but to be honest, I doubt my ability to get it right. Somebody explained the sortname template to me last time, but I still don't understand it. Apparently using the MLBY template screws something up, so that's going to require a huge amount of recoding. There's also the issue of the career tables; what year do they get sorted by!? I don't mind taking out the colspans, not a problem at all, but there are lots of other issues to be considered. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 13:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• You might be interested in looking at another current FLC: Nashville Sounds team records. There, I've got career record years sorted by the player's first season. Sorting by years there probably isn't as important as it would be in the other tables. You might want to replace the MLBY template with the hardcoded [[YYYY in baseball|YYYY]]; it would be a chore, but I see it as a relatively easy fix. -NatureBoyMD (talk) 17:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually it would have to be changed to [[YYYY Major League Baseball season|YYYY]], but I haven't been able to find any problems with the sorting using MLBY yet. It was mentioned to me in the previous FLC. I will take a look at it tomorrow evening (I won't have time before then because of plans tonight) and see what I can do. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I think I've fixed it. Take a look; let me know. Thanks! KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:54, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

• Support - It looks good to me. Nice work! -NatureBoyMD (talk) 18:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks! Cheers from KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!

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:Scorpion0422 22:28, 11 November 2008 [7].

---

The Office (US TV series) season 4

previous FLC (03:15, 20 October 2008)

Is it ready? Nergaal (talk) 01:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - this strikes me more as an article than a list. Have you considered taking it to FAC? –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:55, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the FA people would welcome such a huge table; anyways, the previous 3 seasons are FLs. Nergaal (talk) 02:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• The bolding in the lead is not necessary.

is it discouraged though? Nergaal (talk) 03:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

If what is bolded is not the exact repetition of the page title, yes. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:02, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

ok

• "refused to cross the picket line." This is in the lead, be more clear.

now?

I was referring to defining what crossing the picket line means. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:02, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

now?

• "The DVD set contains all 14 episodes, as well as commentaries from creators, writers, actors, and directors on some of the episodes, while also containing deleted scenes from all of the episodes, as well as bloopers and other promos." Split this sentence up.
• "the two of whom are executive producers on both versions." "two of whom"-->both of whom. What are "both versions"?
• "Season four featured fourteen episodes" Is there any way to fix this distracting alliteration?
• "directed by eleven different directors."
• "While The Office was mainly filmed on a studio set at Valley Center Studios..." "While"-->Although.
• The last paragraph of the Production section does not flow well.

I bet it is an OR added by a random user - so I chopped it off. Nergaal (talk) 03:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

• "pop culture obsessed" hyphenate "pop-culture"
• "The fourth season premiere "Fun Run" received a 5.1/12" Is this referring to the share?
• "While the episode "Job Fair" received the lowest number of viewers for the season, at 7.2 million,[31] it and the episode following it, the season finale "Goodbye Toby" both" Comma after "Toby".

I will review the episode summaries later. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:36, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Except for the ones where I replied, all the comments should be solved now. Nergaal (talk) 03:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

• "Now broken up from Karen" Who broke up with Karen?
• "Jim and Pam announce they are dating" Insert that before "they".
• "The race is won by Toby"-->Toby wins the race...
• "As the new brainchild of Ryan, the new Dunder Mifflin Infinity website is about to be released, the staff of Dunder Mifflin Scranton prepare to host a party as part of a company-wide video chat room." Split this sentence up.
• "Later, at the party, Dwight and Michael take a hostage in the form of a pizza delivery boy, although they later release him."-->Later, at the party, Dwight and Michael kidnap a pizza delivery boy, although they later release him.
• "revealing that he only said he had leave to try to get a raise." Are you sure this is right?
• "Michael and Dwight decide to surprise Ryan in New York for a night of clubbing and meet his friends." You can't surprise someone "for" a night of clubbing. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

updated all of these, how is it now? Nergaal (talk) 18:22, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support, great list, Jaespinoza (talk) Today, 12:46 am (UTC-4)

Resolved issues, Mitch32^(UP)

• Comments -

1. Shouldn't "season" be capitalized in the title?

   I don't thinks so but I might be wrong. All the other season lists I've seen are uncapitalized. Nergaal (talk) 01:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

2. Is it possible to get references in for each episode?

   That should not be necessary since (1) the plots don't require refs, and (2) all the episodes articles in this list are allready GAs, which means they are already adequately referenced, and those refs are found in their respective articles. Nergaal (talk) 01:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

3. Is it possible to bold "fourth season" in the lead?

   One of the previous reviewers specifically asked to remove the bloding. Nergaal (talk) 01:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

4. Is Reference 5 a reliable source? I don't believe, personally that it is.

   Nice spotting there! I switched it with the official site. Nergaal (talk) 01:42, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

5. De-bold the episode names in the chart - Bold blue links violate MOS and policy I think.

   I don't think this should be an issue since the table uses the same template as any other FL about seasons; this means that all the other similar FLs out there have the same issue. Nergaal (talk) 01:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I will support when things are solved. Good luck.Mitch32^(UP) 22:16, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Then I support - good job.Mitch32^(UP) 01:47, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments from SatyrTN

• This looks like a mashup of a list and an article. The paragraphs of text are longer than the actual list itself. Are the first three sections (Production, Cast, and Reception) specific to the season? I believe those sections are overwhelming the actual Episode List. Season 3 has half as much lede text as list, Season 2 and Season 1 seem to suffer the same as this one. I recognize that all three of those reached FL status, but IMO that's a shame :)

Let's see "The fourth season premiere "Fun Run" received a 5.1/12 share in the Nielsen Ratings among viewers aged 18 to 49..." Your are right it refers to a completely different subject. Nergaal (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• The two columns "Directors" and "Writer(s)" - please pick one format or the other.

That was typo. Nergaal (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• The "Notes" section is missing, denoting what "‡" and "†" mean.

This shows how much attention you actually paid while reading the article. Go check it again and maybe you will find it this time. Nergaal (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• I know I'll be a lone wolf here, but even though this is well written and comprehensive, and even though the list itself is in great shape, I can't support what seems to me to be more of an article than a list.

Do you seriously believe that anybody at the FAC will accept the table as a part of an FA?? Nergaal (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:18, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - I am actually confused. I don't really understand the opinion of the above oppose. The user states that the list is more of an article, but how about these FL's: Lost (season 4), 30 Rock (season 2) and The O.C. (season 3)? They too have information other than the list. I am also working on a season list which is very similar to this one, and I would hate really dislike it if someone opposed it for having to much information. After all, isn't that a good thing? Corn.u.co.pia / Disc.us.sion 00:38, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
  • And I'm sorry if I'm sounding rude or harsh, it's just that I'm confused. :-) Corn.u.co.pia / Disc.us.sion 00:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
    • As Cornucopia pointed out, this page matches the typical list format of the season pages. There is only one season article to my knowledge that is FA (Smallville (season 1)), and if you compare that page to this page you get a stark difference in format and information. This page, which includes something that I generally don't agree with or think is necesssary, takes things that could easily be presented in list format and puts them in sentences. In other words, when you read stuff like "Production", what you really find is a list of the people and studios involved in making the show (mainly that first paragraph). One thing I mentioned to Cornucopia on their talk page is the reusing of information from page to page. Why do we need to introduce the same series regulars with such detail on every Office related page? This is a daughter article of a larger parent article, and the parent article should be identifying characters. Anyone coming to season four's page is likely to know who the characters are. Unless the characters are new this season, the section is really unnecessary and seems to be used to bloat the page's size. Lastly, why are the episodes the last thing on the page? The page is about these episodes, so it would beg the idea that they should be first. I don't know why there was a restructing of season pages to have the episodes listed last, but it seems counterproductive to the concept of what the page is about (and that is the episodes of this season).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
      • I mostly agree with Bignole here, although I'm struggling to see what the thing is that he finds unnecessary. This is a list. The "prose" could easily be presented in list format, it just isn't. As for putting the actual list of episodes first, I haven't seen that in any FL, only in the Smallville FA. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:17, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
        • What I find to be unnecessary is the repetative issuing of information in each of the pages (and sometimes within the page itself). Do I need to know there were 11 different directors that worked this season (even listing them out), when all I have to do is scroll down and count for myself? It seems like we're treating the reader like an invalid that cannot discern particular information for themselves. Does the reader need a reminder of who the same series regulars have been for four seasons? Stating who is a series regular can be done in the lead. The detail about who they are is covered in multiple pages that act as a parent to this one. Why are we repeating information from the main article about where the show is filmed? So much information is being repeated over and over again on each page, it's unnecessary. Unless there is something special about this season, there is no need to repeat yourself. The first two paragraphs of "Production" are repititious to the primary article, and that is what I'm calling "unnecessary". The Writers' Strike stuff is good, and should be kept most definitely. It's the stuff before that that is needless. If someone is reading each of the season pages, why would they want read the same stuff over and over again each time they move on to the next page.
        • As for the format of the page. As I said, I don't know why editors started putting the episode table at the bottom, it makes no sense when the page is supposed to be about the episodes of this season. Once it started it seemed to become an epidemic because more editors wanted to get season articles created and to FL so they just followed suit with what the first one did.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:58, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
          • One of the main issues with this would be an ever-divided opinion on what is "Comprehensive", as loosely defined by the FL criteria. Because of the many FLs that include wide sections of prose on cast and production, many would believe that removing these would prevent the article from being Comprehensive. I must say that I follow this opinion also. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 13:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
            • It is comprehensive for the season that you are trying to attain, not comprehensive for the entire show. Comprehensive means "covers all major aspects", but that isn't the same as "repeats the same information on 5 pages". It's fluff, that's what it is. Why people feel the need to add "fluff" to pages is beyond me. What is relevant and comprehensive to season four of this topic is the reception of the topic, what the topic is about, and if there were any changes during this season. Restating the same tired information over and over again has nothing to do with comprehensiveness of season four of this show. You're attributing generalized information about the show to this specific season, and you shouldn't be doing that. Articles should be comprehensive but succinct.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:01, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
              • Unfortunately, I'm quite sure most do not treat the season pages as articles of a series. I feel that it's to the ease of the reader to keep each of the sections in, and then let the reader select what they wish to or don't wish to read. I understand completely what you mean, and I too feel that it can be a bit repetitive, but It's not as if the reader is "forced" to read any part. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 22:34, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
• Question: of all 4 of you guys commenting here, mind voting pro or against the present state of the list? Nergaal (talk) 16:54, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Opinion has not been decided. FLs, just like FAs, are discussions and not votes.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:01, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
    • Sure, but this is the 3rd nomination and while I believe all the comments have been solved, editors still stay away from voting...... Nergaal (talk) 03:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
• Support - Thought I disagree with the structure and the repetition, I recognize that this is an issue with all of these similar pages, that should not hinder any single upcoming page that is modeling them. It's well sourced and written.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:27, 10 November 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:Matthewedwards 22:08, 8 November 2008 [8].

---

List of St. Louis MetroLink stations

My first FLC. I used List of Bay Area Rapid Transit stations and List of Vancouver SkyTrain stations as templates for this list. --Millbrooky (talk) 01:09, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments by SRX

Review by SRX (talk · contribs)/Weak oppose - oppose per prose.

• Prose
  • Serving over 67,000 passengers a day, MetroLink is one the largest light-rail systems in the United States in terms of ridership. - "one the?"
  • MetroLink began service July 31, 1993 with the opening of the Red Line segement from North Hanley to 5th & Missouri. - "began service July?" you mean "on July?"
  • The first expansion, known as the St. Clair County Extension, was completed May 5, 2001 with the extension of the Red Line to Belleville, Illinois and, two years later, to Scott Air Force Base. - "was completed May?" you mean "on May?" Also, no need for comma after "and" and "later."
  • The second major expansion, the Cross County Extension completed August 26, 2006 and now known as the Blue Line, added a new branch to the system from the Forest Park-DeBaliviere station to Shrewsbury-Lansdowne I-44 via Clayton, Missouri. - 1)comma after "Cross County Extension." 2)Also, you need to add "was" before "completed." 3)+ you need to add an "on" before the date 4)Reword to The second major expansion, the Cross County Extension, was completed on August 26, 2006, which added the extension of the Blue Line from the Forest Park-Debaliviere and Shrewsbury-Lansdowne I-44 stations in Clayton, Missouri.
  • 28 stations are served by the Red Line and 24 stations are served by the Blue line with 15 stations served by both lines. - comma after Blue line.
  • You need to be consistent, is it "Blue l'ine" or "Blue Line"?
• Tables look fine.--S_RX 15:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Figured the prose would be my downfall. Anyways, I made the changes you pointed out. The only thing I did differently was the reword on your fourth point as the Blue Line did not exist prior to the "extension," nor is it technically correct (8 miles, 7 cities traversed). I'm still thinking about better ways to phrase this mouthful. --Millbrooky (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Just notify me when that sentence is fixed :)S_RX 18:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support - meets WP:WIAFL.S_RX 21:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support Overall, it looks good. But I think the image should be larger as it is hard to see.—Chris! _ct 19:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Also "An extension to Lambert-St. Louis International Airport opened a year later." should be was opened —Chris! _ct 19:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Done. I revised the image to make the text larger and I increased its size on the page from 300px to 420px. --Millbrooky (talk) 21:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:43, 4 November 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:Matthewedwards 22:08, 8 November 2008 [9].

---

List of mergers and acquisitions by Symantec

previous FLC

I last submitted this for FLC six months ago. Hopefully it passes this time. Gary King (talk) 19:59, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Addressed Review by SrX

Review by SRX (talk · contribs)

• First off, please place a link to the previous FLC.
• Symantec released its first product called Q&A, a database management program, in 1985. - this stands out, so what, this list is about their mergers and acquisitions.
• Other than that, prose and list itself checks out good to my knowledge.--S_RX 21:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

All done Gary King (talk) 00:38, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support - my review was addressed to meet WP:WIAFL.--S_RX 15:10, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Support Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "and it is listed on"
• "NASDAQ 100" Should be hyphenated.
• What is Gary Hendrix's position in the company now? Dabomb87 (talk) 13:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

All done Gary King (talk) 17:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:10, 4 November 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:Matthewedwards 22:08, 8 November 2008 [10].

---

List of awards and nominations received by Radiohead

Radiohead is one of my favorite contemporary bands :) Gary King (talk) 15:42, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Addressed Review by SrX

Review by SRX (talk · contribs)

• They met while attending Abingdon School, a boys-only public school in Abingdon, Oxfordshire. - Abingdon is pipelinked just to Abingdon, just link the whole thing, "Abingdon, Oxfordshire"
• The band have received five BRIT Award nominations but has yet to win one. - comma after nominations.
• Some of the publishers need to be linked and spelled out entirely.--S_RX 21:14, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather just link the city name since cities and states are supposed to be linked separately. Comma is unnecessary. The acronym publishers are better known by their acronyms than their full names, like the BBC. Gary King (talk) 00:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Comma is necessary because when you read it out loud you need to take a pause before going on to "but". Also, well at least link the publishers.--S_RX 00:58, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I added the comma, but I still disagree with it. My personal preference is to not link publishers; sometimes people want, sometimes they don't. I assume it's to learn more about the publisher, which may be helpful in knowing if it's relevant and reliable, but in most cases it just causes unnecessary overlinking in the references as they should probably all be linked since you can't tell which reference the reader would land on first. Gary King (talk) 01:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support - my review was addressed to meet WP:WIAFL.--S_RX 15:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "The band is composed of"-->The band's members are...
• "The first six albums were released by the Capital Records record label, while the seventh was released by Radiohead themselves." "while"-->and.
• "The first six albums were released by the Capital Records record label"—Shouldn't "by"-->on? Dabomb87 (talk) 03:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Done Gary King (talk) 03:43, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Support. Good list. Jaespinoza (talk) 19:41, 4 November 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:Matthewedwards 22:08, 8 November 2008 [11].

---

List of awards and nominations received by Ne-Yo

Gary King (talk) 15:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Support Good list, Jaespinoza (talk) 20:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support - no flaws, prose and list meets WP:FL?.--S_RX 21:48, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:46, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "While a teenager"-->As a teenager...
• "The MTV Video Music Awards has only nominated Ne-Yo once"
• "Black Entertainment Television" Spell out in parentheses that this stands for BET.
• "and the album was later certified Platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America after"
• "The song became "one of the most-played songs on urban radio stations across the U.S."" I don't see where this quote is in the web citation. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:14, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

All done. "As a teenager", to me, seems like he was taking advantage of this stage of adulthood, as if he thought "I'm a teenager so I will go do this" when in fact it's probably more like "I'm going to do this; it just so happens that I'm a teenager." In any case, "While a teenager" is also safer as it doesn't assume anything. Regarding the quote, it's right in the citation. I can't really clarify this further, as I just copy and pasted the quote in my browser's "find" bar and found it on the page instantly. Gary King (talk) 15:22, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:03, 4 November 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:Matthewedwards 22:08, 8 November 2008 [12].

---

List of Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim Opening Day starting pitchers

We are nominating this list because we believe it meets the FL criteria and is consistent with other Opening Day starting pitcher featured lists. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] and Rlendog (talk) 03:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Review by SRX (talk · contribs)

• Mike Witt has the record for most Opening Day starts for the Angels, with five. - the first for should be of.

• That doesn't seem to sound right. Just going through some other Wikipedia articles of record holders (admittedly not featured articles) they seem to use "record for" in this context. For example, from Hank Aaron:"His most notable achievement was setting the MLB record for most career home runs with 755...", and from Lou Gehrig:"His record for most career grand slams (23) still stands as of 2008." I think it should say "record of" 3-0 if I was describing his win-loss record, but "record for" number of wins when describing the category he is a recordholder for. Rlendog (talk) 23:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• Addressed. I deleted the phrase "record for" entirely, which should resolve this. Rlendog (talk) 00:26, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• He has a record of one win and three losses (1–3) with one no decision in those starts. - comma after (1-3).

• Done Rlendog (talk) 23:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• He also has the best won–loss record in Opening Day starts for the Angels with his 3–0 record. - should be win-loss not won-loss. Also, instead of with his 3-0 record how about which is 3-0?

• Done Rlendog (talk) 23:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• The Angels played in the World Series championship games once in their history, in 2002, and they won the World Series that year. - redundant to keep repeating the same thing over and over, --> The Angels have played in one World Series championship game in their history, which they won in 2002.

• Done Rlendog (talk) 23:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• The publisher for each ref should be linked, if someone clicks the 10th ref first and not ref #1, they will not see the publisher because it is only in #1.

• Done Rlendog (talk) 23:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

--S_RX 21:36, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I addressed most of them but had a concern about the first one. Rlendog (talk) 23:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I now think I addressed the first comment too. Rlendog (talk) 00:26, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• Image captions that are complete sentences should have full stops (periods).

• Done Rlendog (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• "Mike Witt has the record for most Opening Day starts for the Angels, with five. "

• Done Rlendog (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• "Frank Tanana, Mark Langston and Chuck Finley all have made four Opening Day starts for the Angels." "all have"-->"have all"

• Done Rlendog (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• "He also has the best win–loss record in Opening Day starts for the Angels which is 3–0."-->He also has the best win–loss record in Opening Day starts for the Angels which is 3–0." Comma after "Angels".

• Done Rlendog (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• "The other Angels'"—No apostrophe.

• Done Rlendog (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• "The Angels have played in two home ball parks during their history."

• Done Rlendog (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• "to the Indians"—Who are the Indians? (what team)

• Added Cleveland Indians (with Wikilink) Rlendog (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Dabomb87 (talk) 00:05, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I think I've addressed them all. Rlendog (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• "The Angels played in the World Series championship games once in their history, which they won in 2002." This is awkwardly phrased. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:52, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• You're right. I revised the phrasing. Rlendog (talk) 02:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Support – I was asked to review, but didn't find any problems. I'm happy to support this list. Thanks, – RyanCross (talk) 03:31, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Alansohn (talk) 02:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Alansohn (talk)

Comments from Alansohn (talk · contribs)

Review by Alansohn (talk · contribs)

• The franchise has also gone by the names "Los Angeles Angels", "California Angels" and "Anaheim Angels" at various points in its history. Please provide a source on the various names and consider detailing when these various names were in use.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• No decisions are only awarded to the starting pitcher if the game is won or lost after the starting pitcher has left the game. Clarify that a no decision can also result if a starting pitcher does not pitch five full innings, even if his team retains the lead and wins. We should consider a standard wording describing the no decision.

Just copied your sentence into the article. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• Please consider sourcing all of the generic summaries of most starts, best record, etc., to the summary from Baseball-Reference, unless more specific sources can be found.

But it's on the list itself though. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I added the B-R summary as a reference in a couple more places, particularly the paragraph that counts various pitchers' Opening Day starts. Rlendog (talk) 18:32, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• The Angels have played in two home ball parks. This and the subsequent paragraphs should be sourced. The Angels site at mlb.com has a ballparks history available.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• ...their starting pitchers have 13 wins and 12 losses (13–12) with 2 no decisions - As I see it, we can say "13 wins and 12 losses" or "13–12" but I don't see that both need to be used. This occurs in several places.

I'll just put, 13 wins ad 12 losses. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• Please note that these are not demands. They are suggestions and recommendations that I hope will be considered constructive. If they make sense and improve the article, feel free to apply them. If not, an explanation should suffice.

Thanks for telling me that, but I answered all of your comments in order to get a support from you. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Alansohn (talk) 03:45, 3 November 2008 (UTC) Review II items:

• The 24 starters have a combined Opening Day record of 23 wins, 18 losses (23–18) and 7 no decisions. - Again use either the "23 wins, 18 losses" or "23–18", probably not both. There's no reason not to mix up the two styles in the remainder of the article.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 05:02, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• They played their first season in Wrigley Field...' Clarify that this is not the one in Chicago. The source came in handy in this expansion.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 05:02, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• The Angels have played in one World Series championship in their history, which they won in 2002. Can I suggest linking "2002" to the 2002 World Series instead of the baseball season article.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 05:02, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• Again, there is no obligation to accept these changes, only that you will consider them. Your disagreement will not dissuade me from supporting the article.

Again, thanks for telling me, but I answered all of your comments in order to get a support from you.

Alansohn (talk) 04:48, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:00, 4 November 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:Matthewedwards 22:08, 8 November 2008 [13].

---

List of mergers and acquisitions by Apple

Gary King (talk) 14:54, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Comment - Like the others this one should also probably be named "List of mergers and acquisitions by Apple" or something to that effect. Silver Sonic Shadow (talk) 19:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, thanks I missed this one. Done! Gary King (talk) 20:00, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved review by SrX

Review by SRX (talk · contribs)

• It was established in Cupertino, California on April 1, 1976 by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak[1] and incorporated on January 3, 1977. - comma after Wozniak.
• Apple's business philosophy is to acquire small companies that can be easily integrated into existing company projects. - sounds POV since there is no source to verify this statement.
• How about in the lead stating how many companies overall were acquired/merged, not just in the U.S.
• Also, how about stating what was the first acquisition and the most recent one.
• Per Template:Reflist#Multiple columns, 3 column format of references should be avoided.
• Other than that, prose and tables look fine. Sources need to be checked by Juliancolton or Ealdgyth.--S_RX 20:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

All done. Their business philosophy uses the reference at the end of the paragraph, but I moved it up to clarify this. Also, the first paragraph already states the total number of acquisitions. I've added what the first acquisition was; however, I don't want to add the most recent one since that can change fairly often. The reference list actually changes the number of columns based on your screen size; if you shrink your browser then you will see that it changes the number of columns, which fixes the problem with normal three-column reference lists. Gary King (talk) 02:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support - The list meets WP:WIAFL after my addressed review.--S_RX 21:17, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - Should this be sortable by name, or does that create more problems than it causes? Rlendog (talk) 03:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

The columns are already sortable by name. Gary King (talk) 14:00, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:43, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "with most of them being software companies"—No with + -ing sentence structure please.
• "during when parts of the company are sold to another company." Doesn't make sense.
• Why don't the Thomson sources have publication dates?
• Ref 1 needs a published date (at the bottom). Dabomb87 (talk) 03:26, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

All done. The information from the Thomson sources isn't necessarily published on the same date that the company publishes the information, which is what the date from each page signifies. Gary King (talk) 15:26, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:56, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment This has the same divestment confusion as the Red Hat one. It would appear that three of the 'divestments' are actually other companies buying stakes in Apple. However in the lead you say that five companies in total were divested. This doesn't seem to tally at all. I think that these three placements (which from your comment on the Red Hat FLC I presume they are) should go in a separate table in the article. If you did that, then you could have a different set of headings e.g. you could get rid of the 'Target Company' and 'Target business' sections (which are always going to be Apple and Personal Computers) and perhaps replace them with the percentage acquired (if known). The two actual sell-offs would remain in the existing table. Boissière (talk) 20:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I've reworded the bit in the lead to imply that not all of the divestments were "parts of the company". I don't think the Divestment table should be split; the reference that I use, for instance, considers them as Divestments as lists them along with the others. Gary King (talk) 21:07, 7 November 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:Matthewedwards 22:08, 8 November 2008 [14].

---

List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 2004

I am submiting this list because I think is ready to achieve FL status, Jaespinoza (talk) 04:17, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Review by SrX

Review by SRX (talk · contribs)

• however, the award went to Intimamente by Intocable,[3] which also peaked at number one on the chart on March 2004. - the second on should be in. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 21:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
• Mi Sangre by Colombian performer Juanes was nominated for a Grammy Award for Best Latin Rock/Alternative Album,[4] won three Latin Grammy Awards,[5] and also reached the top spot of this chart for five consecutive weeks from October 16 to November 13, 2004. - the way the first part is written makes it necessary to have a comma after Sangre and a comma after Juanes. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 21:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
• Two albums by Marc Anthony reached the top spot of the chart: Amar Sin Mentiras and Valió La Pena, winning the Grammy Award for Best Latin Pop Album[9] and a nomination for a Latin Grammy Award for Best Male Pop Vocal Album[10] for Amar Sin Mentiras, and grabbing the Latin Grammy Award for Best Salsa Album[11] and receiving a Grammy Award nomination for Best Salsa/Merengue album for the latter. - 1)grabbing --> winning' 2) Needs a full stop somewhere, the sentence is too long, split. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 21:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
• Other than that Prose and Tables look fine, sources need to be checked by Juliancolton or Ealdgyth.--S_RX 20:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Support - my review was addressed to meet WP:WIAFL.--S_RX 01:29, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Support Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "There were twenty two number-one albums in 2004, including two releases by Mexican group Los Temerarios: Tributo al Amor and Veintisiete, with the latter album receiving a nomination for a Grammy Award for Best Mexican/Mexican-American Album;[2] however, the award went to Intimamente by Intocable,[3] which also peaked at number one on the chart in March 2004." Run-on sentence. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 20:38, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
• "With these recordings Marc Anthony won the Grammy Award for Best Latin Pop Album[9] and was nominated for a Latin Grammy Award for Best Male Pop Vocal Album[10] with Amar Sin Mentiras, while Valió La Pena was awarded with the Latin Grammy Award for Best Salsa Album[11] and also receive a Grammy Award nomination for Best Salsa/Merengue album." Split this sentence up also. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:12, 1 November 2008 (UTC) FIXED!Jaespinoza (talk) 20:38, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments -

• What makes the following reliable sources?
  • http://www.livedaily.com/ FIXED!. I replaced that ref with another from USA Today. Jaespinoza (talk) 18:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Otherwise sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Note I did not evaluate the non-English sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:54, 4 November 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:Matthewedwards 22:08, 8 November 2008 [15].

---

List of San Diego Padres Opening Day starting pitchers

I am nominating this list because I believe that this completes all of the FL criteria. This is also my second nomination for this FLC Contest. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 01:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Review by SrX

Review by SRX (talk · contribs)

• The Padres first Opening Day starting pitcher was Dick Selma, who received a win against the Houston Astros. how about "earned" versus "received."

The word, "earned", sounds a little bit too POV. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Randy Jones and Eric Show ties the Padres' record for most Opening Day starts with four, and both of them combined have an Opening Day record of 3 wins, 3 losses, and 2 no decisions - ties should be singular. Also how about ..and both have a combined Opening Day record..etc

done -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Jones also hold the most Opening Day starts consecutively with 3, holding it with Andy Benes and Jake Peavy. - "hold" should be pluaral. Well if he holds the record with other players, then the sentence is incorrect because he himself doesn't hold the most starts, needs rewording.

done Check it if I did something wrong. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Andy Benes has the most Opening Day losses consecutively with 3 from 1993 to 1995. Jake Peavy was the Opening Day starting pitcher for the Padres since 2006. - 1)Benes and Peavy do not need to be linked again per WP:OVERLINK. 2)You have already mentioned them, you have to just mention them by their last name.

fixed -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Overall, the Padres's Opening Day starting pitchers have a record of 8 wins and 5 losses at San Diego Stadium/Jack Murphy Stadium/Qualcomm Stadium, and 2 wins and 0 losses at Petco Park. "Padres's" should be "Padres'"

done -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• In addition, although the Padres were nominally the home team on Opening Day 1999, the game was played in Estadio de Beisbol Monterrey in Monterrey, Mexico. - "In addition" is a bad transclusion. How about "On Opening Day in 1999, the game was played in Estadio de Beisbol Moterrey in Monterrey, Mexico." You should say why, to make it seem notable.

I don't really think it's a bad transclusion, since if I put it your way, then they wouldn't know if they were home or away. Also, I don't know why they had it in Mexico. I'll try searching it up. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Why is the score in 1985 "03"?

fixed -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 04:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

--S_RX 03:19, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Weak Support - Meets WP:WIAFL, but another thing that stands out is the heavy reliance on the Baseball-reference website, there needs to be more diversity of sources.--S_RX 23:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Support - all FL criteria appears to be met. Good job. --Mr.crabby (Talk) 15:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Support—Meets all criteria and matches the format of other Featured Opening Day lists. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:11, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Support - Consistent with the other Opening Day starting pitcher lists that are Featured Lists. In the interest of full disclosre, I have made an edit to this page prior to the FLC. - Rlendog (talk) 19:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from RyanCross

Comments from RyanCross:

• Delink the second link to Major League Baseball in the lead – Avoid WP:OVERLINKing.

done -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 20:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Baseball-Reference is linked in the references, why isn't MLB.com?

done

• "In addition, although the Padres were nominally the home team" – "nominally" to "normally"? Not sure if this was a type or not, so I'll let you decide.

I just copied the sentence structure from the List of New York Mets Opening Day starting pitchers. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 20:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Make the 90% font-size in the wikitable to 100% – Avoid small fonts

done

– RyanCross (talk) 19:41, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Support – Meets featured list criteria and all my comments have been resolved. Nice work, – RyanCross (talk) 21:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • San Diego Stadium/Jack Murphy Stadium/Qualcomm Stadium - is this really necessary? Just use the current name.

I rewrote the sentence. Check if I did anything wrong. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 05:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

• • Why are you using boldface inside the table? If it's not necessary, don't use it.

Look at the key first. The bold faces letterings are to indicate the home stadium. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 05:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I can look at the key all day and still I will not understand why it's necessary to use boldface in this table. Boldface should only be used where WP:BOLDFACE tells you. I don't see anywhere the "use bold to indicate something" guideline.--Crzycheetah 07:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

So how do I fixed this? Italics? Not even indicate it at all? -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 07:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• • Why are there <br>'s in the table headers?

fixed I was to make the table smaller, but I changed to now. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 05:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

• • Should Final Score → Final score ?

fixed -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 05:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

• • in brackets are the number of innings over than 9 - reword please

done If it is still horribly worded, I suggest you word it for me, as I only have an intermediate understanding of English. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 05:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

--Crzycheetah 04:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Killervogel5

Comments from Killervogel5

• "The Padres have used 23 different Opening Day starting pitchers in its 40 seasons." - subject and object do not agree. It needs to be "Padres franchise" or "their 40 seasons." One or the other.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 02:22, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• "The Padres first Opening Day starting pitcher" - Padres'

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 02:22, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• "The Padres went on to play in the MLB post-season 5 times" - post-season should be linked to Playoffs#Playoffs in Major League Baseball.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 02:22, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• Key: "No Decision" - No decision. No caps in the second word.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 02:22, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• If you are going to link no decision in the key (really not necessary because it's linked above), it should not be linked twice in quick succession. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!

• Neither the Pat Dobson image nor the Eric Show image have fair use rationales for use in this article, and I doubt that you can provide one because there are other appropriate images already being used to illustrate. Remove.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 02:22, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Hope this helps. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 02:13, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Addition (KV5)

• All numbers 10 and below need to be written out (i.e., one, three, nine, etc.). There are a lot of these in the lead.

DONE -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24_[c] 00:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:49, 4 November 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:Matthewedwards 22:08, 8 November 2008 [16].

---

List of Bay Area Rapid Transit stations

I am nominating this list because I believe it fulfills the featured list status.—Chris! _ct 23:33, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Review by SrX

Weak Oppose/Review by SRX (talk · contribs)

• In mid-2003, extension to San Francisco International Airport and Millbrae was completed, bringing BART further south into the San Mateo County. - how about In mid-2003, extensions to San Francisco International Airport and Millbrae were completed, which brung BART further south into the San Mateo County. Per tenses.

Fixed, though I use brought instead of brung.—Chris! _ct 02:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• In additions, BART connects its Coliseum/Oakland Airport station to the Oakland International Airport with AirBART, a shuttle bus service. - addition not additions in this context.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• The majority of stations are located in the Alameda County with 19. - how about The majority of stations, 19, are located in the Alameda County.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• 10 stations are in the Contra Costa County while eight are in the City and County of San Francisco. - comma after Contra Costa County.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Six stations are in the San Mateo County, though it is not part of the BART district. - elaboration about what "not part of the Bart district" means?

The term "Bart district" is explained in the first paragraph—Chris! _ct 02:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• The footnotes don't work properly, when I click the [b] for the daily ridership, it doesn't redirect me to the footnote. Same thing for the [a].

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• All ridership statistics are daily average exits on weekday from April 2008 to June 2008. - weekday should be plural.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Why do you link weekday in note C versus doing it in note b?

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

--S_RX 23:53, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

• The system currently has a total of 43 stations: 15 surface, 13 elevated and 15 subway. - now as a reader who knows nothing about subways, what does elevated mean? Also a comma should be after elevated. Also, wouldn't it be "15 on surface" and "subways" not "subway"?

Partially fixed. Though I don't think I can explain "elevated" more clearly. Any suggestions?—Chris! _ct 02:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Well first of all, what does elevated mean? Plus, a comma is needed after elevated.--S_RX 02:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

It means elevated metro station—Chris! _ct 03:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I added a link for elevated station. Hopefully that makes the term clearer to readers.—Chris! _ct 06:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay that helps, but why pipelink to the glossary when you can pipe to elevated railway?--S_RX 15:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Elevated railway redirect to rapid transit. I guess it could work if that page explains what "elevated" is.—Chris! _ct 18:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Fixed—Chris! _ct 19:00, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support - review addressed to meet WP:WIAFL, Good Work.--S_RX 23:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Goodraise (talk)

Resolved issues by Goodraise (talk · contribs)

• The references lack publisher info.

I just checked. Every ref has publisher info.—Chris! _ct 02:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• I don't think Weekday, Night, and Weekend need to be linked at all.

Removed—Chris! _ct 02:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Image captions are unnecessarily wordy. "View of" and "The" are often not needed.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• View of station platform of the MacArthur station. Is not a complete sentence.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Comments and thoughts:

• You might want to apply the background colors in the table to whole lines instead of only the first field.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• I don't know the difference between "Official transfer stations" and "Terminals". Should I have to click the links to find out, or could you explain it right there?

The terms are clear to me so I am not sure how to make them more clear. Any suggestion?—Chris! _ct 02:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• The image in the lead seems a bit too large.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• How about reshaping the "Citations" and "Bibliography" sections into looking like the "References" section of List of Bleach episodes (season 5)? You might also fit in the "Notes" to make it a "References and Notes" section.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Why are the names of the Official transfer stations bolded in addition to the background color? This might be too much formating.

Fixed—Chris! _ct 02:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

-- Goodraise (talk) 02:20, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Issues brought up after support was declared:

• The lead sections Image needs a more descriptive caption, as the current one is useless without the actual image.
• The Wikimedia Commons template might waste less space if it were placed higher in the section.

Both addressed —Chris! _ct 05:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support: MOS appears to be adhered to. Footnotes look good. Overall appearance is pleasing. Lead section goes into sufficient detail. Supporting materials are rich yet not overwhelming. Image captions are suitable (with exception mentioned above). In my judgement, the nomination meets FL criteria one through six every FL criteria. Therefore I'm now supporting this nomination. -- Goodraise (talk) 03:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Boissière

Another rail list - good work. Just a few Comments

• "...in California consisted of three counties..." - Do you mean "consisting"?

Fixed —Chris! _ct 00:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

• "fifth largest rapid transit systems" - should be singular.

Fixed —Chris! _ct 00:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

• I don't think that the "Lines" column should be sortable as each cell can contain multiple entries. This seems to be the rule in other FLs.

Fixed —Chris! _ct 00:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

• I don't understand the "Authority" bit in the City/Authority column. Presumably it is because of the airport station but I don't understand why it is different (i.e. why isn't the city containing the airport not put here?).

The reason I didn't use the city is that the airport is within another county, not in San Francisco. But since it is generally considered San Francisco, I've change it to San Francisco.—Chris! _ct 00:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

• I am not convinced that future stations (even if they are fairly certain) should be in the main list. One problem is that the West Dublin/Pleasanton station slightly screws up the Year opened and Ridership sorting - it always appears first. Either add it in when it opens or maybe have a small "Stations under construction" list after the main one. If you choose to leave it in in some form then, in the description, please replace the colloquial "slated" with "due".

Fixed —Chris! _ct 00:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Boissière (talk) 20:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

All my comments seem to have been addressed - Support Boissière (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from K.Annoyomous
Support All comments were addressed. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c] 06:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC) Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:47, 4 November 2008 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.