Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/January 2009: Difference between revisions
promoting 13 lists |
crap. fixing |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{featured list log}} |
{{featured list log}} |
||
{{TOClimit|limit=3}} |
{{TOClimit|limit=3}} |
||
{{Timeline of the 1994 Atlantic hurricane season}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 1994 Atlantic hurricane season}} |
||
{{List of Houston Astros managers}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Houston Astros managers}} |
||
{{List of NBA All-Stars}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of NBA All-Stars}} |
||
{{List of monarchs of the Muhammad Ali Dynasty}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of monarchs of the Muhammad Ali Dynasty}} |
||
{{Ballon d'Or}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Ballon d'Or}} |
||
{{List of Montreal Canadiens head coaches}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Montreal Canadiens head coaches}} |
||
{{List of No Country for Old Men awards and nominations}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of No Country for Old Men awards and nominations}} |
||
{{List of Governors of Indiana}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Governors of Indiana}} |
||
{{NBA All-Star Weekend Three-Point Shootout}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/NBA All-Star Weekend Three-Point Shootout}} |
||
{{List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 2008}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 2008}} |
||
{{List of districts of West Bengal}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of districts of West Bengal}} |
||
{{List of Prime Ministers of Canada by time in office}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Prime Ministers of Canada by time in office}} |
||
{{List of Boston Latin School alumni}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Boston Latin School alumni}} |
Revision as of 05:16, 4 January 2009
- 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 05:16, 4 January 2009 [1].
Timeline of the 1994 Atlantic hurricane season
This is a collaborative effort between myself and Cyclonebiskit (talk · contribs), so consider this a co-nom. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 03:56, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Checklinks run and Advisor.js formatted. NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 05:10, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 05:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - great list
- The timeline also includes information which was not operationally released, meaning that information from post-storm reviews by the National Hurricane Center, such as information on a storm that was not operationally warned upon. - this sentence is confusing, consider revising.
- Got it. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Tropical Storm Alberto produced significant rainfall and flooding in the Southeastern United States, damaging or destroying over 18,000 homes, and inflicting $750 million (1994 USD) in total damages. - wouldn't it be and instead of or
- Not necessarily; the storm affected 18,000 homes, of which some were destroyed, and others were only damaged. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In the second paragraph, I would add the months to the storms which you don't have them for, like Gordon
- Done. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Be consistent with the publishers, ref #1 and ref #2 are the same publisher but are written differently.--SRX 02:29, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, it's standard to spell out an abbreviation in its first occurrence. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well its spelled out in ref#6, the third occurrence, so I think there should be some consistency made, and possibly add (acronym here) to the first occurrence in the publisher.--SRX 03:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- I've put the acronym for ref#6. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 14:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well its spelled out in ref#6, the third occurrence, so I think there should be some consistency made, and possibly add (acronym here) to the first occurrence in the publisher.--SRX 03:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, it's standard to spell out an abbreviation in its first occurrence. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "The timeline also includes information which was not operationally released, which is information from post-storm reviews by the National Hurricane Center." Can we fix the repetition of "information"?
- "Tropical Storm Alberto produced significant rainfall and flooding in the Southeastern United States, damaging or destroying over 18,000 homes, and inflicting $750 million (1994 USD) in
totaldamages." Readers will understand that the amount is the total unless there was reason to believe otherwise. - One dab link needs to be fixed.
- "Hurricane Gordon in November was the most significant storm, causing damages from Costa Rica to North Carolina during its six landfalls." What do you mean by "significant"?
- "approximately "-->about; it's simpler. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've corrected all but the one for Gordon being significant. I'm not sure in which way Julian meant Gordon was significant so I'll leave that to him. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Gordon was the longest-lived storm of the season, and it caused the most damage and fatalities. I'll see if I can clarify that. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 16:02, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:59, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [2].
List of Houston Astros managers
-- signed by SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 02:26, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- The team joined MLB in 1962 as an expansion team and have won their first NL Championship in 2005.-no need for have
- Fixed -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 01:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Lanier and Dierker the only managers to have won a Manager of the Year Award with the Astros, winning it in 1986 and 1998 respectively. - add are between Dierker and the
- Fixed -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 01:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I like the new format of this table :)
- Thanks. It's the same as the rest the the List of (MLB team) managers lists that I have done. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 01:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "(1965-1999)" En dash.
- DONE -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 06:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "The franchise is owned by Drayton McLane, Jr., and Ed Wade is their general manager." No comma necessary.
- Which comma? -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 06:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- The one after "Jr." Dabomb87 (talk) 14:48, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That can't be done because it will sound like this :"The franchise is owned by Drayton McLane, Jr. and Ed Wade is their general manager." It sounds like Ed Wade is also owning the franchise. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 06:05, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That can't be done because it will sound like this :"The franchise is owned by Drayton McLane, Jr. and Ed Wade is their general manager." It sounds like Ed Wade is also owning the franchise. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- The one after "Jr." Dabomb87 (talk) 14:48, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Add information about the Astros originally being the Colt .45s.
- Told readers that they were first called the Houston Colt .45s. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 06:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:29, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All the years in the lead need to be linked with [[YEAR Major League Baseball season]] the first time it is mentioned.
- If you haven't noticed, there was a discussion on WT:MOS saying that years should not be wikilinked like this: [[#### Major League Baseball season|####]]
- Then I guess List of Philadelphia Phillies managers needs some cleaning-up. RyanCross @ 23:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- franchise should be linked to Professional_sports_league_organization#The_system_developed_in_baseball in the first sentence.
- DONE -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 23:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Leo Durocher is the only Astros manager to have been elected into the Baseball Hall of Fame[5] – Period needed between Fame and [5].
- FIXED -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 23:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Larry Dierker is the only Astros manager to have had his jersey number retired by the Astros. – Most people would be questioning what his number was that was retired.
- DONE -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 23:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Dierker is also the sixth manager in MLB history to win a division crown in his first season for the Astros in 1997. – Is it possible to link division crown with something?
- Can't find anything that can be wikilinked to "division title" (reworded). -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 23:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment When did that horrible whitespace appear? Please get rid of it. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:52, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You mean the white-space between the table and the images? If I don't upright it, the Achievements column will look messed up. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 03:57, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:01, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [3].
List of NBA All-Stars
I have been working on this list back in July, but sort of abandoned it until this week. Now after making some more edits on the list, I believed it fulfills the FL criteria.—Chris! ct 02:58, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Twelve players—five starters and seven reserves—from each conference are chosen from a pool of 120 players (60 players from each conference with 24 guards, 24 forwards and twelve centers) listed on the ballots by a panel of sport writers and broadcasters. - 1)Link to reserves?
- Could you tell me which article I should link to? I don't see anything relevant in reserve.—Chris! ct 23:01, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well what does a "reserve" mean in the context of Basketball or in the context of the NBA?--SRX 02:54, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
- Could you tell me which article I should link to? I don't see anything relevant in reserve.—Chris! ct 23:01, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The first way is through electronic ballots cast daily by fans on NBA.com or mobile phones. - no need to say way again
- The second way is through paper ballots cast by fans at each NBA arenas and various T-Mobile retail stores. - how about The other is through..
- Coaches are not allowed to vote for their own players and can select two guards, two forwards, one center and two players regardless of positions. - comma before and
- Per
WP:Columns{{reflist}}, not all browsers can handle 4 ref columns.
- Comments: Players should not be sorted into separate sections by number of appearances. All players should be combined into a single sortable table with number of appearances as a sortable column. All headers need to be second-level. Per WP:HEAD, never start an article with a third-level header. Lead and information is great. Reywas92Talk 02:47, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I am not sure if combining all players into a single table will be a good way to illustrate this info. As you can see in this version of the list, a single table is too long and it is hard for readers to look at the number of appearances.—Chris! ct 04:51, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed headers—Chris! ct 05:36, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, I don't mean like that example. Every person should have a column next to the name with the number of All-Star games. It could be with the years like "3: 1999-2001". I want to sort all players alphabetically. Reywas92Talk 22:53, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Instead of "3: 1999-2001", how about make another column for the number of appearances, but not use row spans. Also, I would like to have the "Selections" column sorted out too, so that people can see which player became an All-Star earlier. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 22:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Instead of "3: 1999-2001", how about make another column for the number of appearances, but not use row spans. Also, I would like to have the "Selections" column sorted out too, so that people can see which player became an All-Star earlier. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- No, I don't mean like that example. Every person should have a column next to the name with the number of All-Star games. It could be with the years like "3: 1999-2001". I want to sort all players alphabetically. Reywas92Talk 22:53, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed headers—Chris! ct 05:36, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I am not sure if combining all players into a single table will be a good way to illustrate this info. As you can see in this version of the list, a single table is too long and it is hard for readers to look at the number of appearances.—Chris! ct 04:51, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done—Chris! ct 02:54, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Excellent! My only other comments are in the notes. I think that the note that the 1999 game was canceled can be mentioned in the lead rather than as a note of the first sentence. Also, I do not think it is relevant or necessary to mention the two names and their Arabic meanings. Reywas92Talk 18:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I move the note about 1999 game to the lead. As for notes about the names, I mention them because I think it should be made clear to readers that the names shown here are different from their originals. But if you still think they are irrelevant, I will remove them.—Chris! ct 19:53, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Excellent! My only other comments are in the notes. I think that the note that the 1999 game was canceled can be mentioned in the lead rather than as a note of the first sentence. Also, I do not think it is relevant or necessary to mention the two names and their Arabic meanings. Reywas92Talk 18:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "(60 players from each conference with 24 guards, 24 forwards and twelve centers)" Use em dashes instead of parenthesis, and "twelve"-->12.
- "The starters are
currentlychosen in two ways." - "
eachNBA arenas" - "and various T-Mobile retail stores" Various implies a variety or divesity in these stores, use "some" instead.
- "
Lastly, if a player is unable to participate due to injury, the NBA commissioner will select a replacement." Why "Lastly"? This is not a chronological list (in the lead). - "holds the record for most All-Star Game selection and most All-Star Game played. " Should be pluralized "selections" and "Games".
- "He was selected 19 times and has played
a total ofin 18 games." Why only 18 games (add a footnote if necessary)? - Is it possible to include information about why the All-Stars missed certain games?
- "Shaquille O'Neal holds the record for most All-Star Game selection among active players, with
a total of14 selections." Dabomb87 (talk) 02:49, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:49, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c]
- Question: Is it possible to split the list into two, so that the page will load faster? This is because, with 145,184 bytes, some computer may tend to take longer than 30 seconds to load the page.
-
- Why not? You could easily split it to for example, List of NBA All-Stars: A–L and another one with M–Z. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 22:49, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think it is better to leave it in a single page for now. The page is not long that it have to split into two page immediately.—Chris! ct 01:00, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "The page is not long that it have to split into two page immediately." Are you sure? The page is 145 kilobytes long. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 01:03, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- The reason I don't want to split the list is because it is very hard for readers to look at the number of selections when players are split in two page. I am willing to change if you can come up with a way to shorten the list while illustrating all useful info on a single page, but unfortunately I think that spliting the page according to last name isn't going to work.—Chris! ct 02:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "The page is not long that it have to split into two page immediately." Are you sure? The page is 145 kilobytes long. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- Why not? You could easily split it to for example, List of NBA All-Stars: A–L and another one with M–Z. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- I think making the columns wider is ridiculous. I suggest you make the lists thinner to add images of the players. One image of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is not enough.
- You just mention that this page is loading a bit slow, adding more pictures will make things worse.—Chris! ct 19:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That is true. How about add another column for Nationality or Position? -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 22:49, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That is true. How about add another column for Nationality or Position? -- signed by SRE.K.A
- You could note that the statistics are correct through the end of the 2008 NBA All-Star Game.
- Instead of noting the column, "Selections", you could add that note to the key.
-- signed by SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 07:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You could tell the readers that Jerry West have the most consecutive selections, and that Bob Cousy and John Havlicek are tied for the most consecutive games played.
- Some reader may not know what a "all-star" is. You can get a definition of it and put it on the article, or just rename the article to "List of players selected to play in an NBA All-Star Game", or something similar.
- After some thoughts, the first sentence of the second paragraph pretty much explains this. But if you think it is inadequate, I can move the page.—Chris! ct 02:52, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The article should be moved to "List of NBA all-stars" because of the grammar. Also, you should add the definition of an "all-star". The reference is here, which defines, "Sports. a player selected for an all-star team." -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 03:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Like I said, the first sentence of the second paragraph already define what is "all-stars", "players who have been selected for the All-Star Game". As for the grammar issue, I don't anything wrong with the title. But I will ask someone about that.—Chris! ct 19:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I also don't see the grammar problem. "All-Stars" is a proper noun, so it should be capitalized. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The first sentence does define what an all-star is, but doesn't actually tell the readers directly what the sentence actually defines. I suggest you change, "The following is a list of players who have been selected for the All-Star Game at least once in their career." to "An (A/a)ll-(S/s)tar is a player who have been selected for the All-Star Game at least once in their career.[1]" -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 22:05, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, how is all-star a proper noun? It has never been spelled capitalized. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 22:05, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, I think I understand what you are talking about. I linked all-star so that readers can understand the term. I also added "NBA" in the first sentence of the second para to avoid ambiguity and to make absolutely sure that the capitalization of "All-Stars" was correct in that instance. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
-
- The sentence still does not tell the readers what the definition is defining. I still suggest you change the sentence to "An (A/a)ll-(S/s)tar is a player who have been selected for the All-Star Game at least once in their career.[2]", ot something similar. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 00:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sounds good to me, but of course with the reference. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 03:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The sentence still does not tell the readers what the definition is defining. I still suggest you change the sentence to "An (A/a)ll-(S/s)tar is a player who have been selected for the All-Star Game at least once in their career.[2]", ot something similar. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- Also, how is all-star a proper noun? It has never been spelled capitalized. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- The first sentence does define what an all-star is, but doesn't actually tell the readers directly what the sentence actually defines. I suggest you change, "The following is a list of players who have been selected for the All-Star Game at least once in their career." to "An (A/a)ll-(S/s)tar is a player who have been selected for the All-Star Game at least once in their career.[1]" -- signed by SRE.K.A
- The article should be moved to "List of NBA all-stars" because of the grammar. Also, you should add the definition of an "all-star". The reference is here, which defines, "Sports. a player selected for an all-star team." -- signed by SRE.K.A
(outdent) Do we really need a reference? If that is the issue, we can say: "For the purposes of this list, an NBA All-Star is a player who has been selected for the All-Star Game at least once in their career." That way we are free from having to justify our calling the players an All-Star. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No references are needed, in my opinion—Chris! ct 03:53, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Remember that some readers may not know much about basketball, that is why I wanted a reference for the definition of "all-star". As long as all the readers know what you are saying, then its fine. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 04:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Remember that some readers may not know much about basketball, that is why I wanted a reference for the definition of "all-star". As long as all the readers know what you are saying, then its fine. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- Support Nice work on the list. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 07:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:01, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [4].
List of monarchs of the Muhammad Ali Dynasty
previous FLC (20:02, 8 September 2008)
previous FLC (00:56, 17 December 2008)
Third time's a charm? I hope so, since all of the objections raised in the two previous nominations have been addressed. BomBom (talk) 22:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support My concerns have been resolved, and it looks like the image concerns are fixed too. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Looks excellent. john k (talk) 02:04, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support though it would be nice if you can expand the lead a bit more.—Chris! ct 02:47, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- Could you try to include a link to dynasty somewhere in the lead?
- The lead gives a background for the topic, but doesn't really summarize the list. Could you maybe mention who had the longest reign, shortest, etc?
- Also in the lead, could you add a couple sentences explaining and maybe what form of government Egypt went to after the monarchy was abolished?
- Could you add a key somewhere that explains the colours?
- Overall, a pretty nice list. -- Scorpion0422 20:26, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A link to dynasty has been added in the lead. A key explaining the colours has also been added. Your second and third concerns will be addressed simultaneously when the lead is expanded. I am currently working on such an expansion and will notify you once I am done with it, so that you review the new text in the lead. Regards. BomBom (talk) 03:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The lead has been significantly expanded. It now summarizes the list, providing a brief description of each monarch. It also mentions who had the longest reign and the shortest reign. Information has also been added regarding the form of government Egypt went to after the abolition of the monarchy. Is the lead OK now? BomBom (talk) 03:34, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- A link to dynasty has been added in the lead. A key explaining the colours has also been added. Your second and third concerns will be addressed simultaneously when the lead is expanded. I am currently working on such an expansion and will notify you once I am done with it, so that you review the new text in the lead. Regards. BomBom (talk) 03:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that all links from the Official Website of the Egyptian Presidency show up as dead according to the link checker. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:09, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed. This is quite strange since the links were still working a few days ago. Anyway, there are two possible solutions to this problem. The first solution would be to include links to archived copies of the pages in question, all of which are available in the Internet Archive. The second solution would be to remove the links to the Presidency website altogether, and replace them with links to the website of the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, an equally trustworthy source. The latter has profile pages for all the monarchs in question, albeit in Arabic. Which solution do you prefer? BomBom (talk) 03:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The likely problem is that the site is temporarily broken. In that case, since this nomination is only three days old, I think we would be better served by waiting. If the links have not fixed themselves by say, January 1, then replace them with the web archive links. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:38, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed. This is quite strange since the links were still working a few days ago. Anyway, there are two possible solutions to this problem. The first solution would be to include links to archived copies of the pages in question, all of which are available in the Internet Archive. The second solution would be to remove the links to the Presidency website altogether, and replace them with links to the website of the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, an equally trustworthy source. The latter has profile pages for all the monarchs in question, albeit in Arabic. Which solution do you prefer? BomBom (talk) 03:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:02, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [5].
Ballon d'Or
The list has gone through a major revamping and I now believe it meets all the criteria necessary to become featured. Thanks in advance for your comments. NapHit (talk) 19:19, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from Jameboy
- "The "Ballon d'Or", often referred to as the European Footballer of the Year"... isn't the Ballon d'Or the trophy and the European Footballer of the Year the recipient? Should it be changed to the European Footballer of the Year award?
- Footnote A should have a comma after "Despite being born in Argentina"
- In the "by player" section, I don't see the point of regurgitating all the players who have won it just once. Can we just mention that it has been won once "by 34 players" (if my count-up is correct)?
- "over the previous year" - can we clarify whether this is calendar year or football season? I assume the former, but it should be clarified due to many people using "year" and "season" interchangeably. Also I think "during" sounds better than "over".
- "players at European clubs; meaning" comma not semi-colon (or change second half to "this meant that")
- "This changed in 1995 when there was a change" - repetitive phrasing
- "Germany has produced the most winners" - German players or players from German clubs?
Cheers. --Jameboy (talk) 00:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the comments I have addressed them all. NapHit (talk) 17:09, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from Toon05 Support
- Done Good job on the article. One think I am wondering about is why the most recent winner of the award (Cristiano Ronaldo, as you undoubtedly know) isn't mentioned in the text, only in the table. It would seem prudent to include the information in the text, as it would undoubtedly be one of the most sought-after pieces of information to readers - they currently need to scroll down to the bottom of the table, or figure out that the table is, in fact sortable. Best (and Merry Christmas), – Toon(talk) 00:37, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd be tempted to disagree there on grounds of recentism: we don't want to be constantly updating the leads of articles or lists to mention the most recent event related to the subject. Ballon d'Or 2008 has all the info on this year's award. --Jameboy (talk) 01:01, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well the article is updated at least every year due to the nature of the award, the list of winners needs to be updated, so really WP:RECENTISM isn't an issue. It makes sense to have the reigning European Footballer of the Year mentioned in the text. – Toon(talk) 14:45, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - Found a few issues with it, in addition to the ones above. Here's a list of them.
- France Football is a magazine, so it should be in italics.
- "with 96 journalists from around the world choosing..." This is a "noun-plus-ing" structure and should be adjusted. Perhaps try a semi-colon and "96 journalists from around the world chose..."
- Replace the comma after "Three men have won the award three times" with a semi-colon.
- "Platini won all of his awards in a row from 1983 to 1985, and is the only player to acheive this feat." I don't believe this is specific enough; of course he's the only person to win three in a row from 1983 to 1985. What's important is that he's the only player to do it, period.
- Another noun-plus-ing: "with five players winning seven awards between them."
- Next sentence: "with seven players winning eight awards whilst (change to while) playing for the club."
- Missed this one. Giants2008 (17-14) 20:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The Alfredo Di Stefano photo doesn't have source and date of publication, both of which are needed to prove its public domain status.
- Reference 7 (Juve legend Sivori dies) is lacking a publisher.
- The Sports Illustrated references should be handled in a similar manner to the ones from The Independent. One SI ref is from Reuters, and the other is from the AP. Giants2008 (17-14) 03:26, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - After my comments, and those of the other reviewers, were addressed, I think this meets FL standards. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:50, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:11, 27 December 2008 (UTC) [reply]Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- Only image captions that are complete sentences need full stops (periods) at the end.
- "Originally journalists could only vote for European players at European clubs" Comma after "Originally".
- "meaning that players like Diego Maradona and Pelé were ineligible for the award" Make a footnote that notes which clubs and countries these players play for and are from, respectively.
- "In 1995" Comma after this phrase.
- "The rules were changed again in 2007 with players of every nationality and from any club around the world eligible for the award."-->The rules were changed again in 2007 so that players of any nationality and from any club around the world could be eligible for the award.
- "European based"-->Europe-based.
- "Three men have won the award three times" Add each to the end of this phrase.
- "Platini is the only player to win the award three times in a row"-->Platini is the only player to have won the award three times in a row
- "German players have won the Ballon d'Or the most, five players have won seven awards between them." Make the comma a semicolon.
- "Italian club Juventus has had the most winners, with seven players winning eight awards while playing for the club." Another one of those noun + -ing phrases, try: "Italian club Juventus has had the most winners; seven players have won eight awards while playing for the club. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:11, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Spell out lesser-known abbreviations such as RSSSF and UEFA.What makes http://www.laureus.com/ a reliable source?Dabomb87 (talk) 02:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A quick look at their article and you'll see hy it's a reliable source, they have a famous award for sports people and are a famous sports organisation. NapHit (talk) 19:09, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Images look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:11, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
File:Jc ajax belle photo 01.jpg Who are the "personnel"?Dabomb87 (talk) 02:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- replced with image of Kevin Keegan, no idea who "personnel" are. NapHit (talk) 19:09, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "presented each year" don't need the "each year" part as reader already know the award is awarded annually.
- I think the column, "Country", should be renamed "Nationality" or "Citizenship".
- I think the "By (noun)" sections are ridiculous. Why do you need to have those when the sorting function can easily determine which country, player, or club had the most award winners?
Comments by -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c]
- "..., meaning that players like Diego Maradona and Pelé were ineligible for the award." Why do you need to point out name?
- "Three men..." Does it say that the award can only be awarded to men, and not women?
- I don't think that needs to be made explicit, it is pretty obvious. NapHit (talk) 20:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- But do you have a reference that only men are allowed to win the award? The word "obvious" relates to WP:Original research. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 02:58, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- But do you have a reference that only men are allowed to win the award? The word "obvious" relates to WP:Original research. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- "Ronaldo became the first Brazilian to win the award in 1997, after non-Europeans were made eligible." Why does this also need to be pointed out?
- What are the years wikilinked to? Tell the readers that by note or by key.
- The years are wikilinked to the relevant year of the award, a note is not needed for that it's just overkill. NapHit (talk) 20:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I know that somewhere on WP:MOS, it says not to pipelink years (ie. 1982) That is why you need to tell the readers first about what the years wikilink to. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 02:58, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]- That's not what it says. The MOS is rather obsolete on this detail; the latest consensus (i.e. Date Linking RfC) suggests that when articles are piped through single-year links, it is better to be explicit about where the links go so as to not confuse the reader. Most of the basketball and baseball lists use this method, see List of Washington Wizards head coaches as an example. Also, all the years should be linked because the tables are sortable. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:59, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I know that somewhere on WP:MOS, it says not to pipelink years (ie. 1982) That is why you need to tell the readers first about what the years wikilink to. -- signed by SRE.K.A
-- signed by SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 07:18, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- With regard to the section about Maradona and Pele, I think it's important to highlight that the two players who are almost universally regarded as the best footballers of all time were ineligible - it is not a minor detail IMHO. We could rustle up a large amount of sources to demonstrate this if required. Best, – Toon(talk) 16:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've addressed all your comments. NapHit (talk) 20:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Toon05 stated, "I think it's important to highlight that the two players who are almost universally regarded as the best footballers of all time were ineligible" This is called original research. According to WP:Original research, it is not allowed. I still believe that pointing out players have no use. For example, why do you need to point out the first Brazilian, but not the first Czech? -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 02:58, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Toon05 stated, "I think it's important to highlight that the two players who are almost universally regarded as the best footballers of all time were ineligible" This is called original research. According to WP:Original research, it is not allowed. I still believe that pointing out players have no use. For example, why do you need to point out the first Brazilian, but not the first Czech? -- signed by SRE.K.A
- I've addressed all your comments. NapHit (talk) 20:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- With regard to the section about Maradona and Pele, I think it's important to highlight that the two players who are almost universally regarded as the best footballers of all time were ineligible - it is not a minor detail IMHO. We could rustle up a large amount of sources to demonstrate this if required. Best, – Toon(talk) 16:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:02, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [6].
List of Montreal Canadiens head coaches
-- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c] 01:46, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Officially known as Le Club de Hockey Canadien,[1] the Montreal Canadiens (French: Les Canadiens de Montréal) are an Canadian professional ice hockey team based in Montreal, Quebec. - I'm guessing the an is because of the type of English they use, right?
- ...in 1976-77 and 1988-89 respectively. - why not link to the seasons?
- Because wikilinking them will maybe confuse the readers. I really don't know how it is confusing, but if I'm correct, there was a discussion about this on WT:MOS. I don't know where though... -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Because wikilinking them will maybe confuse the readers. I really don't know how it is confusing, but if I'm correct, there was a discussion about this on WT:MOS. I don't know where though... -- SRE.K.A
- Dandurand is the only coach to have spent his entire NHL head coaching career with the Canadiens, and have been elected to the Hockey Hall of Fame as a builder. - I thought there were nine that were spent their entire careers with the Canadiens. If you mean that they have spent their entire careers with the Canadiens and to have been elected to the HoF, then maybe adding a too before have might tweak it a bit.
- Dandurand did both: spending his entire NHL head coaching career with the Canadiens and to have been elected into the Hockey Hall of Fame. I removed the comma before and, hope that clears thing up. -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In the footnotes, instead of having to reference to it over 6 times, use the {{ref}} and {{note}} templates, they work better in this case.
- Didn't I already do that with the {{ref label}} and {{note label}} template? -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from Killervogel5
- "The Canadiens are owned by George N. Gillett Jr., former head coach of the Canadiens,"→"Canadiens;"
- I think I did it right... -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Though Dick Irvin has coached the team for 15 seasons, Toe Blake, who has coached for 13 seasons," - keeping "has" in there makes it sound like they are all still coaching. Consider "Though Dick Irvin coached the team for 15 seasons, Toe Blake, who coached for 13 seasons,"
- Copied your re-phrasing. -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Blake also has the most Stanley Cup championships"→"has won"
- DONE -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "in 1976-77 and 1988-89 respectively"→use en-dashes in year ranges.
- DONE -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hope this helps. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:38, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "The team's first head coach was Newsy Lalonde, who has coached the Canadiens for eight NHL seasons, in two stints." - remove "has" again. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- DONE -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 23:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support from KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
- Support: Had a few issues with the grammar in the prose and captions, but I went through and did a minor grammar copyedit and it looks good to go! – Nurmsook! talk... 08:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I've got to bring up the inevitable discussion about when to start the Canadiens coaching list, whether 1909 or 1917. Now in the lead, it makes several mentions to the team being founded in 1909, including winning the 1916 Stanley Cup. However, the list only includes the Canadiens from 1917, when they joined the NHL. I would go ahead and include the NHA coaches in this list. After all, they are included in the NHL Record Book for the Canadiens, the only team that includes pre-NHL anything. Information is available in regards to the coaches, and it was a vital part of the team's history, and should be included. Kaiser matias (talk) 17:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I really don't know about actually putting the NHA seasons because of the lack of sources for the playoffs. The only source I know that covers the regular season is [7]. The playoffs will be hard to find. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 23:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Also, you're welcome for the barnstar! -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 23:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Comment While I'll be busy the next few days due to the time of year, I probably have enough references to cover the NHA Canadiens' coaches. It's probably not going to be in time for the nomination, but so be it. And thanks for the award, I appreciated it.
- One more comment. The NHL Record Book, as well as the Montreal Canadiens article, lists Babe Siebert as a coach, even though he died before coaching a game. Since he was officially appointed as a coach, and is recognised as such, he should be included, with a note mentioning he drowned prior to coaching a game, similar to what the Record Book does. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:00, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Thanks for noticing that. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards on 01:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Thanks for noticing that. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- Also, you're welcome for the barnstar! -- signed by SRE.K.A
Comments:
- I went ahead and have figured out the coaching record of the NHL Canadiens. I'll go and add them in the next few days, after finding references for it. However this leads to something. In the NHA and early NHL, the playoffs were a total goals series, not the best of format used now. A note should probably be made to that degree for coaches of that era, as it makes a huge difference.
- It is a difference, but it won't effect the list. I already knew that the playoffs system were by goals before the 1930s. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 03:24, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- On the subject of NHA coaches, the issue of how to add them to the list comes up. Now I would personally say have a running total of all coaches, NHA and NHL, then have seperate running totals for the NHA and NHL coaches. For example, Guy Carbonneau is the 25th coach of the Canadiens in the NHL, but the 28th total coach of the team. Maybe break up Newsy Lalonde's totals, since he coached in both the NHA and NHL. Again, I'll go and add it myself within a few days, to give an idea of what I'm tryig to convey.
- The total will be including both the NHA and the NHL, which is of course 28 according to your references.
- Support As the NHA totals are not of dire importance, and it's stated as not being part of the article, it can wait until proper references can be obtained. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good job, almost all the issues were pointed out by reviewers (and subsequently addressed) before I could get to this article! Dabomb87 (talk) 00:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually there is one thing, could you add the ISBN for the book?Dabomb87 (talk) 00:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:32, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, although I have one minor concern: Is the asterisk, dagger, and double dagger really necessary in the key? The list is already color coded, the extra symbols just look redundant. Tavix (talk) 07:09, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- According to WP:MOS, yes. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 07:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Excellent list. I do have two comments, but neither is significant enough to withold support. In the sentence that begins "Alhough Dick Irvin coached the team for 15 seasons, Toe Blake, who coached two less seasons," should "two less seasons" actually read "two fewer seasons"? I'm actually not sure of the correct grammar myself here, or if maybe both are fine. Also, I would prefer to see a section showing the overall Canadiens coaching records of coaches with multiple stints (e.g., List of San Francisco Giants managers), but I don't think that is required to attain FL status. Rlendog (talk) 18:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed the sentence. Also, the readers can easily sort the name column and then add the numbers up if some managers have multiple stints, so it wouldn't really be necessary. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 00:29, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:02, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [9].
List of No Country for Old Men awards and nominations
This list was created to include all major and regional awards and nominations for the film No Country for Old Men. It is thorougly sourced and cited and meets all content and style requirements (to my knowledge) for a featured list. The content will be stable since all major awards for which the film would qualify have now been awarded and any future accolades would likely encompass "Best of..." or "Top films of..." types of inclusion in the future. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:13, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Looks fine to me. The JPStalk to me 21:21, 22 December 2008 (UTC) Comment: I have not been involved in this article prior to nomination, but have helped out since. Any opinions expressed here are completely neutral. The JPStalk to me 00:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any way that you could make the list more in the format of List of Carnivàle awards and nominations? Dabomb87 (talk) 21:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
CommentSupport - prose checks out fine, as does the rest of the list.but I agree with Dabomb, this format serves no real intention but to make it look more appealing. It should be converted to the format of other FL's, such as the one Dabomb pointed out above.--SRX 22:36, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Response - I looked at the few awards focused lists and cannot see a comparative example. I don't think they are comparative. In fact, there are no comparative examples in featured lists at this time, although it is likely that as some changes from projects like WP:FILMS and WP:ACTOR are occurring, it may lead to more. One of the changes that is about to occur in WP:FILMS is that the use of the pink/green nominated/win templates won't be supported, while tabling of awards will be, using a similiar format to what is presented here. To my knowledge, this may be the first list of its kind to be considered and I'm not altogether sure that the same focus for television award lists should be applied to a film awards list. They spring from different projects with different focus.
Carnivàle is a television series, as are all the other featured lists for individual program awards, the production of which extended over a period of time, yielding multiple nominations of the same award over time. I'd have to ask how a division of awards for a one time production would be better served by breaking it down into a table for each award. Even breaking it down into acting/technical awards would complicate it unnecessarily, since the majority of awards over these categories would create cross-content (acting, writing, editing, etc. are awarded from the same organizations). There is nothing in the FL criteria that compels a breakdown into multiple tables, and criteria says specifically: Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour. So how is making it visually appealing not an intention?
Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- There is a closing parentheses in the third paragraph of the Lede, but no opening one.
- done
- The fourth "paragraph" is just a single sentence. Can it be merged into one of the other paras?
- done
- Please have the use of the poster checked by an image reviewer. I'm not sure it qualifies as fair use in this article because it bears no relation to the awards it won
- It was removed but further search will be conducted to try and find an acceptable use image of perhaps the Coens accepting one of the awards
- Is there an article for DGA Awards in the Lede? All the other awards are wikilinked
- done
- What does "collectively as Roderick Jaynes" mean?
- done clarified and cited
- Why does the table use small writing? What effect does regular sized text have?
- Since there is the L2 header, "Awards and nominations", why repeat it as another header in the table?
- Just a table style and the need/desire for enough sub-headings for the TOC
- I'm happy for the format of the table to be used, but simply saying that WP:FILMS and WP:ACTOR are going in this direction may not be enough. Do you have links to talk page discussions?
- See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers#Discussion, which ratified (for lack of a better term) the style as well as the smaller text, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films#Possible table format, which is progressing toward this format with no dissenting opinions on the style. It's slowed a bit because of the holidays, but Erik is developing the guidelines.
- Same for the use of {{won}} {{nominated}}. Please provide a link to the discussion where their use is discouraged.
- This is included in the WP:FILMS discussion above.
- I think some of the External links could be trimmed. This isn't a Canadian movie, so the official Canadian site could go. Including it is rather arbitrary. Why not the British, German, or Russian official sites? Get rid of the main imdb link, too. This article is about the awards only, so the imdb award page is good enough.
- done
- References need formatting correctly. Website names should not be itallicised; only titles of books, magazines and newspapers. Terms such as Inc should be removed, and things such as org, .com etc, as in "goldenglobes.org", "GoldenGlobes.org", "BAFTA.org", "theage.com.au" should be recast as the actual names: Golden Globes, BAFTA, The Age. Please wikilink to articles of publishers and publications where available.
- done Note: Some of the references are from the website of the organizations that gave the awards. Since the awards are linked in the table itself, should they also be linked in the references, or would that be overlinking? Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The empty cells may appear to some people as if information is missing. Could an em- or en-dash be used to show that there is no missing info?
- done
That's all I have for now. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:55, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think the image qualifies as fair use for the reasons Matthew says. I've removed it. The JPStalk to me 00:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Is using mdash appropriate for the tables? MOS:DASH does not seem to permit this kind of usage. Maybe use something else or leave it blank? —Erik (talk • contrib) 20:46, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I added those after the (last) point above - "The empty cells may appear to some people as if information is missing. Could an em- or en-dash be used to show that there is no missing info?" Neither mdash or ndash specifically endorses this, but I've seen dashes used in other FL tables. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "No Country for Old Men is a 2007 American film that was a multiple award winner in categories ranging from Best Picture" "ranging"-->that ranged.
- "were multiple nominees in Best Director, Best Editing (under the pseudonym of Roderick Jaynes[1]), and Best Adapted Screenplay."-->were nominated for the Best Director, Best Editing (under the pseudonym of Roderick Jaynes), and Best Adapted Screenplay awards.
- "The film was nominated for eight Academy Awards, winning four, including Best Picture,[2] four Golden Globe Awards, winning two at the 65th Golden Globe Awards." The logical flow is thrown off by the commas. Try: "The film was nominated for eight Academy Awards, winning four, including Best Picture; it was nominated for four Golden Globe Awards, winning two at the 65th Golden Globe Awards."
Dabomb87 (talk) 17:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- reworded, although I didn't use the semi-colon. It's a personal dislike.
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:52, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Spell out lesser-known abbreviations such as BAFTA.What makes the following sites reliable sources?Reference 6 needs a publication date.Dabomb87 (talk) 17:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. BAFTA spelled out and ref date included. Chlotrudis is the source for its own awards, the Boston Society Film Critics Award was given its own source and the Hollywood Reporter article reprinted on Backstage was replaced with the original publisher.
Working on the other source.Alternative Film Guide references replaced with refs either from Variety or other pertinent sources. I think that addresses all concerns raised. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:49, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support an excellent-looking list. Only one issue, which I am not sure is major... since there is no date auto-formatting anymore, would it be better to rewrite the ISO formatting of the dates into American date formatting? Not a deal-breaker, but I tend to fix up the dates like here. —Erik (talk • contrib) 23:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All of the dates used are in the references, unless I've badly overlooked one in the prose. The template examples don't indicate that is required, one uses the "2008-12-29" style. If it's an issue, I'd be glad to change it, but it would help to see a guideline that indicates it. And thanks :) Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. Content is fine, but I have some concerns over the style which echo comments made above.
- Why use an infobox instead of a normal thumbnail for what is essentially an image and a caption? I believe the infobox is intended for articles about actual awards, not lists of awards such as this.
- Why the "Awards and nominations" header in the table? It's redundant to the section header and serves no further purpose, so it could be removed with no detriment to the table or article.
- Would "Recipient" or "Nominee" make a better column heading than "Name"?
- What is the justification for using smaller text? It's not as if space is at a real premium here, so normal sized text would do just fine. While this doesn't make a huge difference to me using IE, for other users on different browsers (such as Firefox) the smaller text size will be quite noticeable. I don't think that this smaller text size is entirely appropriate for the main body of an article.
- I'm not sold on the visual styling of this table as opposed to a standard wikitable (as seen in List of Carnivàle awards and nominations, for example). The colours I can take or leave, but the grid lines are far less visible making the table a little harder to read. PC78 (talk) 16:55, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Response - Most of these comments actually don't echo comments from above. If the infobox is an issue, it can be replaced, I was looking for something a little more visually appealing than just a thumb image. The comment about "Awards and nominations" was made because originally the subtitle also said that, so it is no longer redundant to the subtitle. Since the category called "Names" covers both recipients and nominees, which would you suggest be used that would not ignore the other? As for the table style comments, you didn't raise opposition to this at the discussion for the table styling, so why are you raising it here now? This was created on Firefox and the font size is not a readability issue, it is a stylistic choice. The grid lines are the same color on this table as the grid lines on the List of Carnivàle awards and nominations, so on that, I don't see the point you're making. As I noted above, the Carnivàle list is for a television series with a (then) ongoing series of nominations over time, while this is static. Both of the reviewers above withdrew their concerns regarding this list being like that one. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, some of these points were raised above which you yourself have just acknowledged (I never meant all of them). However, I remain unsatisfied by your comments.
- Infobox: This isn't really a major issue, though it does seem like you're using one for the sake of it. If the article can have an infobox with actual info in it then great, but if not then a thumbnail should suffice. I don't think it does anything for the "visual appeal" of the article.
- "Awards and nominations" heading in the table: Of course this is still redundant, a rewording of the section header doesn't change that. You only need one heading for the table, not two that say essentially the same thing. My point above stands.
- "Recipient" or "Nominee": Neither of these terms are exclusive. However, this was merely a suggestion which you may take or leave.
- Table style: In the discussion we had at WT:FILM (which trailed off without any definitive conclusion) I said at several points that I preferred the default styling of "class=wikitable" and that I didn't see any reason to employ the syling which you have here. Regarding the text size, of course this is a stylistic choice but it nevertheless has an effect on readability. The smaller text adds nothing obvious to the article besides the rather dubious sense that it is more visually appealing, and I maintain my position that such reduced text it inappropriate for the main body of an article such as this. My point about the grid lines being less visible should be quite obvious; the lines may be the same colour, but the background colour of the table is darker, hence they sand out less. But my primary concern here is with regard to the text size. PC78 (talk) 14:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It wasn't my view that it trailed off without conclusion. It was left off at attempting to develop specific guidelines. You are raising objections here to my FL review much stronger than you bothered to object on WP:FILMS, with one comment leading at one point to the comment "Well, PC78 is not a fan of it, apparently." You said you preferred the default style, but I don't see that anyone else enthusiastically endorsed your comment. Finally, when I look at the table here, and the one on the Carnivale list, I see the same background color. When I removed the background color from this one, then it looked different. You also said that the List of Little Miss Sunshine awards and honors list "is essentially the same as how [you] set up awards tables". When I compare that, it also has the similar background color. You also objected to the awards table used on Mulholland Drive (film), which uses even smaller text and definitively distinct background color, but that is a featured article. I'm at a bit of a loss for a response here beyond this. Wildhartlivie (talk) 19:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No, some of these points were raised above which you yourself have just acknowledged (I never meant all of them). However, I remain unsatisfied by your comments.
- I did change the text size to a larger set, but just to reiterate, I see no difference in table backgrounds between this and the Little Mis Sunshine and Carnivale lists. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:48, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for that, it does at least alleviate my primary concern. If I am raising my objections much stronger here than in the previous discussion, it is because I felt that discussion was more to establish a basic layout for such tables rather than the more specific styling we are discussing here. I don't recall any "enthusiastic endorsment" for your preffered style either; I don't believe it was commented on much one way or the other. To give you some comparative examples, all other film-related featured lists use bog standard tables without any such styling that you are using here; certainly none of them use anything other than full size text. A final word about the background/gridline colours: if you truly see no difference beween this list and (for example) List of Little Miss Sunshine awards and honors then I'm inclined to think that this is another browser issue. To me the lines on your list stand out far less, and while it isn't a major issue here, in some such lists this does IMHO affect readability. Anyway, it's late so I'll have another look at this tomorrow before I withraw my opposition. PC78 (talk) 02:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It must be a browser issue, because I truly see no difference in the gridlines. On this list, there is a darker gridline between the major awards (Academy, BAFTA, etc.) but if I recall, it didn't appear that way to you previously, although others didn't say that. I looked at the table on Christmas day from a computer using Internet Explorer and don't recall a line problem there, but then she had her computer set up oddly anyway. On my computer, the background of the tables on all three lists we've mentioned are the same color as the background in the Wikipedia styling around the outside of the articles. As an aside note, in the near future, organizations will begin to release updated lists of top films, and I suspect that No Country will be included on some of those. If that happens, I would think that a secondary table would be developed to include those top film lists, much as the Carnivale list does now. To go back to the Mullholland Drive (film) FA, I see less line distinction on the recipient/nominees column than on this one. After looking at that, I did change the "Names" column to "Recipients and nominees" on this one. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:06, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, a few minor issues that will need resolving. There are two blank entries in the "Outcome" column (San Diego & Vancouver awards), and ref #50 is missing a retrieval date. Also (and this one isn't a deal breaker), all of the external links except the IMDb one are just generic links for the film, which seem better left to the main film article. Are these really necessary? PC78 (talk) 17:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know how the blanks happened, but apparently no one noticed that before and were accidental absent spaces. Those are fixed as is the retrieval date, which was a misplaced |. I thought the Box Office Mojo and critic pages were interesting, but they weren't essential, so I removed those, but left the IMDB awards page and the official site link. Wildhartlivie (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, a few minor issues that will need resolving. There are two blank entries in the "Outcome" column (San Diego & Vancouver awards), and ref #50 is missing a retrieval date. Also (and this one isn't a deal breaker), all of the external links except the IMDb one are just generic links for the film, which seem better left to the main film article. Are these really necessary? PC78 (talk) 17:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It must be a browser issue, because I truly see no difference in the gridlines. On this list, there is a darker gridline between the major awards (Academy, BAFTA, etc.) but if I recall, it didn't appear that way to you previously, although others didn't say that. I looked at the table on Christmas day from a computer using Internet Explorer and don't recall a line problem there, but then she had her computer set up oddly anyway. On my computer, the background of the tables on all three lists we've mentioned are the same color as the background in the Wikipedia styling around the outside of the articles. As an aside note, in the near future, organizations will begin to release updated lists of top films, and I suspect that No Country will be included on some of those. If that happens, I would think that a secondary table would be developed to include those top film lists, much as the Carnivale list does now. To go back to the Mullholland Drive (film) FA, I see less line distinction on the recipient/nominees column than on this one. After looking at that, I did change the "Names" column to "Recipients and nominees" on this one. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:06, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for that, it does at least alleviate my primary concern. If I am raising my objections much stronger here than in the previous discussion, it is because I felt that discussion was more to establish a basic layout for such tables rather than the more specific styling we are discussing here. I don't recall any "enthusiastic endorsment" for your preffered style either; I don't believe it was commented on much one way or the other. To give you some comparative examples, all other film-related featured lists use bog standard tables without any such styling that you are using here; certainly none of them use anything other than full size text. A final word about the background/gridline colours: if you truly see no difference beween this list and (for example) List of Little Miss Sunshine awards and honors then I'm inclined to think that this is another browser issue. To me the lines on your list stand out far less, and while it isn't a major issue here, in some such lists this does IMHO affect readability. Anyway, it's late so I'll have another look at this tomorrow before I withraw my opposition. PC78 (talk) 02:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Article is well written, comprehensive and fully referenced, and that's what's really important here, though I retain a few misgivings over the style issues discussed above. I have, however, made the following changes:
- Replaced the infobox with a thumnail per my comments above. Other film-related FLs such as List of Japanese submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film look just fine with a thumbnail, and there's no reason why this article should be any different. I've also added a bit of context to the caption.
- Removed the heading from the table and renamed the section heading accordingly. Again, I still don't see any good reason to have two headings, and I'm not seeing it in other film-related FLs. I could understand if the table was split into two or more sections, but that isn't the case here.
By all means feel free to revert if you feel strongly enough about either of these changes, though I would ask that you state your reasons here. My support stands regardless. PC78 (talk) 02:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for the support. I am trying to think of something to do with the heading in order to retain the blue, which I think gives the page a bit of needed color. Perhaps adding a separate section with top ten lists as they occur? Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:03, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [10].
List of Governors of Indiana
User:Golbez, User:Charles Edward, and I have collaborated on bringing this list up to FL quality. It is based on other Governor FLs, and I believe it is finally ready to be promoted. Reywas92Talk 17:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will co-nominate this article since I have also spent considerable time on it and have access the book sources that were used and a fairly extensive knowledge of Indiana history :) Charles Edward (Talk) 02:23, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I co-nominate with but reservations; I'm unhappy with the 'days' column and the party chart at the top. I think the days column is a bit too much (It gives a different view of the date data without really adding any information, IMO, that isn't readily visible with the more abstract terms column; such information, since it requires constant tending, should be in its own list IMO), and the party table gives undue weight to people who were elected once over those who were re-elected, and doesn't really enhance one's knowledge of the subject. Furthermore, it's simply counting certain rows in the table, so it's not new information at all. I'm also unsure about the terms, adding parts of a term together with +, etc, as I think it complicates what is already not an entirely intuitive column; but others would disagree, saying it simplifies it. To each his own. :) --Golbez (talk) 08:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I do get your point about the party table. I don't understand why the days would need constant tending. I added a template that automatically updates the current governor. It's nice to be able to sort them by length of time in office; that can't be done with terms. For Morton's terms, it shows how he only served one full term with some on both sides rather than two terms when added. Reywas92Talk 15:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I see that, I'm still used to the old days. :P As for the "served part a term, then was elected, then served part a term" problem, I brought up the Clinton/Tucker/Huckabee part of the Arkansas table. It's not great, but I still think it's better than all the addition. --Golbez (talk) 17:15, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "The second and current constitution of 1851 lengthened terms to four years, with the governor's term commencing on the second Monday in the January following the election."-->The second and current constitution of 1851 lengthened terms to four years; the governor's term commences on the second Monday in the January following the election.
- That doesn't sound right.
- Whoops, forgot to add an "s". My issues was with the with + -ing sentence structure, which is awkward and ungrammatical. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Still not so sure about the semicolon here. I'll try to think of something else. Reywas92Talk 03:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I can find no source against this and a grammar expert said it was acceptable. The constistution specifies the date, so a semicolon splitting the clauses doesn't work, and nothing else seems to be parallel. Reywas92Talk 16:46, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- See User:Tony1/Advanced editing exercises#A common problem—noun plus -ing. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Whatever. How's "The second and current constitution of 1851 lengthened terms to four years and set the commencement of the governor's term on the second Monday in the January following the election."? Reywas92Talk 23:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, that's better, but the sentence is a bit winding. Give readers a break with the semicolon: ""The second and current constitution of 1851 lengthened terms to four years; it set the commencement of the governor's term to be the second Monday in the January after the election." Dabomb87 (talk) 23:38, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- How about "The second and current constitution of 1851 lengthened terms to four years, and it set the commencement of the governor's term to be the second Monday in the January after the election."? The semicolon is a too abrupt splitting of clauses that go together. Reywas92Talk 18:11, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, that's better, but the sentence is a bit winding. Give readers a break with the semicolon: ""The second and current constitution of 1851 lengthened terms to four years; it set the commencement of the governor's term to be the second Monday in the January after the election." Dabomb87 (talk) 23:38, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Whatever. How's "The second and current constitution of 1851 lengthened terms to four years and set the commencement of the governor's term on the second Monday in the January following the election."? Reywas92Talk 23:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- See User:Tony1/Advanced editing exercises#A common problem—noun plus -ing. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Whoops, forgot to add an "s". My issues was with the with + -ing sentence structure, which is awkward and ungrammatical. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"the only instance of this is when James B. Ray succeeded William Hendricks."-->this has happened once, when James B. Ray succeeded William Hendricks.
- Done
"Isaac P. Gray and Henry F. Schricker are the only governors to serve non-consecutive terms. "-->Isaac P. Gray and Henry F. Schricker are the only governors to have served non-consecutive terms.
- Done
"The longest-serving state governors are Otis R. Bowen, and Evan Bayh" Comma not necessary. Should it not be "were", since this happened in the past (I assume)?
- Previously it said "Shricker, Bowen, and Bayh." I must have forgotten to remove the comma when removing the incorrect Schricker; Done. No, they still are the longest-serving.
"who served only two days"
- Done
"The most recently-serving governor"-->The most recently serving governor...
- No, I think the hyphen is correct. "Recently-serving" is one phrase. Think about "the recently-servingest governor," not "the recentlyest serving governor."
- See MOS, -ly adjectives should not have hyphens following them. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:HYPHEN: "A hyphen is not used after a standard -ly adverb...unless part of a larger compound...Some words ending in -ly function as both adverbs and adjectives," which this is. The example "a friendly-looking driver" would become "the most friendly-looking driver." Reywas92Talk 03:41, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- See MOS, -ly adjectives should not have hyphens following them. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Use em dashes in the empty cells in the table.
- In this case I don't think it's really necessary; it's clutter and the other FLs don't have it either.
Add a white color (for independents) to the legend.
- Done
Dabomb87 (talk) 01:28, 25 December 2008 (UTC) Images[reply]
File:William H. Harrison.jpg needs a proper source and author.
- I'm not experienced in image tagging, but it says it was by Rembrandt Peale and is now in public domain.
File:VPthomasrmarshall.JPG same.Dabomb87 (talk) 01:28, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know. I just replaced it with another pic of him, File:Thomas Marshall, bain photo portrait, circa 1912.jpg.
Sources
Ref 14 (http://www.allbusiness.com/ should not have its ref title in bold caps. Also, what makes this a reliable source?
- Done. It was actually from Indiana Business Magazine and hosted on Allbusiness.com.
On the citations from the Indiana government website, use "State of Indiana" as the publisher instead of IN.gov.
I think this article is ready for featured status World tcs 20:01, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Kensplanet
It is recommended that you have atleast one map of Indiana at least for people outside the US.KensplanetTC 09:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Reywas92Talk 16:46, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have to disagree strongly with this suggestion; should we include a map of every area that we have a list of executives for? A map of Nepal for its kings? A map of Bavaria for its list of minister-presidents? I think the link to the location is 100% sufficient to find out just where it is. It adds no real information for a list of governors. --Golbez (talk) 20:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree, there is no need for it here when there is a link. The important thing is that readers know that Indiana is a state in the US; its location in the country itself is not important enough for this article to warrant adding an extra image. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:43, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I had thought the same, but I added it because of his suggestion. It is now removed. The capitol photo's okay though, right? Reywas92Talk 23:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Disagree: It need not be a recent map of Indiana. Maybe a map of the 1800s will work. KensplanetTC 05:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I had thought the same, but I added it because of his suggestion. It is now removed. The capitol photo's okay though, right? Reywas92Talk 23:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree, there is no need for it here when there is a link. The important thing is that readers know that Indiana is a state in the US; its location in the country itself is not important enough for this article to warrant adding an extra image. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:43, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have to disagree strongly with this suggestion; should we include a map of every area that we have a list of executives for? A map of Nepal for its kings? A map of Bavaria for its list of minister-presidents? I think the link to the location is 100% sufficient to find out just where it is. It adds no real information for a list of governors. --Golbez (talk) 20:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you mean by the Days in Office in each Table? How did you consider this. Are they exact?KensplanetTC 17:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes they are exact. It is the number of days that passed from taking office to leaving office, exclusive.
- What is Gubernatorial term? KensplanetTC 17:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It's just referring back to the years he was governor. Reywas92Talk 23:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, great work! HoosierStateTalk 00:20, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:03, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [11].
NBA All-Star Weekend Three-Point Shootout
Another NBA-related list. Comments welcomed.—Chris! ct 00:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose from Killervogel5
- Violates WP:RS, specifically the use of third-party source. Every reference except one is to the league's official website, not to an independent source.
- "No players have ever achieved the perfect score of 30."→"No player has..."
- Three point arc needs a wikilink.
- On my monitor, there are references for statements breaking over lines, which means that there may be a space between them, I believe. "television instant replay system.[2][4]"
- The 1998-99 season should be sorted so that it ends up at the bottom when the total points are sorted (right now it sorts as higher than 25 points). This can be rectified by sorting the m-dash as negative 1.
- Note B should be a complete sentence.
- Neither navbox has a direct link to this article. Add links or remove the navboxes.
I will reconsider an oppose only if third-party sources can be found. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Every point is addressed except the first one. I am not sure if it is actionable since there aren't many independent sources out there about this subject. But, I will try to research more and see if I can improve it further. Also, I think it is unfair to oppose this nomination based solely on the fact that most of references used are from the league's official website. But that is just my opinion, I guess.—Chris! ct 02:05, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am still wary about the high level of league-dependent sources but I support. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 19:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- In this contest, participants attempt to shoot as many three-point field goals as possible from the five positions behind the three-point arc - remove the from the five positions
- In cases of tie, additional rounds are played to determine the winner. - how about In the case of a tie...
- In the lead, the last paragraph, it should be stated who was the first winner, and the most recent winner.--SRX 20:00, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Comments -
- Move reference 1 after the parenthesis in the first sentence.
- The Three-point Shootout is an National Basketball Association contest...". Typo.
- Move the first use of reference 2 so it can cover the "money ball" part.
- "Three players with the top scores advance to the finals." I suggest adding "The" to start this sentence.
- "which was not made in the same round as the 25 points" Perhaps try "which was not made in his 25-point round"
- 2007–08 NBA season should be 2007–08 seasons.
- "Seasons" with an "s" seems incorrect —Chris! ct 21:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It now reads "who won the contest in the 2006–07 and 2007–08 season". I take it that season should be plural, as it represents both of Kapono's victories. Alternately, season could just be removed. Either way, I don't think it looks right as is. Giants2008 (17-14) 03:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Seasons" with an "s" seems incorrect —Chris! ct 21:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Photo caption: "Larry Bird has won this contest three consecutive times" implies that he is the current champion. Removing the has should be good enough to fix it.
- Perhaps make clear that Stojakovic's two point totals came in the tie-breakers? It was a little confusing to me at first.
- There's room for one more photo on the right. I first thought to ask for a photo of Peja, but the one free one is blurry and not the best choice. Ray Allen has a couple of good free pictures; one of these would be nice to have.
- Records: Why are the refs in two columns out of order? They are currently both [8][7][1]. Usually, citations should be put in numerical order.
Support - After the fixes above, I think this meets FL standards. Giants2008 (17-14) 16:43, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC) [reply]Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "Since then, however, six players typically take part in the contest." Why only "typically"?
- "Hodges and Kapono are tied for the scoring record with 25 points. No player has ever achieved the perfect score of 30." If the scoring record is 25, then is it not understood that the perfect score has not been attained?
- In the key: The "Player (X)" and "Team (X)" should be changed to "Player (#)" and "Team (#)".
- Center the em dashes in the table.
- "Denotes the number of times the team has won" The teams can't win, try "Denotes the number of times a player from this team has won". Dabomb87 (talk) 21:04, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "NBA All-Star Weekend Three-point Shootout" Why is "point" not capitalized ? All your other changes look good. I tweaked that one sentence a bit. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:04, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c]
- In the brackets on the first sentence, "also named the" --> "officially named the", since that is the official name.
- "—one on each baseline..." there are two on each baseline, not one.
- No, one shot on each baseline and there are two baselines, which mean there are two shot total.—Chris! ct 20:12, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "...have both won..." --> "...have each won..."
- "...have won..." --> "...have each won..."
- The whole third paragraph needs a general reference to be cited at the end of the paragraph.
- This is based on the referenced list below and thus does not need a reference. Everything else done.—Chris! ct 20:12, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I just think that readers may think that the third paragraph does not have a reference, that's all. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 21:44, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I just think that readers may think that the third paragraph does not have a reference, that's all. -- signed by SRE.K.A
-- signed by SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 07:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "...who won the contest in the 2006–07 and 2007–08 seasons..." Aren't they in the 2007 NBA All-Star Game and the 2008 NBA All-Star Game?
- No. This contest is part of NBA All-Star Weekend, but not the NBA All-Star Game itself.—Chris! ct 20:12, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Since it's in the All-Star Game, wikilink all the years to the All-Star Game.
- Note that the column, "Season", that each year is linked to an article about that particular NBA All-Star Game.
- See above.—Chris! ct 20:12, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If you look at 2008 NBA All-Star Game, you will see that it includes the events in the All-Star Weekend. Maybe you should wikilink all the years to the respective All-Star Game. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 11:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]- I still don't think this is a good idea. Keep in mind that this contest started in 1986, so if I link to 2008, I must also link to 1986. Now look at 1986 NBA All-Star Game, it has no info on events in the All-Star Weekend. And I don't like how some links in the list are irrelevant to the topic. Perhaps a discussion is needed on whether events in the All-Star Weekend should be in the All-Star Game article or not.—Chris! ct 19:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Now I get what you mean. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 01:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Now I get what you mean. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- I still don't think this is a good idea. Keep in mind that this contest started in 1986, so if I link to 2008, I must also link to 1986. Now look at 1986 NBA All-Star Game, it has no info on events in the All-Star Weekend. And I don't like how some links in the list are irrelevant to the topic. Perhaps a discussion is needed on whether events in the All-Star Weekend should be in the All-Star Game article or not.—Chris! ct 19:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- If you look at 2008 NBA All-Star Game, you will see that it includes the events in the All-Star Weekend. Maybe you should wikilink all the years to the respective All-Star Game. -- signed by SRE.K.A
Support -- signed by SRE.K.A[reply]nnoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 01:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Comments
- In this contest, participants attempt to shoot as many three-point field goals as possible from five positions behind the three-point arc—one on each baseline, one at the top of the arc as well as two halfway between the two baselines and the top of the arc. Aren't the two points "halfway between the two baselines and the top of the arc" commonly called the wings?
- That's not the real name for the two points halfway between the two baselines and the top of the arc though. It is just a common saying. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 00:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Well, I'm just looking for a way to reduce the wordage. I don't know if there are "official" names for any parts of the basketball court. FWIW, this source calls those spots the wings. Zagalejo^^^ 03:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- As long as it has a reliable source, and it has to be true, so I guess Chris should add it on. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 03:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- From the source, it states, "each corner, both wings and the top of the key [should be arc]." I think this version is better than "one on each baseline, one at the top of the arc as well as two halfway between the two baselines and the top of the arc." -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 03:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- I agree with you guys that this version is better, but we have to assume readers don't understand what we are talking about. So perhaps the best way is to combine the two.—Chris! ct 18:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Nice job on combing. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 23:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Unfortunately, I think the sentence still needs some work. If you try parsing it, you'll see that the grammar is a bit sloppy. For example, what does "two" refer to in "two on the baseline"? There's no clear antecedent. (I think I know what it's supposed to refer to, but we shouldn't make readers stumble.) Zagalejo^^^ 04:05, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Then can you please reword the sentence for me? Thanks—Chris! ct 05:02, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I'm struggling to find a way to make the sentence clear to non-basketball fans without being too wordy. I tried to make things very simple- I just said that a player begins at one corner, and works his way around the arc. If someone wants to add more detail, they can take a stab at it. (It might not be a bad idea to include a simple diagram of the positions from which the player shoots. Anyone good with graphics?) Zagalejo^^^ 23:04, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Then can you please reword the sentence for me? Thanks—Chris! ct 05:02, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately, I think the sentence still needs some work. If you try parsing it, you'll see that the grammar is a bit sloppy. For example, what does "two" refer to in "two on the baseline"? There's no clear antecedent. (I think I know what it's supposed to refer to, but we shouldn't make readers stumble.) Zagalejo^^^ 04:05, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Nice job on combing. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- I agree with you guys that this version is better, but we have to assume readers don't understand what we are talking about. So perhaps the best way is to combine the two.—Chris! ct 18:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- From the source, it states, "each corner, both wings and the top of the key [should be arc]." I think this version is better than "one on each baseline, one at the top of the arc as well as two halfway between the two baselines and the top of the arc." -- signed by SRE.K.A
- As long as it has a reliable source, and it has to be true, so I guess Chris should add it on. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- Well, I'm just looking for a way to reduce the wordage. I don't know if there are "official" names for any parts of the basketball court. FWIW, this source calls those spots the wings. Zagalejo^^^ 03:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- (outdent) A minor fix to File:Basketball positions.svg could work. —Chris! ct 23:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry for my ignorance, but I seriously don't know the answers.—Chris! ct 23:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think it does, but I don't know for sure, as Zagalejo may know, the ABA ball was colored with the American flag colors, same as the money ball. I'll my to find the reference. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 00:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Here is a About.com reference, and here is a USA Today reference. The USA Today one states, "I made just five shots, including one ABA-like red, white and blue ball, better known in NBA circles as the two-ball because you register 2 points if you make the final ball in each rack." -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 01:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Is anyone going to reply to my comment, since I really want to know what users think of it. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 23:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Hmmm. I don't think those sources really prove that the ball is intended as a salute to the ABA. I'll see if I can dig something up, though, since I'm pretty sure there is a connection of some sort. Zagalejo^^^ 04:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- But the article could tell the readers that the red, white, and blue ball is ABA-like (ie. The ABA-like red, white, and blue ball, also known as the "money" ball...) -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 10:08, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- The two-point ball in the most recent contest is not red white blue anymore, but gold I believed. That's why I wrote "special colored ball" in the article. Anyhow, this info is pretty trivial and probably shouldn't be in the article.—Chris! ct 21:00, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe that the blue and gold ball was only for the All-Star Game for New Orleans. I think it'll change back to the ABA-like ball in this year's All-Star Game in Phoenix. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 01:02, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- But the article could tell the readers that the red, white, and blue ball is ABA-like (ie. The ABA-like red, white, and blue ball, also known as the "money" ball...) -- signed by SRE.K.A
- Hmmm. I don't think those sources really prove that the ball is intended as a salute to the ABA. I'll see if I can dig something up, though, since I'm pretty sure there is a connection of some sort. Zagalejo^^^ 04:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Is anyone going to reply to my comment, since I really want to know what users think of it. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- Here is a About.com reference, and here is a USA Today reference. The USA Today one states, "I made just five shots, including one ABA-like red, white and blue ball, better known in NBA circles as the two-ball because you register 2 points if you make the final ball in each rack." -- signed by SRE.K.A
- I think it does, but I don't know for sure, as Zagalejo may know, the ABA ball was colored with the American flag colors, same as the money ball. I'll my to find the reference. -- signed by SRE.K.A
- Sorry for my ignorance, but I seriously don't know the answers.—Chris! ct 23:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- (outdent) You sure? Can you show any evidence on that?—Chris! ct 04:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure, but I believe it is true. Just say "specially colored ball" for now. -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 spell my name backwards at 06:59, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure, but I believe it is true. Just say "specially colored ball" for now. -- signed by SRE.K.A
Comment - In the sentence "Hodges also holds the record for making 19 consecutive shots (which was not made in his 25-point round)," should the parenthetical comment read "which were not made in his 25-point round), if the "was" refers to the 19 shots? Otherwise looks good. Rlendog (talk) 18:12, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- "often nicknamed the "money ball") -> "often nicknamed the money ball)"
- "Change "The first place is worth $35,000" to "The first place winner receives $35,000" and so on for the other places. The former seems weird to me.
- "Denotes the number of times the player have won" -> "Denotes the number of times the player has won"
- "Denotes the number of times a player from this team have won" -> "Denotes the number of times a player from this team has won"
- "Most points, round" -> "Most points in a round" to the the same as the next table.
- "Ray Allen won this contest in the 2000–01 season, while playing with the Milwaukee Bucks." doesn't need a comma.
- For all captions, change "this contest" to "the contest".
Comments by -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c]
- Laugh out loud, I found something that can be quite interesting. Why didn't you include the finalists of the Three-Point Shootout? If you don't, shouldn't this article be named "List of NBA All-Star Weekend Three-Point Shootout winners"? -- signed by SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24 (spell my name backwards) at 06:24, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:03, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [12].
List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 2008
I am submiting this list because I think is ready to achieve FL status. Jaespinoza (talk) 00:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - many prose problems
- There were twenty three number one albums in 2008, including La Vida... Es un Ratico by Colombian singer-songwriter Juanes, which won five Latin Grammy Awards including Album of the Year. - twenty three should be written as a number. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Cómplices, the eight number one album by Mexican singer Luis Miguel debuted at number 10 on the Billboard 200, the highest peak for the singer on that chart, with 32,000 units sold;[4] also gave the singer the record for most number one albums on this chart for one month, - 1)comma after Luis Miguel 2)Instead of a semi colon, use a period to start a new sentence. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Mexican performer Vicente Fernández with Para Siempre, won the Latin Grammy Award for Best Ranchero Album[6] and spent three non-consecutive weeks at the top of the chart; while Primera Fila, a live album by Fernández, became the last number one album of 2008. - 1)Comma before and' 2) a comma would work better than a semi colon here. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- With 26,000 units sold, Daddy Yankee debuted at number 13 on the Billboard 200 with Talento de Barrio, a sountrack for the movie starred by the Reggaeton performer, which also debuted at number one on this chart. - 1)Soundtrack is misspelled 2)There is a problem with the font, you need to stop the italics on the name of the album, it italicizes the whole sentence. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Wisin & Yandel returned to number one with Los Extraterrestres, and album that was awarded with the Latin Grammy Award for Best Urban Music Album. - An album, not and album. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- and ended the year as the best selling latin album of 2008.[9] -If this is part of the previous sentence, the previous sentence needs end in a comma not a period. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Luis Fonsi with Palabras del Silencio, landed his best sales week ever with 30,000 units sold and the second biggest sales week of the year for a latin performer, only Luis Miguel came in higher with Cómplices starting with 32,000 in May. 1)Earned, not landed 2)the comma before only should be a semi colon. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge the last three paragraphs together, they are too small to be individual paragraphs, and merge the second and third.--SRX 00:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- All issues fixed, Jaespinoza (talk) 01:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "Chicago-based group K-Paz de la Sierra, one month after the death of their lead vocalist Sergio Gómez in late December 2007,[3] returned to the first position of the chart with Capaz de Todo Por Tí for six consecutive weeks."-->One month after the death of their lead vocalist Sergio Gómez in late December 2007, the Chicago-based group K-Paz de la Sierra returned to the top of the chart with Capaz de Todo Por Tí, for six consecutive weeks. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Cómplices, the eight "-->Cómplices, the eighth... FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "the highest peak for the singer on that chart, with 32,000 units sold." How can it be the highest peak if he had eight number-one albums?. Answer: It is his highest peak on the Billboard 200.
- "This album also gave the singer the record for most " Add the before "most". FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Mexican performer Vicente Fernández with Para Siempre, won the Latin Grammy Award for Best Ranchero Album, and spent three non-consecutive weeks at the top of the chart"-->Mexican performer Vicente Fernández's Para Siempre won the Latin Grammy Award for Best Ranchero Album and spent three non-consecutive weeks at the top of the chart... FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "while Primera Fila, a live album by Fernández, became the last number-one album of 2008." Make this a separate sentence. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "movie starred by the Reggaeton performer"-->movie that starred the reggaeton performer...
- "with the Latin Grammy Award for Best Urban Music Album"—Add award at the end of this phrase. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "latin" Capitalize. FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 01:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fix these prose issues; I will also copy-edit afterwards, then I will support. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All issues adressed, Jaespinoza (talk) 01:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- One more: What is a "unit"? Everything else looks good. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC) FIXED! Jaespinoza (talk) 23:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Copies" still isn't accurate (copies of what? albums?). You haven't changed every instance either. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:09, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- FIXED units is a term used on Billboard magazine when they are talking about albums, but I think it was not clear enough for people that do not read Billboard. Jaespinoza (talk) 18:03, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "Copies" still isn't accurate (copies of what? albums?). You haven't changed every instance either. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:09, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:03, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [13].
List of districts of West Bengal
Nominating this list for FLC review after a peer review was completed. Please add your comments/suggestions here.--GDibyendu (talk) 18:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Conditional support -- Reduce the overlinking. I tried to remove some, but just clean up the rest where duplication occurs. Mention what a Paragana is. It would be an interesting addition as 24 Paraganas sounds interesting. Expand contractions such as "viz" =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Taken care of the links: now only districts are linked twice, once in text and once in final table; if that is not desirable, please tell me which one should be kept, first occurrence only or only in the table. Pargana article is linked from 24 Parganas page, explaining what it means may be somewhat irrelevant for this list (concept of Pargana was abandoned long before West Bengal was formed), unless it is done in notes along with other Indian words used in various names like Purba, Zilla, Samiti, Sabhapati etc. Linked the former districts. If needed, I can add a small list of former districts like say, Former counties section in List of counties in Massachusetts.--GDibyendu (talk) 20:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeSupport The lead and the geography section have no inline citations.—Chris! ct 02:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Support. Nice work, Dibyendu.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: Has improved a lot since its peer review. --KnowledgeHegemony talk 09:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) Too many little prose problems, articles are missing, there are ambiguities, the flow is sometimes awkward. These examples are from the lead
- "and its main distributary Hooghly flows southwards to reach Bay of Bengal."-->and its main distributary, the Hooghly River, flows southwards to reach the Bay of Bengal.
- "The important Siliguri Corridor" Why is it important?
- "The important Siliguri Corridor that connects North East India with rest of the India, lies in North Bengal region of the state. "-->The important Siliguri Corridor, which connects North-East India with the rest of India, lies in the North Bengal region of the state.
- "Former princely state" Add a The at the beginning.
- "Hooghly district" "district" should be capitalized.
- "States Reorganisation Act" Add The before this.
- "led to addition of Puruliya district" missing "the" before "Puruliya" (which is spelled wrong).
- "West Bengal is now divided into 19 districts under three divisions." Either spell out 19 or write out three.
- "Other districts are further divided into administrative units like subdivisions and blocks" "like"-->such as.
- "the atomic ones" Be more specific than "ones". Dabomb87 (talk) 18:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have made the suggested changes and similar ones across the sections. I have removed important form the sentence on the 'Siliguri Corridor', as importance is explained by the sentence. Please see whether these issues are resolved now. Thanks.--GDibyendu (talk) 18:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, I looked over your changes and they are all good; I have not looked at the rest of the article. I was wrong about "District" being capitalized; rather, the Hooghly District article was wrong and I have moved it. I promise to finish commenting tomorrow. Good job so far, Dabomb87 (talk) 04:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have made the suggested changes and similar ones across the sections. I have removed important form the sentence on the 'Siliguri Corridor', as importance is explained by the sentence. Please see whether these issues are resolved now. Thanks.--GDibyendu (talk) 18:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "West Bengal is a unique state of India that has both the Himalayas in the north and the Bay of Bengal at the south." So how does that make it unique?
- "The districts which are located at the north of the Ganges" "which"-->that.
- "are often termed together as the North Bengal"-->are often referred to collectively as North Bengal.
- "with effect from 1 March 1986" Do you mean to say that it was bifurcated on this date?
- "With effect from 1 January 2002" Same here.
- "Since 2007, the demand of a separate Gorkhaland state has been revived" "of"-->for.
- "Kamtapur state covering"-->Kamtapur state that covers.
- "DM is either an IAS officer or a WBCS officer and is appointed by the State Government of West Bengal."-->A DM is either a IAS officer or a WBCS officer, and is appointed by the State Government of West Bengal. Spell out what the abbreviations stand for.
- "(also known as CD blocks or
simply,blocks" - "A Panchayat Samiti is
beheaded" - "Third tier" Add The before thus phrase.
- "and the MLAs" Spell out this abbreviation out too.
- "panchayat" italicize this term.
- "etc." Italicize per WP:ABBR
- Disambiguation link needs fixing.
- Why are Kolkata and 1947 in the "Total" row?
- Refs 2, 12, 27 and 29 need
format=PDF
added to them. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:13, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments:
- Repetition of nineteen districts under three divisions. (in lead) and nineteen districts, grouped under three divisions: (before division list). Can the later be removed?
- Repetition of West Bengal is bordered by three countries: Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh; and five Indian states: Sikkim, Bihar, Chhattishgarh, Orissa, and Assam. Sikkim and Bhutan are located at the north of the state, Nepal at the northwest, Bihar and Chhattishgarh at the west, Orissa at the southwest, the Bay of Bengal at the south, and Bangladesh and Assam are at the east. in Geography section and also in lead. Text from geo-section can be removed.
- Repetition of Kolkata, the capital of the state, constitutes the Kolkata district in lead and geography section.
- Gorkha Hill Council is a unique administrative body in WB (a Government within a Government). Add one sentence on what executive powers it holds over the region. Currently the 1 sentence speaks of power maintained by Darjeeling district administration, but not of GHC.
- districts have more courts other than a District Court – not sure what more courts exist?
- The ref for this sentence provides the list of other courts in various districts. However, there is no clear structure across the districts (it would have been if each subdivision would have had a court for example), so details are not noted here.--GDibyendu (talk) 12:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Each district is divided into subdivisions, except the Kolkata district, which contains urban area only. Sentences after this talk of other districts with no mention of Kolkata Municipal Corporation being administrative body of capital city district.
- Municipal Corporation is not exactly a district-level or subdivision-level authority. Sentences after this talk about subdivisions of other districts. Kolkata district does not have any subdivision. However, it can be mentioned.--GDibyendu (talk) 12:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC) Done.--GDibyendu (talk) 13:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- After the Indo-Bangladesh enclaves sentence can one sentence for South Talpatti Island be mentioned under South 24 Parganas district as disputed territory claimed by India?
--GPPande 11:28, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment on repetition: I agree lead is summary of article, but exact duplicate of the sentences is not what is expected. In lead, only a point should be made like 19 districts - details of which can be put in sections below OR if it is just a point already mentioned in lead no need to mention it again in section below (example, what all surrounds WB). No need to repeat same at both places as it is already written at one place. Best example would be see India page - which says what all oceans and countries surround India in lead only not again in geo section. --GPPande 19:45, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess I have got your point. I have removed one repetition from lead section. I don't think any other cleanup on repetition point of view can be done, as it will destroy the flow of prose. Having said that, I appreciate your view on this. Most FL's have leads which are not summaries. Initially I kept it like that and kept only geographical info in lead, so there was no repetition. The change to summary-style lead was done as suggested in the review. BTW, India article is written on a vast topic and all of its sections are written in summary style. So, the lead there need not be a summary of summaries to a T.--GDibyendu (talk) 14:02, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment on repetition: I agree lead is summary of article, but exact duplicate of the sentences is not what is expected. In lead, only a point should be made like 19 districts - details of which can be put in sections below OR if it is just a point already mentioned in lead no need to mention it again in section below (example, what all surrounds WB). No need to repeat same at both places as it is already written at one place. Best example would be see India page - which says what all oceans and countries surround India in lead only not again in geo section. --GPPande 19:45, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Kensplanet
- Can we have Page nos for Directory of District, Sub division, Panchayat Samiti/ Block and Gram Panchayats in West Bengal, March 2008". The document is huge. Just citing the document is not at all helpful for any readeer. Use {{harvnb}} templates if required. KensplanetTC 13:27, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The second page of the document contains intra-links for each district, where detailed info on constituent subdivisions and the GPs are provided. Also, each subdivision in the table is linked to a WP page that provides information on the subdivision (including info contained in this doc. That should be a lot of info for the reader.--GDibyendu (talk) 13:47, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Works
- Can you correct REF14 (Mandal, Asim Kumar (2003).
Google books preview fromThe Sundarbans of India: A Development Analysis. Indus Publishing.pp.pp. 168–169. ISBN 8173871434. ) KensplanetTC 14:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. All comments addressed. KensplanetTC 18:40, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:04, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [14].
List of Prime Ministers of Canada by time in office
All concerns of reviewers in the previous nomination had been addressed when it was closed, and I can't find a rule against immediately resubmitting an article, so here it is again. If there are any new problems I'll fix those ones too. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 04:17, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support All my issues have been resolved. It is often good to say that you have fixed the issues on the FLC page itself. I didn't know that you had until just now, which is why I did not support last FLC. Anyway, the article is good now. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Closing notes:
- Despite only one review in this FLC, it has been extensively reviewed in previous FLCs. I think there was nothing else to mention on this FLC, and IMO it met the criteria.
- This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:05, 4 January 2009 (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:Matthewedwards 05:16, 4 January 2009 [15].
List of Boston Latin School alumni
I believe the List of Boston Latin School alumni meets Wikipedia's featured list standards. Boston Latin School is my alma mater and I have put a lot of work into the article over the past week. This list would be a major point of pride for me, to have my work honored as the best Wikipedia has to offer. It would also be an honor to create the first list of high school alumni to become a featured list. The motto of Boston Latin is "summus primi" which can mean "we are fisrt" (it is the oldest public school in the U.S.) or "we are number one." I want Boston Latin to be the first high school to receive this honor, and have it be the best high school list on Wikipedia.
Thank you, --Pgp688 (talk) 06:32, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
- Can you move {{Dynamic list}} down to the list. It is distracting when placed in the lead, imo.—Chris! ct 23:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I moved {{Dynamic list}} underneath the Alumni heading. --Pgp688 (talk) 03:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Linked U.S. News & World Report
- Some rows are missing years. If the year is unknown, put an emdash in the empty cells
- Comment: THe dash in missing years implies that there wasn't one. I think that all people should be able to have a year listed or at least an estimate. Reywas92Talk 23:03, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I see four possible solutions to this. First, we could leave the article as is. Second, we could leave the cells without dates blank, but User:Chrishomingtang argued this was not a good idea. Third, we could estimate the year of graduation to be 18 years after birth, but we would have to indicate that this is just an estimate. Fourth, we good remove names from the list that do not have years. All of these options are not ideal. I'd like the input of another editor on this issue. --Pgp688 (talk) 03:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a requirement for FL, but are there any WikiProjects the page falls under the scope of? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have added the list to WikiProject Schools, WikiProject Boston, and WikiProject Massachusetts.--Pgp688 (talk) 07:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We do not start lists as "This is a list of..." anymore. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:20, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
-
- Still needs rewording, see List of Wilfrid Laurier University people for an example. We have been trying to get away from the near-repetition of the title in the lead. Nothing should be bolded, really. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- Images need checking, ping User:Awadewit.
"The school's first class was in single figures, but it now has 2,400 pupils drawn from all parts of Boston."-->The school's first class had a population in the single figures; it now has 2,400 pupils."The school's first female student was not until the nineteenth century. "-->The school's first female student was admitted in the nineteenth century."It was not until 1972, when Boston Latin would admit its first co-educational class."-->In 1972, Boston Latin admitted its first co-educational class.
- I went ahead and changed the three sentences as suggested. I'm slightly hesitant to ask Awadewit because of the user's response to User_talk:Awadewit#Image_review_for_List_of_monarchs_of_the_Muhammad_Ali_Dynasty. I have gone through all the images and I believe they are all good faith public domain. Was there another user who does image reviews? --Jh12 (talk) 19:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- User:Moni3. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:52, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Great, I'll notify that editor. Also on further review, I think there may actually be a problem with File:ArthurFiedler Japan.jpg (Star and Stripes appears to be independent of the Department of Defense and I think that image is under their copyright). --Jh12 (talk) 19:58, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:12, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Several of your references need last access dates: Refs 1, 2, 4, 5. If possible, can you make the last access dates formatted the same?Ref 26 needsformat=PDF
added to it.Ref 27 has something wrong with its formatting.Why does Ref 31 use Brittanica? Generally, we shouldn't be citing to another tertiary source.Dabomb87 (talk) 23:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- PDF format added to refs, Ref 27 fixed, Ref 31 changed to a published book, accessdates added to 1,2,4,5, all accessdates standardized to ISO format (although I'm honestly not sure what the cite templates are doing half the time). --Jh12 (talk) 09:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You did what you could; the remaining inconsistencies have to do with the way the Cite XXX templates deal with the input. Ref 1 uses Brittanica also, couldn't you use the official site instead? Also, you haven't resolved my prose comments and image check comment above. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:09, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- User:Jh12 has resolved the prose issues and the use of Brittanica as a source. I don't think the image issue has been resolved by an editor who is an expert in that regard, but all the images appear to have lock-down copyright-free rationales.
Comment: It would be helpful if the table included a hyperlinked footnote symbol (either in the column heading or in the first appearance of the --) to help readers find the footnote to the table (the note that reads "—" indicates that the person graduated but the year of commencement is unknown). Also, I suggest simplifying the wording of the note to — indicates that the year of graduation is unknown. --Orlady (talk) 17:36, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps it would be better to put the disclaimer before the alumni names, instead of after them. --Pgp688 (talk) 07:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A footnote would work also, but I don't know how make them. --Pgp688 (talk) 08:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I can do it. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, it looks good. --Pgp688 (talk) 21:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, that's much better. However, it is necessary to say "the person graduated but the year of commencement is unknown" or would "the year of graduation is unknown" be sufficient? Since the table lists only people who graduated, it seems unnecessary to say "the person graduated," and the reference to "year of commencement" seems needlessly confusing (apparently the ceremony of "commencement" is being used here as a synonym for "graduation"). --Orlady (talk) 01:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree, the original wording was unnecessarily verbose. I was worried that readers might believe the em dash means the person did not graduate, but by placing the footnotes in, this should not be an issue. --Pgp688 (talk) 03:54, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. The above comments are resolved (and hidden). However, I have a new concern. Most of the sortable table columns don't sort "properly." The human names sort by first name -- not wrong, but not particularly desirable. Some of the dates sort properly, but some don't. Fixing the date sort may require expert assistance. --Orlady (talk) 19:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the sort by last name and dates have been fixed. I placed the people without dates at the bottom during sort. It can be changed to sort at the top with any lower number like 0. As for if the list should be manually changed to be listed by chronological order per below, I'll leave that up to the discretion of the primary editors. Thanks, --Jh12 (talk) 23:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. The above comments are resolved (and hidden). However, I have a new concern. Most of the sortable table columns don't sort "properly." The human names sort by first name -- not wrong, but not particularly desirable. Some of the dates sort properly, but some don't. Fixing the date sort may require expert assistance. --Orlady (talk) 19:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree, the original wording was unnecessarily verbose. I was worried that readers might believe the em dash means the person did not graduate, but by placing the footnotes in, this should not be an issue. --Pgp688 (talk) 03:54, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, that's much better. However, it is necessary to say "the person graduated but the year of commencement is unknown" or would "the year of graduation is unknown" be sufficient? Since the table lists only people who graduated, it seems unnecessary to say "the person graduated," and the reference to "year of commencement" seems needlessly confusing (apparently the ceremony of "commencement" is being used here as a synonym for "graduation"). --Orlady (talk) 01:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, it looks good. --Pgp688 (talk) 21:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I can do it. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. All my comments have been resolved. Nice list. --Orlady (talk) 23:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment 1: I strongly urge you not to use thumbnail images like you are doing. Make the images part of the table when relevant instead. -- Cat chi? 21:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'll make this change. Revert if you don't like. But before doing that try adjusting the image size. -- Cat chi? 22:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Comment 2: All images are licensed & attributed properly. -- Cat chi? 22:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Comment 3: I would advice the chronologic of alphabetic sorting of the list. I know this can be done by clicking the arrows but it should be sorted by default. I'd advise chronologic listing by default as thats probably more interesting. -- Cat chi? 22:34, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- I have been thinking about this for a while now. While most alumni lists display alphabetically, it is because the alumni are split into categories, such as sports, the arts, politics, et cetera. In this article, because the graduate alumni are in one big list, it is a really good idea to sort chronologically. I like how it shows that in its early years, Latin's graduates were mostly statesmen and ministers, but now the list includes many people from television, music, and sports. Furthermore, sorting alphabetically is only useful if one is trying to locate a name. --Pgp688 (talk) 00:16, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in the bot processing the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{FLC}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- ^ "all-star". Reference.com. Dictionary.com, LLC. Retrieved 2008-12-28.
- ^ "all-star". Reference.com. Dictionary.com, LLC. Retrieved 2008-12-28.