Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/March 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 Scorpion0422 22:10, 14 March 2009 [1].

---

Houston Rockets seasons

Nominator(s): Noble Story (talk • contributions)

This is modeled after similar lists for the Lakers, Bulls, and so on. I believe it passes the criteria. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 09:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Lookng at the lists for the Bulls and Lakers, the lead for this article is quite short. Expand it to include more on the team's history. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Before I review, I would also like to see the lead expanded like the sister FLs.--₮RUCӨ 22:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I've expanded it as best I could. But keep in mind the Bulls and Lakers have been around a lot longer than Houston. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 04:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comment, Gman124 (talk)

:Comments Could the font size for the table be made bigger. It's kind of hard to see the letters in the tables. Why does the text size need to be 90% anyway? Could that be left as how it would look with regular text size. --Gman124 talk 04:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Under the "Rockets season" column why are some of the season numbers missing? Add em. --Gman124 talk 05:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC) I've resized the fonts (which were originally 100% anyway). As for the the Rockets season: some of them have not been made, so I just leave out what hasn't been made (similar to what was done with the other NBA seasons lists). Noble Story (talk • contributions) 05:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC) I think it is not visual appealing to set font size to 100% since all items in cells are forced into two rows. I strongly suggest you changing it back to 90% per FL criteria #6. (This is my suggestion, though I think it needs further discussion if you or Gman124 disagree with it)—Chris! ct 05:19, 4 March 2009 (UTC) I don't think it looks any more "appealing" with smaller font, since I either can't see the text properly or have to zoom in on my browser every time. --Gman124 talk 23:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC) The only alternative is to resize the font back to 100% and set the width longer than the page. Readers would have to use scroll bar to see all column, though.—Chris! ct 00:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC) I think there might be more obejections to doing that then the text size. the following line is from the table "Won NBA Western Conference First Round vs. Portland Trail Blazers, 3–1" (which is almost half the size of the table in normal text, at least on my computer). Surely you can't really expect that to lay out on a single line, in a table as big as on this list. Surely it will get split into two lines. --Gman124 talk 00:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC) Take a look now. I removed a column and was able to fix that.—Chris! ct 00:32, 5 March 2009 (UTC) Looks good now. Gman124 talk 00:39, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support --Gman124 ^talk 05:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from KV5

Comments from KV5 "in National Basketball Association" - the National Basketball Association "In the Rockets debut season" - Rockets' "But after drafting Elvin Hayes first overall in the 1969 NBA Draft," - Sentences do NOT start with BUT. Also, Hayes was drafted first in the 1968 draft. What do Hayes, Malone, etc. have to do with the team's season records? There needs to be more correlation made. Also, discuss more about best/worst seasons, etc. "After Hayes was traded, Moses Malone was acquired to replace him." - "After Hayes was traded, Moses Malone replaced him." - remove redundant wording "MVPs" - you must state explicitly what an acronym means before using "in his first year" - remove Easter Egg link per WP:PIPE "They did not win their first championship until 1994, when Olajuwon led them to the championship, and 1995." - you have a linked year and an unlinked year; also, the last part of this sentence makes no sense. "And 1995" isn't a clause. "from 1999–2003" - remove dash, replace with "to" Many of the things in the key would be better explained using footnotes (see Philadelphia Phillies seasons for an example). "4th *" - all symbols should be next to their number, not separated Per WP:BOLDFACE, do not use bold text as an indicator in the table. Replace with a symbol or italics. "adding the absolute difference in wins" - Explain or link absolute difference "50 game" - 50-game "The Western Division was renamed to Western Conference" - the Western Conference You use W-L% in some tables and Win% in others. Be consistent. References: use the same format for all dates, and the publisher of all Basketball-Reference.com links must be Sports Reference LLC. Also, one BB-Ref link is not capitalized like the others. I'm not a big fan of the table being split up into so many pieces. I would rather see one cohesive unit instead of three small tables. I will return to review further once these concerns are addressed. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:38, 5 March 2009 (UTC) I've changed most of the trouble spots, which should be obvious. However, there are a couple of things I left: "Many of the things in the key would be better explained using footnotes" Personally, I think it is neater to keep it in a table key. My personal preference, but I'll change it if you insist. "I'm not a big fan of the table being split up into so many pieces. I would rather see one cohesive unit instead of three small tables." I've combined 2 tables, but the all-time record table I left separate. I think it looks better without tacking on to the main table. "What do Hayes, Malone, etc. have to do with the team's season records? There needs to be more correlation made. Also, discuss more about best/worst seasons, etc." I've added in the lead about their best/worst seasons. Also, I think the correlation of Hayes, Malone, Olajuwon to their record is made clearly ("Malone won 2 MVPs, they advanced to the Finals", "He led them to...", "He took them...", etc). "before being moved to" - before moving to Table headers that are in the key should be bolded to show that they are headers. Re-alphabetize your key. Since the alphabetizing in the footnotes starts over, you need to have a header delineating the section changes (lead, table, etc.). Navbox: "San Diego/Houston Rockets seasons" box does not currently link to this article. Change the title to link here or remove navbox. Hope this helps. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:03, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Noble Story (talk • contributions) 15:09, 6 March 2009 (UTC) I have restored back to two tables format because the colspans affect the sorting. I don't think it is possible to combine the tables without taking away the sorting function.—Chris! ct 19:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Actually, there is. Remove the colspans; they aren't necessary. The move is delineated in the lead. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 19:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Well, readers who only read the table will be confused by that. Also, I don't see why we need to combine the tables. The current layout looks good to me.—Chris! ct 20:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Because it's one team, one franchise, with one set of records. Splitting it up makes the sorting incorrect, because you aren't looking at a complete data set. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 20:40, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Have all your comments been addressed? Noble Story (talk • contributions) 10:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Resolved comments are under the cap. If they are still out, they aren't resolved yet, unless further changes have been made per the above notes. I don't have time to re-review right now, because I'm on my way to work now, but I will take a look later today if these were completed. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC) I think I have your other points, although I'm not exactly sure about your last point: "Since the alphabetizing in the footnotes starts over, you need to have a header delineating the section changes (lead, table, etc.)" But I think I've got it. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 12:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support from KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 21:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead He also took the Rockets to the NBA Finals in 1981, but they were defeated in six games by the Boston Celtics. However, only two years later, the Rockets won a franchise-low 14 games. -- The however doesn't cope well here because when however is used it, it is used to transition to two opposing statements or views, and these both have negative views. I would like to see in the lead state how many seasons overall there have been for Houston, and the most recent season (even though it may be bad, it still has to be mentioned to keep the prose up to date) After Hayes was traded, Moses Malone replaced him. -- this was when? Malone won two Most Valuable Player awards during his time in Houston, and he led the Rockets to the 1978 conference finals in his first year with the Rockets. -- the last mention of the Rockets can just be "them" Seasons I don't know, but since the lead has the seasons formatted in a single yr format like "1996", I feel that the column in the table should have it formatted like that, or vise versa for consistency purposes. Most year in the lead are link to finals and drafts, which are usually not written in year-year format.—Chris! ct 01:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Why aren't the conference and division columns sortable? Since there are only 2 conferences and 4 divisions, I don't see how the sorting function will be useful to readers.—Chris! ct 01:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Notes Due to a lockout, the season did not start until February 5, 1999 and all 29 teams played a shortened 50-game regular season schedule. -- comma before and External links Maybe to their official website?--₮RUCӨ 23:28, 6 March 2009 (UTC) I disagree. That belongs to the main Houston Rockets article, not here.—Chris! ct 23:43, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Agreed.--₮RUCӨ 00:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)--₮RUCӨ 00:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) I think I've got your comments corrected. However, regarding years: I do single years in the lead, because the things they mention happen i only one year. In other words, the draft is only in 1968, the finals only in 1994, and so on. The whole seasons, however, go over two years. Hence, two years in the table. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 01:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--₮RUCӨ 03:52, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) The lead looks much better. "The team plays"-->They play "and he led the Rockets to the 1978 conference finals" "where they lost again-->in which they lost again "The Rockets repeated the feat in 1995, but in the following seasons, they did not advance to the finals again."-->The Rockets repeated the feat in 1995, but have not advanced to the finals since. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Again, thanks for comments. I think I've gotten them all. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 10:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from SRE.K.A.L.24

Comments from -- SRE.K.A.L.24[c] "...they won only 15 games." I think "only" violates WP:POV. Em, I think that having a .183 winning % (assuming .500 is average), then saying "only" is really POV. It's pretty much generall accepted. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 10:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC) Let the stats speak for themselves. Readers will easily come to the conclusion that .183 is not good, you don't have to tell them. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC) OK, I've reworded. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 23:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC) "After Hayes was traded, Moses Malone replaced him." Some readers won't get what you mean. A previous reviewer said to shorten "was acquired to replace him" because of redundancy. I've re-inserted. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 10:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC) "After Hayes was traded, Moses Malone was replaced him." Read it carefully. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 01:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC) I removed the second was. It makes the sentence sounds awkward. The sentence is clear already.—Chris! ct 01:40, 11 March 2009 (UTC) "conference finals" --> "Western Conference Finals"? "He also took..." --> "He also led". "the Rockets won a franchise-low 14 games." the Rockets won? Re-phrase it please. I'm just wondering what is wrong with saying "won"? Noble Story (talk • contributions) 10:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC) I don't see what's wrong here either. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC) Nor me :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC) Nothing is wrong, it just sounds weird. Bad excuse, but won is usually used for a victory, that's all. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:56, 11 March 2009 (UTC) Well, those 14 games won were still victory.—Chris! ct 01:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC) "won" is the past tense of the verb "to win". Sorry for stating the obvious, but I still fail to see what is wrong or even "weird" about this sentence. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:51, 11 March 2009 (UTC) Lets just all say I'm an idiot for not reading the sentence carefully. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 02:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC) "did not reach the playoffs again". "In their most recent season" 2008–09 is now the most recent season, so add "completed" or something similar to the sentence. "Their overall record is 1723–1669." Readers may not know what this means. Use the words "wins" and "losses". Couldn't you link "Games behind" in the key so that you won't have to note how the stat works? No need to have Category:Houston Rockets, as you already have Category:Houston Rockets seasons. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 06:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC) Other than my replies above, I've fixed all your comments. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 10:57, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support Hope you'll nominate more featured lists. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 02:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Scorpion0422 22:10, 14 March 2009 [2].

---

List of Calgary Flames draft picks

Nominator(s): Resolute

Well, here we go again with this list. Third time lucky? I can only hope as this has easily been the most frustrating article I have worked on! The last FLC fell down mainly on sorting issues, and after a great deal of trial and error - mainly error - I have resolved the problems. There is, however, one exception. The Matt Keetley entry breaks the entire sorting function if I do anything to it. Even removing his entry breaks it. Don't ask me why, but I've spent hours trying to solve it, and have ultimately decided it is a flaw in the sorting functionality itself. Otherwise, this list is complete, statistics are accurate to the end of last season, and is stated as such, plenty of images, and I believe should meet WP:WIAFL. Looking forward to all comments. Resolute 16:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead The NHL holds a draft lottery for the 14 non-playoff teams, allowing the winner to move up a maximum of four positions in the draft. -- (1)Link to draft lottery (2)Make it clear that it is the entry draft (at the end of the sentence) One player, Al MacInnis, has been elected to the Hockey Hall of Fame. -- Just mention the player by his last name since he has been already mentioned before. With the 25th pick, the Flames selected Greg Nemisz from the Ontario Hockey League's Windsor Spitfires. -- Was their 25th pick their final pick? See also Remove the first entry, its already mentioned in the article. References The TSN acronym needs to spelled out in the publishers.--₮RUCӨ 03:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Done, done, done, done and done. Thanks! Resolute 04:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• I'm not sure what was the problem (other than sorting) in the table, but IMO it looks fine, but I want other reviewers inputs before I can make my decision. But overall, you've done a great job fixing it up. You may notify me when another reviewer has reviewed the list.--₮RUCӨ 15:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- --₮RUCӨ 00:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude (talk · contribs)

• Could the first table in the key be arranged differently so there isn't a blank section in the bottom right?
• Humour me on this one, as I know nothing about ice hockey....what does W/L/T/OTL/GAA signify (not as in what does it stand for, but what does it actually mean?) and why do only some players have stats in those columns?
• Shouldn't the columns with numbers in be centred?

All looks good otherwise -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:19, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

• The latter stats are goaltender stats, so would apply only to players at that position. Wins, losses, ties, overtime losses are the results of the game they played in, while goals against average is how many goals they gave up per 60 minutes of play. I'll add a clarification statement for that. Reworking the key as well. As far as centring the numbers goes, I'm not certain the overhead is worth it. I'd have to centre align the entire table, then left align the country and name cells individually... some 750 additional entries. I'll do it if it is deemed necessary, however. Resolute 15:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

• I've re-aligned the table for you, but you might want to check I haven't accidentally messed anything up :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:04, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

• Yup, looks good. Thanks for doing that. Resolute 05:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Weak support. The em dash issue that is being discussed on the FLC talk page is not a dealbreaker, but I'd like to see it fixed. I wouldn't impede promotion over it though; we can resolve it afterward. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "and until 1979, it drafted as the Atlanta Flames." This is a bit forced, especially since it is understood that while the team was in Atlanta it would be drafting under said name. This is what I think you should do: Add a {{seealso}} link that takes users to the Atlanta Flames list, and rephrase to something along the lines of "The franchise was founded in 1972 as the Atlanta Flames, and relocated to Calgary in 1980. Moved it down to the see also section. "the Flames have selected a total of 306 players" Fixed "The NHL Entry Draft is held each June as teams select players" "as" is clumsy here; maybe "The NHL Entry Draft is held each June; teams select players Fixed "players in American colleges that were otherwise ineligible for the Entry Draft." Ambiguous, were the players otherwise ineligible or the colleges? Simplified "The highest Calgary"-->The highest that Calgary Fixed The color needs accompanying symbols. Also, why does the color extend all the way across the row? Just use it to highlight the players' names. I disagree on that, since the very existence of stats beside the players acts as the symbols. However, given the use of shading has been questioned in the past as well, I've decided simply to remove it. Add a note that says the years link to articles about NHL drafts for that year. Alternatively, you could rename the column header to "Draft". Done List of NHL players—Isn't especially relevant, not even for the See also section. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Agreed and removed. Thanks! Resolute 05:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support - all looks good now -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:13, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Discussion about sorting moved to talk page Resolute 03:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Comment is there a reason there's no mdash in the blank spaces? Maxim_(talk) 21:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
  • See the discussion on the talk page of this FLC. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
• Concur with DB87 above on both points of the sorting issue. I will not withhold my weak support as well for this list; the sorting issue can be resolved outside of this review period, but the content is featured material. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 13:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• Weak Oppose This is really nothing, but involves the Gary Roberts caption. As of last week, he's no longer active. Other than that minor detail, which obviously wasn't an issue when the list was nominated, and you've got my support. Kaiser matias (talk) 04:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

• Well, if you want to get technical, he hasn't formally announced his retirement yet, so the caption was still accurate on one level.  ;) I've changed it regardless. It was fitting that his last NHL game was in Calgary though. Resolute 05:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support Considering he stated he won't play after this year or in the AHL, and the Lightning aren't going to call him up again, what he says doesn't really matter anymore. Kaiser matias (talk) 05:13, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from SRE.K.A.L.24

Comments from -- SRE.K.A.L.24[c] "...the Flames have selected 306 players." selected --> drafted. Changed, though I do become concerned about overusing the word "draft/drafted" "The Flames have never won the lottery." You didn't tell the readers how you win the lottery. I tried to add a bit more, but I didn't think it was unclear. Have my changes helped? On the table, why aren't the "S"es not center aligned? I have no idea, changed. Just wondering, why didn't you add which team/high school/college that they came from? And if so, why did you want images over this? I did have the info initially, however removed it due to size limitations on the chart. The junior/college teams a player played with is not really a defining characteristic of a hockey player like it seems to be for football and basketball players. In the Draft picks section, tell the readers that this does not include Atlanta Flames draft picks, just in case. It is mentioned in the lead, however a second note has been added. There's no need in abbreviating Round and Nationality. I've tried, and it could fit (though won't if you put the team/highschool/college column). Changed OTL --> OT, as the NHL now uses OT. Changed Why couldn't you link Overtime on the key? Umm, I simply didn't? lol. fixed. Fix the disambiguation. There is no article to dab draft lottery to. I've simply delinked it for now. Though I could also convert to a redlink and write something later. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 06:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Thanks! Resolute 14:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Comments from -- SRE.K.A.L.24[c] (continued) "The Flames have never won the lottery." Didn't you already tell the readers the Flames' highest draft picks were sixth overall? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 17:31, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Yes, but the reader is also told that the most the team winning the lottery can move up is four positions in the draft. Thus, if Calgary were to finish 10th last and win the lottery, they would only move up to 6th. Resolute 19:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support Though I still would like to have trades note about the draft picks that were first on another team, but since WP:NHL doesn't care, ehh... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment I don't like the fact that the images pushes the list down at 1024x768 resolution. Some of the players depicted never even played for the Flames, and many of them never made any big impact, do you think you could limit the number of images and perhaps put them in a gallery? —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 15:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

• The table appears fine for me at 1024x768 on my laptop screen. However, I will try to shrink them a little further. Not every player who is drafted by a team plays for them, so I personally believe their inclusion is appropriate. Resolute 16:08, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I've tried upright all the pictures with 1024x768 resolution, and it works just like 125px (in fact it probably is, but not sure). So why not upright it? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 17:31, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
    • I did just change it to 125px, so yes, converting to upright would probably work at this point. Resolute 19:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Scorpion0422 22:10, 14 March 2009 [3].

---

List of awards and nominations received by Dexter

Nominator(s): --Music26/11

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the FL criteria. It is my first FLC, so I'm a bit on shaky ground. The list is very much based on the List of Lost awards and nominations FL, which is were a lot of the layout ideas come from.

Thanks very much. --Music26/11 13:21, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead Michael C. Hall, who portrays the title character, is the most nominated cast member with a total of fourteen nominations, second is Lauren Vélez, with four nominations. -- Comma before with a total of fourteen done.--Music26/11 15:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Besides the show's cast members, the writers and producers of the show have also been nominated for various awards, writer, producer and showrunner Clyde Phillips has gained six nominations for his work on the show. -- Add a semi-colon after various awards (so replace the comma) done.--Music26/11 15:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The lead needs more expansion in terms of summarizing the list more. So add some text about more significant awards. In the lead is information about almost every award the show has been nominated for, the awards that are not mentioned have either a lesser significance or are less known to the public.--Music26/11 15:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC) List Some entries have the purpose of the award written, like the Satelite awards, others, however, do not. The other awards need the purpose written and sourced.--₮RUCӨ 14:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Done, except for the "other awards" section, where this isn't possible.--Music26/11 15:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The Emmy Awards are awarded annualy since 1949 by the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, to honour excellence in television, they are considered to be the television equivalent to the Academy Awards. -- (1)Replace are with "have been" (2)Typo on the word annually (3)Replace the comma before they are with a semi-colon Dexter has been nominated for Primetime Emmy Awards,[3] which are awarded to honour acting and writing in primetime television,[4] as well as Creative Arts Emmys,[5] which are presented in recognition of technical and other similar achievements in American television programming. -- (1)I feel the word "excellence" could be added before acting and writing (2)The of technical and other similar achievements makes no sense, do you mean "of technical and other related areas"? The Satellite Awards, formerly known as the Golden Satellite Awards, are presented yearly, by the International Press Academy, both for cinema and television. -- Remove the comma before by the International In 2007, the show received four nominations, in the categories Best Actor - TV Drama Series (Hall), Best TV Series - Drama, Outstanding DVD Release of a Television Show (season one), Best Supporting Actor in a TV Series (David Zayas) and won all, making Dexter the most winning show of that year's ceremony. -- (1)Add "of" after categories (2)Add a full stop after the last category and start a new sentence with "The show won all of its nominations, making ..." The Saturn Awards are presented by the Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films and honor science fiction and fantasy films and television shows. -- Comma before and honor science fiction There needs to be consistency with what type of English is being used, since I see the word honor also spelled as honour Dexter has been nominated for four, Michael C. Hall has received nominations for Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Drama Series in 2007, 2008 and 2009, but has not won any. -- The comma before Michael's name should be a semi-colon or a full stop The notes in the Writers Guild of America Awards section need a colon after the bolded link.--₮RUCӨ 16:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Done on all counts.--Music26/11 17:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Remove the image of Julie Benz, it passes over its section limits. Done, also removed the Jimmy Smits image, because otherwise, you got a lot of empty space left, and that looks awful.--Music26/11 17:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Decrease the image size of the James Remar pic. In addition, why is his name linked in the caption, but the others dont have the names linked? (consistency is needed).--₮RUCӨ 19:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Unlinked name, decreasing the image is no longer neccessary, because, aside from the infobox image, there are no other images.--Music26/11 17:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--₮RUCӨ 21:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) Lots of glitches; this article would have benefitted from a proofread by an independent editor. I feel like opposing on principle. That's indeed stupid of me. You did a great job by fixing various minor errors, thanks.--Music26/11 14:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "It has been nominated for a variety of different awards including eight"-->It has been nominated for a variety of awards, including eight "years top ten best television programs." "years"-->year's "with a total of fourteen nominations, second is Lauren Vélez, with four nominations."-->with fourteen nominations; Lauren Vélez is second, with four nominations. "The Emmy Awards have been awarded annually since 1949 by the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, to honour excellence in television" Comma not necessary. "There are various types of emmys" This is understood, delete the phrase. "shows opening titles"-->show's opening titles "losing the award for Outstanding Drama Series to Mad Men, and the award for Outstanding Lead Actor – Drama Series to Bryan Cranston for Breaking Bad.[8]" Comma not necessary. "which are awarded annualy by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, to honour film and television." Misspelled word and the comma is not necessary. "are presented yearly"-->are presented annually "The won all of it's"—"it's"-->its "most winning show"-->winningest "including Best TV Series – Drama, in 2007 and 2008." Comma not needed. "The Screen Actors Guild Awards (SAG awards) are presented annually by the Screen Actors Guild, to honour acting in film and television." Comma not needed. "The Writers Guild of America Awards are presented annually by the Writers Guild of America, and are awarded to film and television writers."-->The Writers Guild of America Awards are presented annually to film and television writers by the Writers Guild of America. "Timothy Schlattmann and Scott Reynolds have both gained individual nominations."-->Timothy Schlattmann and Scott Reynolds have received nominations. "Dexter has had success at various Guild and society awards, having been nominated for awards at various ceremonies and winning six awards." Redundancies abound here, please trim the sentence. "When the show was in the official AFI Award selection as one of 2007's top ten television programs." Not a complete sentence. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Fixed all of your concerns but one; changing "Timothy Schlattmann and Scott Reynolds have both gained individual nominations" to "Timothy Schlattmann and Scott Reynolds have received nominations" makes no sense. The only reason their names are in the wikitable introduction is because they have gained induvidual nominations.--Music26/11 14:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC) I see, I must have misread that. Good catch. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:28, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Only publications should be linked in italics; websites (such as BBC News) and associations (such as Academy of Television Arts & Sciences) should not be. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Done.--Music26/11 14:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
    • I am extremely stupid, I meant that "italics", not linked'. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)'
      • No problem, I've relinked the unlinked links (what a sentence), and the publishers are not in italics anymore.--Music26/11 14:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments I really think this page needs moving to List of awards and nominations received by Dexter. I've heard of the Grammy Awards, the BAFTA Awards, the Saturn Awards, the Brit Awards, but never the Dexter Awards. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Well, I had never thought about it, but now you say it, it does make the wrong impression. The page has been moved.--Music26/11 19:33, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments The opening paragraph differentiates between Primetime and Creative Emmys, but the Did You Know specifically says "Dexter has won two Primetime Emmy Awards." Since there are only two listings under Primetime and both are nominations, I thought the List was out of date at first. Maybe that's a Did You Know problem rather than the list article itself.

Yep, that's my fault entirily. You see, the creative arts emmys are awarded to excellence primetime television, but differ in categories from the primetime emmys. That's why there are seperate tables. The DYK hook is not wrong, but it's not complete, and I'm terribly sorry for that.--Music26/11 18:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Also, James Remar's page doesn't mention his SAG Award nomination at all -- was he only nominated as part of the Ensemble? That seems strange to highlight in the article. The Cut of Your Jib (talk) 05:00, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Well it's not really to highlight the fact that he was co-nominated, it's more to image the article. I could have placed an image of Michael C. Hall there, but since his name was already in the infobox I wanted some variety. As I stated in the lead, the article is based on the Lost award list, which passed with similiar images.--Music26/11 18:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Scorpion0422 22:10, 14 March 2009 [4].

---

List of alumni of Jesus College, Oxford: Law and government

Nominator(s): Bencherlite^Talk

Restarted, 23:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

In August 2007, "List of people associated with Jesus College, Oxford" (as it was then called) was given its FL star (see how it looked then). The list kept growing as more names were added, and some other FLs were spun out of it to keep it at a manageable size, making the initial list eventually one that listed alumni only, not academics. However, the main list has kept growing as I keep going through my "to do" list, and it was well inside the 30 longest pages on Wikipedia. To try and keep the main list (still over 200,000 bytes) at a readable size, I've taken out the lawyers, politicians and civil servants to make this list, which I present for your approval. In terms of comprehensiveness, I've exhausted the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and the Dictionary of Welsh Biography, as well as histories of the college and other sources, and so I'm confident that this is comprehensive. BencherliteTalk 16:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC) Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk) Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "There are still strong links with Wales"-->It (The college?) still has strong links with Wales "with about 15% of students being from Wales"-->as about 15% of students are Welsh "A number of Welsh"-->Several Welsh "such as D. J. Williams who was a co-founder of the Welsh nationalist party Plaid Cymru."-->such as D. J. Williams, a co-founder of the Welsh nationalist party Plaid Cymru. "A number of prominent judges"-->Several prominent judges All done. BencherliteTalk 11:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC) File:HEA Cotton.jpg needs a source and author. File:Ed Davey 01.jpg ditto. File:Thomas Johnes of Hafod portrait.jpg Forgive my ignorance, but what is "Peacocks in Paradise"? A pamphlet? Readers need to theoretically have enough information to be able to verify the licensing themselves. All removed from the article for now and I will contact the original uploaders for the missing information. BencherliteTalk 11:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC) The Cotton contributor has retired, I've left a question for the Davey contributor and added the missing details about Johnes from the article about him ("Peacocks in Paradise" is a book, it appears). BencherliteTalk 11:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC) WP:LAYOUT, external links should come after references. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Done. BencherliteTalk 11:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC) Sources Ref 7 only says "Foster". We need a page number at least. Refs 11 and 12 need page numbers and authors for consistency with other inline book refs. Spell out all abbreviations in the ref publishers. Examples only: WBO, ODNB and JCR, but it isn't necessary to spell out BBC. Also, website names shouldn't be in italics. Put these under the "publisher" parameter in the cite templates. Every ODNB reference needs a note that a subscription is required. Denote this by putting this in the citation template: format=Subscription required What makes http://www.britannia.com/wales/lit/lit16.html a reliable source? Dabomb87 (talk) 15:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Here I've taken the liberty of numbering your points to make it easier to reply to them. 1(a) I respectfully disagree that page numbers are needed for Alumni Oxonienses (ref 7) or the Oxford Honours book (was ref 12, now ref 13). The entries in each work are arranged in alphabetical order, so the page number is superfluous to the name of the individual. It would increase the page byte length for no added value. What I have done, though, is make it even clearer whether the individual can be found in the 1500-1714 or 1715-1886 volumes of Alumni Oxonienses by referencing them separately, and added "sub nom." to the reference. Of course, if consensus is against me on this, I will happily waste my time turning 2 references into 18 references when I next have access to the hard copies of Alumni Oxonienses, in about a fortnight's time... 1(b) As for ref 11, Oxford Men, I have added a page number to the general reference (only 2 pages are used) and a url to the archive.org copy. 1(c) Author's name for Oxford Men is given in the general reference; there is no named author of Oxford Honours. 2(a) I have said in the "general references" section what ODNB, WBO and JCR stand for, and said "Cited in references as: WBO" (for example). What's wrong with this, please? 2(b) Where is there a website name in italics? I'm not sure what you mean. 3. Again, this is mentioned in the "general references" section. I do not think that it needs to be repeated nearly twenty times. 4. Removed; better ODNB reference added for his degree details. I'd point out that the main featured list, List of alumni of Jesus College, Oxford, has 437 different references at present. There are about 50 references to Foster and about another 30 to Oxford Honours, and at the moment these are grouped as 2 references used multiple times. There are nearly 100 references to the ODNB and more than 100 from the WBO. Changing all these references as you suggest (individual page references to Foster, spelling out every time what ODNB and WBO mean etc) would add about another 80 references and bloat 200 more, for no additional benefit. BencherliteTalk 11:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC) Thank you for your patience and detailed explanations. The problem is that when a reader clicks on a specific inline citation, they will not see the general reference and its corresponding information. Readers will have no idea where to look for such information. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC) So – just to be clear – you'd rather I did away with the general references section altogether? Even though it's a format used in all of the articles/lists in the Featured Topic about Jesus College without previous complaint? In addition, which of the numbered points are still problems for you? BencherliteTalk 08:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Sources look good. I don't want to make a big deal about minor issues. Before I support, can I have clarification on the image statuses? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Of course. The contributor of the Cotton photo has retired and, whilst I can find online that there is a book called "Calcutta Old and New", as the image page says, I can't find the name of the photographer, so will have to leave the image out. I've added back the Davey photograph, having added more information to the image page following a discussion with the uploader (who confirmed it was his own photo). And I added some more details about "Peacocks in Paradise" to the image page for the Johnes image, so I added that back to the list as well. As I'm no image guru, please let me know if more is needed. Thanks, BencherliteTalk 20:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Comment. Why are there so many missing years and degrees? Surely this information exists? I would tend to oppose due to lack of comprehensivness.Yobmod (talk) 10:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC) In theory, the missing information exists, but most probably only in unpublished college and university records to which the public does not have access. The possible accessible and reliable sources are these: From the foundation of the college to 1886: university records as noted in Alumni Oxonienses, but these are not always entirely accurate or complete, particularly for earlier years. 1886 to 1894: Oxford Men and their Colleges and / or Oxford Honours; this may only give the year of graduation, or the year of matriculation, or the subject studied, rather than all three 1895 onwards: unless the details were recorded in "Who's Who" at the time, or were mentioned in their obituary in The Times, or in their profile for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (or the Dictionary of Welsh Biography), then getting the details will be virtually impossible - there is no central university or college publication listing all graduates since 1886. Some names get mentioned in college publications, such as JNL Baker's History (but that was written in 1971 and so won't include anyone coming to prominence since then), or the annual College Record (which is a "hit and miss" affair, in that somebody's matriculation year may be mentioned, but not their graduation year (or vice versa), and no mention ever made of their subject!) I have done my best to find the missing information using "Google Books", but in most cases the people aren't the types who would have biographies written about them, or such comparatively minor pieces of biographical information mentioned in other contexts. In each and every case, the basic fact of the individual's connection to the college – which is the main purpose of the list, after all – is reliably sourced. Whilst the rest of the information would be lovely, I do not think that it makes the list lacking in comprehensiveness. BencherliteTalk 20:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Support My issues have been resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Support Can't see any faults—Chris! _ct 01:51, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• Geez Dabomb, you got all our comments =P I also support, meets WP:WIAFL.--₮RUCӨ 02:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Scorpion0422 22:10, 14 March 2009 [5].

---

List of Puerto Rican boxing world champions

Nominator(s): - Caribbean~H.Q.

I am nominating this for featured list based on the progress presented during the last months. Since its creation, the list has been expanded, sourced and even verified for accuracy by a boxing writer (Antonio Martin). After undergoing peer review, I applied a few tweaks, but most of the review's concern were of technical nature and they have been fixed or clarified by now. This is the next logical step, I will work with this nomination on behalf of WP:PUR and WP:BOXING. Please note that my work rate will be significantly higher on weekends due to college, so if it goes unattended for a couple of days, rest assured that I will pick it up then. Thanks for your time. - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:43, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Chrishomingtang

Comment Looks pretty good to me, just some minor issues group footnotes and references into two columns Applied {{reflist|2}} to the footnotes, but the Boxrec notes are using separate templates, which will probably prevent the use of that format. - Caribbean~H.Q. 19:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC) I've done it for you.—Chris! ct 00:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC) "† indicates boxer of Puerto Rican heritage that is recognized by the commission due to parent's nationality, residence or other circumstances ." - Move this above the table and remove the extra space in front of the period Both issues corrected. - Caribbean~H.Q. 19:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC) for the above, both symbol and color have to be used per WP:ACCESS Added color to the symbol, I'm not sure if that is what you meant. - Caribbean~H.Q. 19:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC) Oh, I meant coloring the box, like List of Vancouver Canucks captains.—Chris! ct 22:04, 25 February 2009 (UTC) I've done it for you.—Chris! ct 00:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC) Thanks. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) "Successful Defenses" --> "Successful defenses" Corrected. - Caribbean~H.Q. 19:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC) —Chris! ct 01:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC) Thanks for the review, I am working with it. - Caribbean~H.Q. 19:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support —Chris! _ct 20:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead These include: Wilfredo Gómez's record for most defenses in the super bantamweight division and for most successive knockouts by a titleholder. -- The colon should be removed because its not proper to use it here. Replaced it with a comma. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) The acronyms WBA and WBO need to be spelled out in their first occurrences. I decided to spell them in their second occurrences, particularly because the first are inside parenthesis, which would lead to an awkward format. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Boxing in Puerto Rico The acronym CMTC needs to be spelled out in its first occurrence. Actually, I'm not sure what "CMTC" stands for, the book only uses this acronym. My guess is that it is similar to the ROTC concept, but that would be OR. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Then it would best to either remove it or research what it means, because its questionable when reading the text.--TRUCO 17:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Nevermind, I found its meaning and added it to the article. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC) They were surprised to discover that several members of law enforcement agencies and the government were involved, a group of police officers including a colonel, two members of the governor's cabinet, numerous legislators and a judge. -- The comma before a group of should be a colon. Corrected. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) In 1926, a boxing venue was opened in a military facility known as Cuartel de Ballaja, with card being organized weekly. -- Add 'a' before card being Added. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) The first Puerto Rican to win a world championship was Sixto Escobar, who did it on June 26, 1934. -- did should be 'won' Fixed. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) In the 1960s and 1970s there was an improvement in the number of pugilists reaching this recognition. -- Comma after 1970s Added. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Including Wilfred Benítez who on March 6, 1976, became the youngest world champion in history at 17 years old. -- Comma after who and remove the comma after 1976 I believe that this is the widespread format for full dates within a sentence. For example, this is taken from today's Main Page FA: "Caspar David Friedrich was born on September 5, 1774, in Greifswald, Swedish Pomerania". - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Wiki has some weird formats, but okay.--TRUCO 17:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC) During the following decades the Puerto Rico Boxing Commission took initiative in certain aspects when compared to other entities. -- Comma after decades Added. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) List of world champions I believe its not necessary to have the symbol with color, the default color should be able to suffice. Chris fixed that one. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) The symbol should be placed in a table. There isn't sufficient width left to add another field to the table, we are using 99%, which is already stretching the article. I provided a more detailed example on the list's talk page. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Oh okay, but I hope you know that I mean make the symbol in a key table format.--₮RUCӨ 01:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Well, to be honest, I'm lost here. Can you provide an example? - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Nevermind, its fine.--₮RUCӨ 03:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC) References The formatting is a bit awkward, the MOS really doesn't say anything about this system, where did you find this system?TRUCO 22:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC) It is a simplified version of the one used in List of Academy Award winners and nominees for Best Foreign Language Film. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Oh, okay. I've just never seen that format before.--TRUCO 17:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards]].--₮RUCӨ 03:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

New comments are welcome. Thanks to Chris and Truco for your reviews as well. - Caribbean~H.Q. 22:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Weak oppose from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) There are many prose glitches; nearly every sentence needs some sort of fixing (I note that the peer reviewer seemed to highlight prose as a major area of improvement). Please find someone to fix it up, it isn't much more than a ten-minute job. Examples: Puerto Rico is such a broad link, can use something more direct, such as a pipe to Sports in Puerto Rico#Boxing? I believe that linking Puerto Rico in the lead is a must. We can't expect every reader to know where Puerto Rico is or the nature of its political status. Perhaps a link to Sports in Puerto Rico can be added elsewhere? - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) I added it to the see also section. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "Puerto Rico is located in the third place for most boxing world champions per country in the world " "located" is used in the wrong sense here, how about "Puerto Rico has the third-most boxing world champions per country in the world " or something similar? Got it. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Image captions that are not complete sentences should not have periods at the end. Both captions are pretty extensive, but you are right. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "Individually, Puerto Rican world champions have reached numerous achievements." Awkward wording ("[reach] ... achievements"?) Changed it to "earned numerous achievements", how is it now? - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "also holds the fifth place in this category"-->is fifth in this category Reworded. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "The sport of boxing was introduced" That boxing is a sport is understood by now. Yup, removed it. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "with the objective being to determine the best fighter among the employees-->and the objective was to determine the best fighter among the employees Reworded. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "soldiers that established residence " Why not "soldiers who resided"? I used that wording based on the fact that they arrived with the war, if we say that they only "resided" maybe the reader will interpret that they were Spanish soldiers. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "During World War I, a championship known as Campeonato Las Casas as part of the military training of military personnel." Not a complete sentence. Reworded it to "During World War I, a championship known as Campeonato Las Casas was held as training for military personnel." - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "Nero Chen, the first Puerto Rican boxer to gain recognition began in these tournaments." Comma after "recognition". Added. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "followed this example" Comma after here. Added. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "were organized in the rooftops" "in"-->on. Corrected. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "were taught how to box by Gregario Rosa Removed. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "a boxer that had won-->a boxer who had won Reworded. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "Rosa also established Removed. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "a gym where he continued instructing students" A bit confusing, considering that it was never mentioned that he instructed students in the first place? What did he teach? Boxers, "student" was used there as in "dojo" teaching. Anyway, I replaced "students" with "more pugilists". - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "The charges were archived, the decision was justified with a statement saying:" -->The charges were archived; the decision was justified with a statement that said: Reworded. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "with a card being organized weekly." What is a card? Fight card, added a link to that article. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) "Legislator Lorenzo Coballes Gandía would redact a proposal to legalize boxing, which was signed by governor Horace Mann Towner on May 1927."-->Legislator Lorenzo Coballes Gandía redacted a proposal to legalize boxing, which was signed by governor Horace Mann Towner in May 1927. Reworded. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Dabomb87 (talk) 02:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC) A nice and detailed review. I worked with most of the points, the others are waiting for feedback. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Those were only examples, there are more problems out there. I will try to return if I have time to finish the review, but it would be nice if you could find someone to do a ten-minute proofreading job. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC) I asked Tony, one of our project's best writters, to take a look at the prose. - Caribbean~H.Q. 23:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC) Looks much better. I gave it a copy-edit myself too. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Scorpion0422 22:10, 14 March 2009 [6].

---

List of Oh My Goddess! episodes

Nominator(s): NOCTURNENOIR ^{( t • c )}

This list is a former featured list that I split into three separate lists. One is now an FL, another is at FLC (which needs comments, by the way), and the final is in progress. Additionally, it has gone through a peer review. Thanks for your consideration. NOCTURNENOIR ^{( t • c )} 01:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Rambo's Revenge (talk · contribs)

Oppose Refs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6: The lead relies heavily on these ANN sources which are not a reliable source. The encyclopedic section of ANN is editable by anybody so only the news/releases/reviews sections can be considered reliable. I've switched them up. I don't have citations for the theme songs, but I can cite the episodes themselves if you wish. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 18:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Okay, but this has left some things uncited. For example "initially aired on WOWOW in 1998 and 1999" Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Fixed. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 03:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC) No worries, I know the feeling. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:22, 4 March 2009 (UTC) I may have missed them, but "Adventures of Mini-Goddess", "Ah! My Goddess: Fighting Wings" and the "OVA series" airdates are uncited. Refs added. They're not from the official sites, but of course, official websites didn't exist in 1993. They are reliable as the information page of Allcinema.net cites them as being a company; not a fansite. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 18:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC) For the OVA series the ref added only cites the first date, not the other three. For Adventures of Mini-Goddess it only seems to cite the month range of the series, not all the individual air dates. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Fixed. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 03:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Other minor fixes ==Notes== should be ==Note== Done. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 18:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC) WP:OVERLINKING e.g. Anime International Company, Tokyo Broadcasting System etc. in the lead I can unlink the entire page, but I still feel that each section should link to those pages individually as viewers may skip sections when reading the page. I've unlinked the lead, but that's all I've done so far. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 18:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC) What are your opinions on this? NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 03:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC) OVA series ep. 3 | Per WP:DASH use spaced ndash or unspaced mdash. Not spaces mdash. I cannot find what you're talking about. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 18:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Thanks for the catch. I need my eyes checked, heh. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 22:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Rambo's Revenge (talk) 15:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Sources Ref 21 and 40: park2.wakwak.com/~mi-ke is not a reliable source. It is a fan site. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC) It is a direct copy from official sites that are no longer on the internet. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 19:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC) I'm sorry but you saying it is a direct copy of an offline reliable source doesn't hold. You would need to prove it. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Finally cited with definite reliable sources and clarified for airdates, and theme music ref replaced with episode citations. Don't know why I didn't see the refs for the airdates before... NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 20:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Ref 43 doesn't cite what it claims. It mentions no airdates. Column on the right should. It looks fine on my computer, so I don't know what's going on. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 19:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC) It is fine, I got a different page to that last time, buts have copied the url wrong or something. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Ref 22: The site ANIPO doesn't cite anthing. If you meant the video, you can't do that (copyvio). I think the Japanese messed with the linking... I had linked to a different site with the "ANIPO" logo in the upper left-hand corner, but the current linked site is a bit... different? I've changed the links. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 19:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC) New ref is fine. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC) "The storyline initially parallels the early parts of the original manga and is similar to early episodes of the later 2005 TV series, but it soon moves off onto a tangent of its own" | more context, can you state what some of the parts it paralleled were, and how or to what it becomes I haven't read the manga, so I don't have a clue. I've clarified the connection to the other TV series though. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 22:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC) ==Adventures of Mini-Goddess== has overlinking of "Pony Canyon" and "Geneon Entertainment" Removed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 22:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC) "It had only two" Fixed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 22:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Ref 36 & 37, the titles should not be all in capitals, even if the webpage is. Decapped. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 22:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC) "With Belldandy and Megumi off shopping, Keiichi decides watch a film that has mysteriously arrived in the mail", so did the Ultimate Force get broken somehow..? To tell the truth, I have no clue. It's an anime; they tend to have plot holes like this. They pretty much inexplicably go shopping, so this plot hole is not covered. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 22:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Um for the short prose section in ==Ah! My Goddess: Fighting Wings== it might be worth combining all three one sentence "paragraph" into one paragraph. They were separate paragraphs for the others. I've made it into two paragraphs. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 22:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC) For the two Ah! My Goodness seasons, they both say "They are based on the manga series Oh My Goddess!," isn't that fairly obvious on an "Oh My Goddess!" episode page. I would suggest either expanding about what parts of the manga it covers or removing. There is more clarification the paragraphs elsewhere, so I've moved stuff around a bit and removed the unnecessary repetition. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 22:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC) More Inconsistent naming: Links to List of Adventures of Mini-Goddess episodes and The Adventures of Mini-Goddess. Which one is it "Adventures of Mini-Goddess" or "The Adventures of Mini-Goddess". You might need to move some pages/create new redirects for this one. List of the OC episodes redirects to List of OC episodes, so I see no reason why List of Adventures of Mini-Goddess should be moved to "List of The Adventures of Mini-Goddess" (the proper title). ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Um no it doesn't. It redirects to List of The O.C. episodes. And regardess, you should be consistent within this list. e.g. It says "Adventures of Mini-Goddess" in the lead. But you claim the official title is The Adventures of Mini-Goddess. Then the section on it is called ==Adventures of Mini-Goddess== but you start that section with the name "The Adventures of Mini-Goddess". Rambo's Revenge (talk) 15:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Hmm, musta been superbly tired when I wrote that, as I didn't utter a single proper sentence in that whole post. I have moved the list. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 20:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC) "However, the later episodes of the OVA, episodes four and five, do not follow the manga or any other TV series." | firstly OVA is a singular, so should be OVA series if it stays, but I think you can remove the later episodes of the OVA completely as it is clear from the previous sentence what is being talked about. Removed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) It was also reissued twice Removed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) "also known as Ah! My Goddess: Being Small is Convenient[citation needed] That's the literal translation from the original Japanese title. I've changed the wording to reflect this. I don't believe this still needs to be cited. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) "It was directed by Hiroko Kazui and Yasuhiro Matsumura and it was produced by Oriental Light and Magic" Removed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) "It premiered as a part of the omnibus show Anime Complex on WOWOW and is distributed in North America by Geneon Entertainment, formerly known as Pioneer Entertainment." | these two things seem completely unrelated, split Split and cited. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) "A boxed set was released" | I'm guessing it is a DVD boxset from the year, but you have mentioned VHS previously so make explicit Clarified. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) "the season was licensed to Geneon Entertainmen]," | typo Fixed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) "On January 6, 2005, the season aired in Japan on TBS and ended on July 7, 2005" | The season aired in Japan on TBS from ... to ... Fixed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) "Bandai Visual released the episodes in Japan between April and November 2005, as eight DVD compilations each containing three episodes" | repeatitive episodes, something like Bandai Visual released eight DVD compilations in Japan between April and November 2005, each containing three episodes Fixed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Stopped looking, I'm noticing a lot of prose that still needs tweaking. Suggest getting a copyeditor. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC) This list has already been copyedited by La Pianista (talk · contribs). Are you suggesting that I need yet another? Most of these prose concerns seem very nitpicky (aside from the typo). ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 15:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC) I disagree that most of my concerns were nitpicky. Stuff like slitting unrelated sentences, reducing redundancy and ambiguity are all valid concerns to meet criteria 1: "professional standards of writing". My only other concern is the image, I realise someone told you to add it at PR, but I don't think it passes WP:NFCC criteria 8 for inclusion - "only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Both List of Bleach episodes and List of YuYu Hakusho episodes include a logo. List of Bleach episodes was promoted at the end of January; has consensus changed since then? ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 20:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Consensus has nothing to do with it. It has nothing to do with what people want, it is what is allowed by the Foundation to protect Wikipedia from issues with copyrights. If you can justify the non-free criteria then that's okay, but I cannot see how this significantly increases a readers understanding of the topic. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:22, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Removed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 20:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I have capped my oppose, but given the amount of changes I want give it another once-over before supporting. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Right one of my main concerns is that the three Ah! My Goddess were "produced by Tokyo Broadcasting System". Neither of ref 3 or ref 5 comfirm this. I may be wrong, but I wouldn't expect a TV network to be producing a show, just broadcasting it. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

It's common enough for Japanese anime. I've added references which should help. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ^{( t • c )} 21:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Support. Honestly I still don't think this "exemplifies our very best work". However, it now seems to meet the criteria. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Can you tell me why this isn't the best work so I can fix it? ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ^{( t • c )} 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support - I can't see much wrong with list. Seeing that the Amazon site is only being used to reference its release date, it isn't really a problem. Top work. Sunderland06 (talk) 22:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Question: Is the ending theme for the OVA series "コングラチュレイションズ" or "Omedetou"? If the latter, what is the actual Japanese script? —tan³ tx 00:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, fixed that. Copypasted the wrong thing (slash I don't speak Japanese). Thanks for the catch. NOCTURNENOIR ^{( t • c )} 00:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Goodraise (talk · contribs)

Resolved comments "FUNimation" - Maybe it's a borderline case, but per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) I'd write it "Funimation". Changed anyway. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Reference titles should be taken directly from the pages, from the rendered page, the title bar, cut together from several lines if need be, but not made up yourself. This applies to references #3, #4, and #51. Done. Took some screwing with the HTML source code though... ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) The titles of ref. #47 and #48 should be title-cased. Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Same goes for references #33 and #40: "DVD-BOX" -> "DVD-Box". Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Also in the reference titles, replace "　" with " " and "！" with "!". Replaced. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) In reference titles, you replaced various forms of dashes with spaced em-dashes. Replace them with spaced en-dashes or unspaced em-dashes. Replaced. Stupid script. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Don't superscript ordinal suffixes. Anime is linked a bit often, but in this case that seems fine. I'll unlink it if you wish. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) "uu" -> "ū". Replaced. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) "Koibito Doshi" (恋人同士 ?) - Use nihongo3 when romaji comes first. Also, a literal translation might be nice. Used a Google translator; someone should fix this if it's wrong. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) "Negai" (願) - Same case. Done. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 20:15, 6 March 2009 (UTC) The cite episode template has an episodelink field. Use it! ("|episodelink=#ep10" for page internal links and "|episodelink=List of Ah! My Goddess episodes (season 2)#ep14" for Wikipedia internal links) I'll fiddle with this a bit and will fix it later. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 16:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) I've done the best I can with this; the link doesn't work precisely, but it's close enough. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 20:15, 6 March 2009 (UTC) I'm not happy with it yet. But I'll look into this myself. -- Goodraise (talk) 12:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Because of the multiple episodes under the same "number," it is impossible to redirect directly to "ああっ片翼の天使降臨っ." I've tried several different combinations after the #, but none redirect, much less to the episode in question. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Dropping this one, as I have not time to investigate a solution and because it's not that big a deal anyways. -- Goodraise (talk) 17:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC) "Oh My Goddess!, the manga by Kōsuke Fujishima, has had several anime versions broadcast on television." - I don't like this sentence. (Has the OVA series even been broadcast?) I think the rest of the paragraph should be concatenated with the next paragraph and this sentence expended to give a better introduction to the list and to summarize the rest of the lead. Not sure how to do this. I've tried, so take a look. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) It's explained at MOS:BEGIN. -- Goodraise (talk) 22:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Hopefully, I actually understood what was being said and the current one is good. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 04:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC) Most of my concerns were addressed during the peer review. -- Goodraise (talk) 12:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Support: The list technically meets the criteria. However, there is something about it that just doesn't feel right. In most cases before supporting, I take a last look at the list and find myself thinking: "Yes, that's a featured list! It just hasn't received its star yet." That's not the case here. It's missing that special something more. But since I can't come up with "a specific rationale that can be addressed", I have to support. -- Goodraise (talk) 18:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Instead of posting all my comments here, I will just copy-edit the seven summaries myself. Watch for the hidden comments. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:14, 8 March 2009 (UTC) I left <!-- please check --> in some places. This is a notice that my copy-editing of that phrase may have changed the meaning of the plot and you may need to ensure that everything is correct. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Responded to those. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "who all live in a temple home."-->all of whom live in a temple home. Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "ran for twenty-four episodes between" Numbers over nine should be written numerically. Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "who released all 26 episodes on six DVD compilations." Here, comparable quantities should be written the same, so write 26 and 6 or twenty-six and six. (occurs multiple times) This generally confused me, so make sure I fixed this properly please. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "A total of thirteen pieces of" Removed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "Several soundtracks and drama CDs were released as well by the Japanese production companies or the holders of the licenses in Region 1." This can easily be converted to the active voice. Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "In late 1993 through early 1994"-->From late 1993 to early 1994 Done. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "Kosuke Fujishima's popular Oh My Goddess! series." Is there a source for "popular"? It's a very well-known anime series, so I thought that would be "common knowledge," but upon reflection, it sounds kind of POV. I've removed "popular." ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "It is distributed " By the use of the present tense, is it correct to assume that the OVA is still being distributed? Yes. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "The series initially released straight " The series didn't release itself, add "was" after "series". Haha, fixed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "is a Japanese animated TV series and had 48 episodes during its run between 1998 and 1999."-->is a Japanese animated TV series and that had 48 episodes aired during its run from 1998 to 1999. Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "The series does not follow the manga closely, developing on the adventures of the miniaturized three goddesses and their rat companion Gan-chan, who live in their temple home."-->The series does not follow the manga closely; instead, it describes the adventures of the miniaturized three goddesses and their rat companion Gan-chan, who live in their temple home. Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "Pony Canyon to both DVD and VHS." "to"-->on. Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "It had two pieces of theme music, which were both ending themes."-->The Adventures of Mini-Goddess had two pieces of theme music, both of which were ending themes. Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "utilizes"--uses Changed. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) "while episodes twelve through twenty-four were ended"-->and episodes twelve through twenty-four were ended Tweaked. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Is there a source for the note? You could cite the episode itself. Cited. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC) The dab link tool in the toolbox reveals one self-redirect. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Fixed the dab by changing the redir. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 18:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 02:04, 10 March 2009 [7].

---

M.I.A. discography

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk)

The format and sources for this one were cribbed from the recently promoted Dido discography, so hopefully it's OK. Let me know what still needs tweaking. And apologies if you suffer any eye ailments after looking at her outfit in the photo :-) ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Support Looks great. All of my concerns have been addressed. Drewcifer (talk) 19:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Drewcifer

Comments Good start, and most of my comments from the recent peer review have been addressed. But here's a few more nonetheless. Mainly, there's a few inconsistencies between this and the Dido discography you cited as your inspiration. I think Dido's discog is a good target, so I'll point out some ways to mimic it better: For the chart columns, use 3 ems rather than 4. This not only makes it look more consistent with other discogs, it also makes the table slimmer, since right now on my monitor (1024x768) it's being squeezed. "Paper Planes - Homeland Security Remixes EP" should be "Paper Planes – Homeland Security Remixes EP" (the dash should be an en-dash, not a hyphen) We're only concerned with the original home-land release for most data. So, I don't think the US labels are needed here, only the British ones. The Belgian sub-columns are interesting here, but the Wallonia column is empty, so I think there's a better solution here. Such as a single column called BEL (FL), for instance, while keeping the note to explain. Year columns should be centered. Bold the album/ep titles. There's alot of data in these charts, so I find bolding the titles focuses all the data on what it's all about. The table proportions here are still wildly inconsistent. The details columns should ideally be the same width, as should chart columns and year columns. Drewcifer (talk) 08:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Already done, I think, unless there's anything I've missed..... I'm always a little wary when "EP" is put in the title of something. In most cases it's not really in the title at all. How Many Votes Fix Mix looks like one of those examples: I don't see "EP" anywhere on the cover. Double check all three. Changed them on this article, whether or not the articles need re-titling is something that can be addressed outwith this FLC In the iTunes Live sessions, don't capitalize "Download". Changed For the sake of consistency, most discogs use the following country abbreviations: US, NLD, DAN, US DANCE, US R&B. All changed, I think U.S. → US Done I would generally suggest using "#18" rather than "number 18", since it's a statistic you're quoting. Drewcifer (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC) M.I.A. is British, though, so (per my understanding of WP:ENGVAR) British English should be used for the article, and in the UK we don't use the hash mark to signify "number"...... Huh, I didn't know that. Interesting. Nevermind then. Drewcifer (talk) 22:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Many thanks for your comments and assistance...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) General comment Most of my problems are the same as Drew came up with, I will re-review once their comments are resolved.--TRUCO 16:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC) OK, pretty much everything raised above has been sorted, but for the life of me I can't figure out (and I've been trying for the best part of an hour) why, even when I specify the width of the second column in the Mixtapes and EPs tables, it refuses to "force" to that size. What am I doing wrong (bound to be something really obvious that I've missed.....)???!?!?!?! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Figured it out, 30 seconds before I threw the PC out the window. And as it's technically my wife's PC, that would probably have been a bad move..... :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:04, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Hmmmm, spoke too soon, it still isn't working right, the width of the second column doesn't match across all the tables, even though they're all set to the same width.....anyone.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC) It looks fine to me, but there's alot of variables that might be affecting what you're seeing: screen resolution, font size, web browser, etc. I added some forced line breaks to the stuff that is longer than a single line. Did that help? I also made a few other small edits that were easier to do myself than explain. I also added a few more notes above. Drewcifer (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC) It was only out by a couple of pixels on my screen, maybe I was trying too hard to make it perfect :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC) So are Drew's comments resolved? Since not all of them are capped.--TRUCO 00:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC) I think so..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Lead The band's lead singer, Justine Frischmann, lent her a Roland MC-505 sequencer/drum machine which she used to make a demo tape which secured her a contract with British label XL Recordings. -- The second which should be "that" Although the album had limited commercial success, it was highly regarded by music critics for its blending of such genres as grime, hip hop, ragga and Brazilian baile funk, and for its politicised lyrics. -- Don't you mean "genres such as"? Spell out US and UK in their first occurrences. The album featured the song "Paper Planes", which proved to be M.I.A.'s breakthrough hit and was nominated for Record of the Year at the 51st Grammy Awards. -- Comma before and The song also appeared on the soundtrack of the 2008 film Slumdog Millionaire along with "O...Saya", a new song by M.I.A. and A. R. Rahman, which was nominated for the Oscar for Best Original Song at the 81st Academy Awards. -- a new song is WP:WEASEL wording, specifically state when it was released Please state when it was released.--₮RUCӨ 21:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC) It wasn't "released" other than by being on the soundtrack of the film, the date of which is already covered by the phrase "The song also appeared on the soundtrack of the 2008 film Slumdog Millionaire along with......" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Well that should be clarified a bit more, that it was only released on the soundtrack and not in a studio album.--₮RUCӨ 22:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC) I reworded it a bit, however.--₮RUCӨ 21:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Mixtapes Initially only given to the press and distributed at live performances. -- This is not a complete sentence and thus does not need a full stop. Singles Her 2003 and 2007 (Sound of Kuduro) singles need to be verified in some way because they did not rank and have no verification.--₮RUCӨ 17:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC) All done, I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--₮RUCӨ 21:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "but moved into making music after" This is a false contrast, "but"-->and. "which further increased the anticipation for her official debut." "Her second album, Kala, was released in 2007 and was again praised by critics-->Her second album, Kala, was released in 2007 and was also praised by critics "The song also appeared on the soundtrack" "but not on an M.I.A." "an"-->a "O...Saya"-->O... Saya Dabomb87 (talk) 00:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Websites (such as Yahoo Music, Allmusic and BBC News) should not be italicized.
• http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/error/?c=y&referURL=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FM.I.A._discography&errorURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.philadelphiaweekly.com%2Fprint_friendly.php%3Fid%3D8794 (ref 28) deadlinks. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

All addressed now, I think..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 02:04, 10 March 2009 [8].

---

List of Governors of Connecticut

Nominator(s): Golbez (talk)

Another in the long line of featured governor lists, the last couple being List of Governors of Indiana and List of Governors of Arizona. New features in this version of the format: Split terms (i.e. someone served a partial term, then served a partial term) are denoted with +s, as in Indiana, and moving the images down to coincide with the table rather than the text. --Golbez (talk) 05:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support Excellent list to the same high quality as your others! My only recommendation would be to use a better word than "stint" in the last paragraph. Though I'm disappointed that Hiram Bingham broke Indiana governor Lane's record :(. Reywas92^Talk 00:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I agree, 'stint' sounds a little informal, but it was preferred to "distinct terms", as that could be ambiguous. As for the record, I believe the permanent record is held by James Peabody of Colorado, who was declared governor on the condition that he immediately resign so that his lieutenant could take the office. --Golbez (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Maybe "timespans"? Stint is really too informal. Reywas92^Talk 14:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
      • That seems a bit long; how about "spans"? Or is that too contracted? --Golbez (talk) 20:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) General comment There is a self redirect to the article, as found with the dab tool Assuming it was the one in the lead, fixed. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Lead Can you make the third and fourth paragraphs into one? They are too small to stand alone. 2nd and 3rd, yes; 3rd and 4th, no, as they have little to do with each other. And the 2nd+3rd would probably be too large. (2nd is the term of governor; 3rd deals with the lt. gov; and the 4th is a history paragraph explaining the charter.) Any suggestions? --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Then merge the 2nd and 3rd, the size will still be fine.--₮RUCӨ 03:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) There have been 67 governors of the state, serving 71 distinct spans in office. -- spans? Shouldn't it be "terms"? It used to say "distinct terms" but that confused someone since the next person then said "the longest terms in office ... were elected to ten one-year terms". We're using at least two, possibly three, definition of 'term' in one paragraph and it got confusing. I'd be happy to put it back to "distinct term" but others would have to agree it's not confusing. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Oh, I see. Then span is alright.--₮RUCӨ 03:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) The longest was the first, Jonathan Trumbull, who served 14+1⁄2 years, but seven of those as colonial governor; the longest-serving entirely state governor was his son, Jonathan Trumbull, Jr., who served over 11+1⁄2 years. -- The first what? Governor. Clarified. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Like most early states, Connecticut had claims to western areas but, unlike most of the others, did not cede all of its claims during the formation of the country. -- (1)The comma goes before the but (2)Add "it" before did not I originally had it after the but, but then the clause makes no sense. I'll move it later in the sentence, let me know what you think. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Its perfect.--₮RUCӨ 03:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Governors What does the "white" color mean in terms of parties? There is no white color; there is a null color, used in one cell, due to the person having no party at all. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) You should explain that in the key.--₮RUCӨ 03:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Can the took office and the left office be replaced with "Term began" and "Term ended" or "Term start" and "Term end"? Possibly, except that "term began" implies that it was the official start of the term, where there was at least one situation where a governor stayed on past the end of his official term. But that's a minor instance, I'll make the change. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) IMO, its fine. Unless any other reviewer states otherwise.--₮RUCӨ 03:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Is this table capable of being sortable? It would serve the reader better if it were. Sadly, no; some work is being done to make tables with rowspanned columns sortable, but they aren't yet. Oh, okay.--₮RUCӨ 03:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Other high offices held * denotes those offices which the governor resigned to take. † denotes those offices that the governor resigned to be governor. -- (1)These should be listed instead of being in this format (2)After each symbol, have the first word capitalized. OK, let me know what you think of my attempt. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Its fine, except that it should be in small font, but the italics should remain.--₮RUCӨ 03:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) The Gubernatorial term shouldn't be sortable because some entries have more than 2 terms listed in each column. But the default sort is done by first term in office; it's at least useful to that regard to take you back to the default sort, yes? --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) In a way, yes, but also its not representative of all the entries. But I'll let it go for now.--₮RUCӨ 03:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Blank entries in the US House and US Senate columns should have centered aligned emdashes. Fair enough. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Living former governors The most recent governor to die was William O'Neill (1980–1991), who died on November 24, 2007. -- It would be best if you state when he took office and when he left. This also needs a source. The took/left office is what's in parentheses. :) As for the source, do you mean one saying he's dead, or one saying he's the most recent to die? --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Notes The first, third, eight, eleventh, and eighteenth through twenty-first need a source to be verified by. The general references act as references for anything that isn't specifically cited. Oh, okay.--₮RUCӨ 03:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Remove the full stops from notes 6-7, 9-11, 16, and 18-21 Done. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) References Some of the publishers have respective articles, and should be linked per consistency with linking, like the Connecticut State Library.--₮RUCӨ 01:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Done. --Golbez (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Done all new things above (though I think the 2nd graf is too big now :)) --Golbez (talk) 07:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Its fine, really ;)--₮RUCӨ 22:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--₮RUCӨ 22:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "The longest terms in office were in the state's early years, with three governors being elected to ten or more one-year terms." This sentence structure (noun + -ing) is ungrammatical, try "The longest terms in office were in the state's early years; three governors have been elected to ten or more one-year terms." Rearranged a little bit. --Golbez (talk) 20:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC) "who served 14+1⁄2 years, but seven of those as colonial governor" Write comparable quantities the same, either use 14+1⁄2 and 7 or use fourteen and a half and seven. Done. "Prior to"--Before Done, though is there a guideline saying this? I tend to look at 'before' as possibly meaning "just before", whereas 'prior to' doesn't have that possible connotation. A guideline would be ludicrous, but "before" is plainer, more understandable and more concise. Remember that we are trying to make Wikipedia well known to all types of people. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:19, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Not necessarily ludicrous; we do have lists of "words to avoid", I was just curious if you were referencing something like that. --Golbez (talk) 02:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC) "but it did not" File:Abraham ribicoff.jpg has no information at all to verify its copyright status. Swapped him out for another governor. File:M. Jodi Rell.png needs a more specific URL (see the file page). Dabomb87 (talk) 13:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Found a free picture on flickr. --Golbez (talk) 20:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Gimmetrow 03:42, 10 March 2009 [9].

---

List of individual National Basketball Association scoring leaders

Nominator(s): —Chris! _ct

Another NBA list written by me. Comments welcomed.—Chris! _ct 23:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead The following list individual players who lead the National Basketball Association (NBA) with the highest point per game average in a given season. -- list --> "lists" Both George Gervin and Allen Iverson have clinched four scoring titles in their career[5] while George Mikan, Neil Johnston and Bob McAdoo have clinched it three times. -- Comma before while List and key Make a section header for the list itself and optionally for the key, if not just place it at the top of the new section. This was not done.--TRUCO 00:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Opps, I missed this one. Now done.—Chris! ct 02:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The 3-point field-goal made column needs to have its content center aligned like the rest of the list the columns. I can remove the center alignment if that is what you mean.—Chris! ct 18:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Sorry, forget about that, I just found it awkward that the column is stretched like that.--TRUCO 00:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Done.—Chris! ct 02:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC) No no, revert that, the center aligning of the emdashes has nothing to do with the width of the column, in fact its proper to list it in the center. However, maybe the name of the column can be coded with break parameters to decrease the width of it? If not, its still fine.--TRUCO 03:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC) I see. I think I did it right this time.—Chris! ct 03:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Remove at least 2 images because they stretch past the notes section, and they should stop beforehand. Notes Remove the commas from notes B, C, and E they are not complete statements. References If you're going to link one of the publishers, you may as well link the rest for consistency. I removed the links. Everything else done.—Chris! ct 18:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC) --TRUCO 16:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--₮RU₢0 05:21, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support excellent list to the same quality as your others! Reywas92^Talk 00:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from KV5

Comments from KV5 The table, so "by season" in the title is extraneous. Page move needed. - Done Lead sentence "The folowing lists..." - not so much. Reword. Hook me! - I can't think of a better way to say this. Any suggestion? Try "The National Basketball Association's (NBA) scoring title is awarded to the player with the highest points per game in a given season." It says the same thing without starting "This list...", etc. We know what the list is because of the title. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Done—Chris! ct 23:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC) "who lead" - "who led" - Done "point per game average" - make it points per game and link to here - Done "point per game averaged" - you've already established that it's an average, so just "points per game" will suffice here - Done "also the frist player" - first - Done "in history" - excess, you've already said first player, so remove - Done "He is also the frist player in history to lead both categories as a rookie when he scored 2707 points and averaged 37.6 points in the 1959–60 season." - needs ref - I reword the sentence and got a ref for it "Michael Jordan holds the record for having the most scoring titles, with ten." - either "Michael Jordan has won the most scoring titles, with ten." or "Michael Jordan has won ten scoring titles, more than any other player." - Done "to have seven consecutive scoring titles." - to have won - Done "Both George Gervin and Allen Iverson have clinched four scoring titles in their career,[5] while George Mikan, Neil Johnston and Bob McAdoo have clinched it three times." - clinched used twice in quick succession, and I would remove it altogether to facilitate understanding. Use "won" or "achieved" instead. - Done Positions should be linked in the key - Not done because they all link to basketball position and this link is in the key already They should be linked to the appropriate section of that article: Basketball position#Point guard, Basketball position#Center, etc. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Done—Chris! ct 23:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Key should be separated from the table by a level 2 header - Done Table headers: Field goal, 3-point field goal, and free throw - the only dash in there should be 3-point, as shown, and all need to be plural - Done Make all footnotes complete sentences - Is this necessary? I suppose it's not necessary per se, but consistency would be nice. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Done—Chris! ct 23:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Check out reference 85, I think it should be 1999-2000, not 1990-2000 - Done References need to be formatted consistently. Some access dates are "February 20, 2009", and some are "February 20 2009". Check all. - Done Hope this helps. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC) My replies are in bold. Thanks for reviewing—Chris! ct 19:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Support. Cheers. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 23:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "highest points per game" "most", not "highest". Alternatively, you could say "highest points per game average". ", both of which were achieved in the 2005–06 season." Change the comma to a semicolon and rephrase to "both records were achieved in the 2005–06 season." "while George Mikan, Neil Johnston"-->and George Mikan, Neil Johnston "have all won" "Only three players " In the last sentence, I think you should link to the season article rather than the NBA finals articles. Why is this necessary?—Chris! ct 02:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Fix the edit bunching. "Denotes the number of times the player has been the scoring leader" This is a bit off but I don't know the best way to rephrase. Maybe " Denotes the number of times the player had been the scoring leader up to and including that season". This is something that needs to be amended in your other lists too. Done, will do other lists later—Chris! ct 02:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC) The George Mikan image is fair use and should be removed, as there are plenty of free alternatives of other players. It is not imperative that Mikan be pictured. Image caption: "Kobe Bryant won the scoring titles twice from 2006 to 2007."-->Kobe Bryant won the scoring titles twice in 2006 to 2007. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC) All done—Chris! ct 02:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved layout issue

Comment On my screen resolution (1024 x 768), the images in the "Scoring leaders" section push the table down; in other words, they do not go alongside the table, they are above it, right-aligned, and there's a whole lot of white space on the left. Can this be fixed? Noble Story (talk • contributions) 07:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC) I tried to fix it. Does that help?—Chris! ct 17:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC) At the moment, it is still the same. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 00:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC) A screen shot would be helpful. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC) I think the fix bunching template is causing this problem. I remove them and rearrange the images. See if it looks better.—Chris! ct 03:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC) No, it's still the same. I guess it can't be fixed. Noble Story (talk • contributions) 04:11, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Ooh, high five! It's fixed (Don't listen to me talking again). Noble Story (talk • contributions) 04:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from SRE.K.A.L.24

Comments from -- SRE.K.A.L.24[c] "Wilt Chamberlain holds the all-time records for total points scored (4029) and points per game (50.4)..." that's in a season, right? Also with the Bryant one. Right—Chris! ct 22:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC) The readers may be confused whether it is all-time, or just the season. Just clarify it by adding "in a season" or something similar. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Although I think "both were achieved in the 1961–62 season." in the sentence "Wilt Chamberlain holds the all-time records for total points scored (4029) and points per game (50.4); both were achieved in the 1961–62 season." already clarify the meaning. But done anyway. "...and Bryant have won the scoring titles twice." have --> have each; titles --> title. Done—Chris! ct 22:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC) You could include that O'Neal is the only season scoring leader to have never had a three point field goal in his respective seasons. I think the lead has enough material already.—Chris! ct 22:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Ehh...you could still add it, since it is kind of a fascinating fact. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC) The reason I don't want to add is because I probably need a ref for it and I am not sure if I can find one for it.—Chris! ct 00:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC) Couldn't the general reference work? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 01:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC) Don't think so, but I added it anyway.—Chris! ct 01:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC) Abdul-Jabbar did not change his name until after the 1970–71 season. So I think that he should be named Lew Alcindor for his scoring title in 1970–71. Oh, I forgot that. Now done—Chris! ct 22:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC) -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 20:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support Added a sentence. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 02:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 02:04, 10 March 2009 [10].

---

List of Popotan episodes

Nominator(s): じんない

I believe the last of any signifigant issues have now been resolved. じんない 20:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NocturneNoir

Comments from NocturneNoir (talk · contribs) "The DVD box cover of the Popotan anime." from the caption, is not a sentence. Corrected. Combined the 2 sentances.じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) "The anime, which features character designs by Haruka Sakurai based on the original concept by Akio Watanabe[2][3] under the alias of Poyoyon Rock,[4][5] was developed by Shaft, directed and storyboarded by Shinichiro Kimura, and written by Jukki Hanada." is very convoluted. Try splitting it up into multiple sentences. Done. Semi-colon split the character designs (which was probably the section that made it so convoluted).じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) "They originally aired on TBS's satellite station BS-i from July 17, 2003 through October 2, 2003" needs a comma before and after BS-i. Done.じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) "From August 15, 2003 through August 17, 2003 the first episode of Popotan, "Secret House", was shown for free at Ishimaru Electronics in Japan." needs a comma after the second 2003 and personally, I would use "to" instead of "through" or just exchange the whole intro for "Between August 15 and August 17, 2003,". Done.じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) "At the same time Bandai released DVDs without the figurines at a lower cost." Needs a comma after "time". Done.じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) "The discs also came with a promotional figurine of one of the girls." I assume you mean "Each disc also came with..."? Yes. I changed it to that.じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) "[11]Geneon USA licensed needs a space between the ref and the next sentence. Done.じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) How come only the opening theme is mentioned and not the closing theme? More detail could be given here, including the name of the artist. I added all information on the any release based directly on the anime's songs.じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) EP# should be bolded. Other lists tend to just use # as well, so you may want to consider that. I personally don't care either way. Done...i believe.じんない 03:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Do "mansion" and "ghosts" really need to be wikilinked? Same with most of the other wikilinks in the episodes; I'd assume most readers know what "Christmas" is. I removed ghosts as it's not that pertinent to the story. Christmas, or rather the idea of Christmas, plays a somewhat more important role in the anime and while most people might be familiar with it, it is also relevant to the topic, especially as it relates to 1 episode in particular. Mansion...well...i could remove that one. While it is a central location not knowing about it would not inpede one's reading of the list as much as Christmas would.じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) On that note, can you wikilink to List of Popotan characters more often? I have never seen this series, so I had no clue who the characters are. I added links to characters mentioned not at the top. That should be enough links to that page.じんない 03:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC) I trust Malleus Fatuorum (talk · contribs) did a good job copyediting, so I won't even look at the episode list for errors I won't find. Good job on the list overall. And why yes, I stole this comment layout from Matthewedwards (talk · contribs). I quite like it. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ( t • c ) 01:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I really dislike the formatting of some of the citation templates... Anyway, I did a minor c/e and tweaking, so I will support. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ^{( t • c )} 04:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment: instead of using multiple sources for the Japanese epsiode titles, I believe it would be better to use a single source (perhaps http://www.b-ch.com/cgi-bin/contents/ttl/stry_list.cgi?ttl_c=601) as a general reference, as many other animanga FLs do. —tan³ tx 10:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Another comment: per WP:MOS-JA#Titles of books and other media, "S・U・K・I" is styled inappropriately, and should probably be "Suki". —tan³ tx 10:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Did this myself. —tan³ tx 03:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Done...took me a while to figure out what was the actual "title" and was was the "work" it was published under.じんない 10:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

No other problems I can see. Support. —tan³ tx 03:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Rambo's Revenge (talk · contribs)

Sourcing It was mainly by concerns with reliable sourcing that held this back on the two previous occasions, and my previous concerns have now been satisfied. My only question is what is Getchu, and what makes it a reliable source, as I couldn't find much info about it. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC) Getchu is a major retailer of adult games in Japan. Sourcing from it would be analogous to sourcing from Amazon, I believe. —tan³ tx 00:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC) Other Comments Where you have multiple references (e.g. [10][18][19][11]) they should be in numeric order. Done.じんない 01:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Citations should use consistent templates, I changed one from {{citation}}, but wasn't sure if the Getchu was citing the website ({{cite web}}) or something else. The article cites various pages on Getchu. The article cites either the media itself or the web sites. No real print media beyond the media related to this exists that I know of.じんない 01:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC) I think you may have misunderstood. Most of the Getchu are {{cite web}} which is fine. However ref 27 and 29 use the form {{citation}}. These two refs need to be changed to a specific citation template – depending on whether you are citing the web page itself: {{cite web}}, or the CD notes: {{Cite album-notes}}. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Done.じんない 16:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC) The image is missing an fair-use rationale Done.じんない 01:28, 6 March 2009 (UTC) Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support. I fixed any remaining issues I found myself. I wish to congratulate Jinnai for persisting with this, through 3 FLCs and my many opposes/comments. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Support My concerns were resolved in previous FLCs.

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 02:04, 10 March 2009 [11].

---

Ed Chynoweth Cup

Nominator(s): Resolute

So, yet another sports list. Having redesigned the table and added a history, I believe this article on the Western Hockey League's championship trophy now meets WP:WIAFL. Well sourced, appropriate lead image, straightforward table. I look forward to all feedback. Resolute 17:02, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead The WHL champion earns a berth into the Memorial Cup tournament, Canada's Major-Junior championship. -- Major-Junior should be pipedlinked to Junior ice hockey#Major-Junior History In 1971, four years after the league's founding, the CAHA reorganized the top level of junior hockey into two tiers, sanctioning the WHL as the top league in western Canada and one of three leagues, along with the Ontario Hockey Association (OHA) and Quebec Major Junior Hockey League (QMJHL), to form the "Major-Junior" tier. -- (1)IMO there is no need to state that it is 4 years after the league's founding (2) This would be better worded as 'In 1971, four years after the league's founding, the CAHA reorganized the top level of junior hockey into two tiers: the WHL was sanctioned as the top league in western Canada and as one of three leagues that formed the "Major-Junior" tier, the others being the Ontario Hockey Association (OHA) and Quebec Major Junior Hockey League (QMJHL).' The 1971 champion Edmonton Oil Kings thus faced the Quebec Remparts in the 1972 Memorial Cup final, though it nearly failed to materialize as the OHA and QMJHL initially refused to face the western champion. -- Comma after though The Oil Kings ultimately did play Quebec in an abbreviated championship, losing the best-of-3 series in two games. -- (1) No need to word it as such since in the previous sentence its confirmed that they did play. Reword possibly to 'The Oil Kings defeated Quebec in an abbreviated championship, losing the best-of-3 series in two games.' (2)It should be explained as to what the best of 3 series means or how that process functions. A half-dozen years later, the 1981–82 Winter Hawks recorded numerous other firsts, becoming the first American team to win the President's Cup,[3] as well as the first American team to compete for the Memorial Cup. -- A half-dozen is very wordy, how about 'Six years later'? "You've got to perform." -- this just seems like a random quote, remove or integrate it better in the text. The Blazers dominated the WHL in the early 1990s, capturing four league championships between 1990 and 1995 and three Memorial Cups to cap a seven championships in nine year stretch for the WHL between 1987 and 1995. -- ..to cap a seven championships in nine year stretch --> "...to cap seven championships in a nine year stretch" Chynoweth had served as president of both the WHL from 1972 and the CHL from 1975 until leaving both posts in 1995 to form the Edmonton Ice. He remained with the franchise through its transfer to Kootenay until his death in 2008. -- This would be better worded as 'Chynoweth had served as president of both the WHL and CHL from 1972 and from 1975, respectively, until leaving both posts in 1995 to form the Edmonton Ice.' List of winners Bold denotes won Memorial Cup; number in parenthesis denotes total championships won to that point -- This would be better represented as a key in table form located at the top of the table. See also Some of the links located here were already mentioned in the text so they should be removed from this section, like the President's cup. Notes Brandon qualified for the 1995 Memorial Cup the losing finalist as Kamloops was both the host team and won the WHL title. -- The grammar structure of this sentence is unclear, it needs to be revised Portland qualified for the 1986 Memorial Cup as the host team after New Westminster withdrew as host -- From my view point, 'the' should be added before the last host--TRUCO 02:02, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Some excellent suggestions. I've changed all per your comments except for two: (1) I don't see a huge need for a tabled key to denote the use of bold text and the bracketed numbers, but I did move it to the top of the list. (2) There are no redundant links in the See also section that I could find. Somewhat confusingly, both the QMHJL and WHL used to call their championship trophy the President's Cup. The see also link refers to the QMJHL's trophy. I did remove the CHL awards link, however, as that is contained in the template. Thank you for the excellent review.Resolute The only thing I suggest is that you add "team" before won Memorial Cup in the note.--TRUCO 00:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Interesting idea. done. I also removed the bolding as it becomes redundant to the notes. Resolute 16:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Yeah it does since you mention it in the results column. Now, however, you should re-add the bullet point.--TRUCO 17:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Picky, picky.  ;) done. Resolute 17:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 18:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "trophy that is awarded to" "first team with two victories winning the title,"-->in which the first team with two victories won the title, "American based team"-->American-based team "recorded numerous other firsts" "the first American team to win the President's Cup,[3] as well as the first American team to compete for the Memorial Cup." Comma not needed. "outside of Swift" Dabomb87 (talk) 03:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC) All six points addressed. Thanks, Resolute 16:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Rambo's Revenge (talk · contribs)

Oppose for now Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lists of works) says that items should be in chronological order, earliest first. Is there a reason for this not to be sortable. I guess "3–0–2" means 3 wins 0 losses 2 draws, otherwise it would be "3–2" if there were no draws, correct? You should make this explicit so idiots like me can figure out what is going on. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC) Reversed the table and added a note explaining the ties. I'm not at all sure that sortability is necessary, however I've added that as well. Resolute 20:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC) Good work, I now have no major issues with this. The comments below are all minor/picky things. I realise Junior ice hockey does it, but I don't think Major-Junior should be hyphenated, in fact I'm not sure it should even be capitalised.[12] I began capitalizing it in the past after a FAC commenter thought I was introducing POV by calling a certain league "major", rather than stating that this was the level of hockey. Changed back. "One year later, the Winter Hawks won the 1983 Memorial Cup, becoming? the first American champion" - missing word fixed "The community rallied around the team, ... etc.", firstly is this cited, secondly, meaning no disrespect to the victims of the crash, is the crash particularly relevent to the Ed Chynoweth Cup history? It is cited. The book references cover the entire paragraph. The statement about the crash attempts to set the tone for the team's victory three years later. The Broncos' 1989 championship is virtually always tied in with the crash in the histories I have. I'll attempt to improve the connection between the two. Okay that is fine if you haven't associated these two events yourself. I know it is named/linked in the lead, but for "The Blazers dominated the WHL in ...", it sounds like it is a team that has already been introduced. I'd be tempted to use the full name (and possibly link). I typically do just that. This was an oversight, fixed. "to cap seven championships in a nine year stretch for the WHL between 1987 and 1995", might be being thick but this seems a bit unclear. Clarified See also section. I realise the OHA became the OHL, but you haven't previously used OHL, so it should probably be spelled out. Corrected with a note in the article body. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC) Thanks! Resolute 15:33, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, my issues have been resolved. This looks good. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support The prose is very well written (frankly, I was a bit surprised that I couldn't even add a comma or anything like that anywhere), the refs and list look excellent as well. Maxim_(talk) 13:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 21:50, 7 March 2009 [13].

---

Ashlee Simpson discography

Nominator(s): Underneath-it-All (talk)

I think this discography about the American singer is comprehensive and well referenced. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 03:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead -- Incomplete lead. The discography of Ashlee Simpson, a American pop singer, consists of three studio albums, eight singles, and seven music videos. -- 'an' not a On the UK albums chart, it reached number thirty-one and was certified gold by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI). -- Spell out the United Kingdom in its first occurrence The album sold 2.9 million copies in the US and produced two top ten singles. -- This is not elaborate enough, all discographies explain some of the artist's most notable singles and how they ranked. It debuted at number one in the US and was certified platinum. -- certified platinum by who? I Am Me sold 900,000 copies in the US and produced two top forty singles. -- same thing here about the elaboration of singles Bittersweet World, Simpson's third album, was released in April 2008. The album reached number four in the US and number fifty-seven in the UK. -- Well what about the singles, which need to be elaborated? Other appearances These songs have not appeared on a studio album released by Simpson. -- (1)Source? or (2)No need for it since the table itself says this. References Why isn't Interscope records linked under "Interscope" [which should be changed to Interscope records]--TRUCO 01:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Done -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 23:56, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 17:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Support Happy to support, very nice work. Only two minor comments: year columns should be centered (they look off to me), and you may want to put a # before the catalog numbers. Great work though! Drewcifer (talk) 08:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support, nice. Without much enthusiasm, please. Cannibaloki 16:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• No need to link actress, it is a common term and most people know what it is.
• "2.9 million" Needs a non-breaking space.
• "top forty singles"-->top-forty singles I think "spawned" would be a better word here. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:57, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:57, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Done -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 19:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 21:50, 7 March 2009 [14].

---

Rufus Wainwright discography

Nominator(s): Another Believer _(Talk)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets all requirements. Despite receiving support from two reviewers, my previous attempt at obtaining FL status was unsuccessful. However, I have made all corrections requested here, so I hope the list satisfies all reviewers this time. Thanks again! --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous comments resolved in the first FLC, and I still feel it meets the WP:WIAFL criteria despite changes. Good work.--TRUCO 22:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from JD554

Comments from JD554 (talk · contribs) "released under [label]" seems a strange choice of wording. Would "released by" or "released through" be better? Done. All "under"s have been changed to "through"s. References for chart positions and certifications aren't needed in the lead as they are cited in the main body. Done. Comment: It was suggested that I add citations for specific chart positions in the header. Since it comes down to a personal preference, I put the references back (only 3 total, so not a big difference). --Another Believer (Talk) 16:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC) "Best New Artist" doesn't need quotes around it. Done. Saying "and more" at the end of what's available on All I Want makes it sound like an advert. This needs re-wording or maybe expanding to say what the "more" is. Done. Removed "and more". The last sentence of the lead isn't necessary. Done. Some of the releases in the lead are referred to in the past tense, these need changing to the present. Eg, "His first music DVD, Live at the Fillmore, accompanied Want Two and featured live concert footage" should be "and features". Done. The actual details of albums are in different orders: Studio, live and compilation albums have released date, label, format; but EPs and video albums have released date, format, label. These should be consistent. Done. Wherever there is more than one format, it should be "Formats:". Done. Remove the word "Records" from the Waiting for a Want EP's details. Done. Move the video albums to follow the singles so they are in the same order as the infobox. Done. References Reference #3 could be used for both American charts. Comment: I'm sorry, but the references were shuffled around in the process of making the above suggestions. Could you please clarify which reference you are referring to? They're now 6 & 7, the Billboard and Allmusic sources. The Allmusic source seems more comprehensive and has everything the Billboard one has as well as including the Heatseaker chart. --JD554 (talk) 07:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Except Allmusic does not have the chart position for Rufus Does Judy at Carnegie Hall, so the source is still needed. --Another Believer (Talk) 17:01, 27 February 2009 (UTC) References in a foreign language (Nos. 9, 11, 12) need a language tag. Done. ChartStats (used at #20) can be used instead of everyHit (#16). Done. A reference for the UK certification of Release the Stars is needed. Done. That's all for now, --JD554 (talk) 08:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC) Additional comment from JD554 The links to the countries for charts should be links to the relevant chart, these can be found at List of record charts.--JD554 (talk) 08:44, 26 February 2009 (UTC) Done. Thank you so much for your time and assistance. --Another Believer (Talk) 17:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

• Just one more thing I've spotted: The gold certification for Release the Stars isn't confirmed at the BPI's website[15] (use 'wainwright' as the search term) but it looks like Want Two was awarded silver. It may be possible that the BPI haven't kept their database up to date (but doubtful): Do you have another source for the gold certification that isn't a quote from Wainwright? --JD554 (talk) 10:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have added the silver certification to Want Two on the table. This, this, and this all mention Release the Stars' gold certification in the UK. Does the reference need to be replaced? --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the last source as it's blocked from where I am at the moment, I could check it later, but from the URL it looks like an interview - does the reporter say it's gold or does Wainwright? This is also the problem with the second source as it's simply Wainwright saying it's received gold. The first one may be enough, but it's a bit weak compared to the BPI's site which I would have thought to be the most reliable. --JD554 (talk) 07:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The reporter, who says: "Congratulations on the success of Release The Stars, which has been at the top of the charts both here in the States and in the U.K., where it went Gold." --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Support on the proviso that the two independent sources are used over the current one for the gold certification. --JD554 (talk) 09:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Done. Much appreciated! --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Support I was pretty tough on this list, so I'm very happy to finally support. It clearly meets all of the standards expected of an FL discography. Great work! Drewcifer (talk) 04:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Drewcifer

Comments Since you've already gone through my un-ending list of comments already, I'm pretty pleased with the way this list has turned out. There's a few more things that I'm noticing now, but nothing major: The lead needs a few citations, namely for sentences talking about chart positions and certifications. I'm sure you could use references you've already been using. Comment: I had citations, but was asked to remove them (see second suggestion by JD554 above). What to do? As you already know, I'm of the opinion that they aren't needed in the lead as they are simply summarising what's in the article, see WP:LEADCITE. However, there isn't really a hard and fast rule, some FL-class discogs have them, but most don't seem to. I wouldn't consider the issue to be a deal-breaker either way (for me). --JD554 (talk) 07:45, 27 February 2009 (UTC) In a case like this, I'd say just go with whatever you feel is right. It's not a deal breaker for me either. But, my rationale is this: specific statistical information (chart positions) need to cited since they're so specific, whereas more generalized information like who what where when why can be left for the bulk of the article where the prose will inevitably go into more detail. But you can't get any more detailed than #27 on XYZ chart. But like I said I'll leave it up to you. Drewcifer (talk) 07:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC) I prefer the citations, so I put them back and added a comment in the JD554 section above. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC) "Alright, Already: Live in Montréal, was released by Geffen via iTunes in the United States and Canada on March 15, 2005, and later in Germany on March 29." We're usually only concerned with the original release date, so I'm not sure why the German release date is relevant here. Done. May want to wikilink Judy Garland in the notes for Rufus! Does Judy!... Done. The double heading-in the video albums and singles table still bugs me... Done, although I don't prefer the wider column width. "Contributions" sounds a little vague. What about "Other contributions" or "Original contributions"? Done. "Various artists" isn't a proper name, so it shouldn't be capitalized. Done. For some of the song titles, some of the prepositions are capitalized where I don't think they should be. Words like "Are" and "On" should be lower-cased. Unless of course the titles are specifically like that on the recording. Done. I see "What Are You Doing New Year's Eve?" mentioned numerous times in the latter tables. Are these all different renditions/recordings, or are they the same? Same with "Spotlight On Christmas". Done. Removed second occurrence. I think that's it for now. Drewcifer (talk) 20:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC) Thanks again! --Another Believer (Talk) 21:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Support My comments were resolved at the previous FLC. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support, "It clearly meets all of the standards expected of an FL discography." Cannibaloki 02:42, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 21:50, 7 March 2009 [16].

---

List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Chiefs of Naval Operations)

Nominator(s): — Rlevse • Talk •

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comment -- The lead looks like an exact copy of the Astronauts list. Reword a bit to distinguish it. In addition, the lead really doesn't say much about the Chiefs of Naval Operations program: Elaborate on that. Also, use the comments from the other list's FLC and apply them here, like removing the full stops from the notes. Before nomination another list, wait for at least one of your nominations to be passed/archived.--TRUCO 00:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I did, it's the same topic/school, so of course there'll be similarities - I'm working on a general topic with these lists, and yes I did change the lead, and no, if you look you'll see the full stops are already removed. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC) There's no rule about only having one nomination. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 01:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC) (ec)Due to the backlog and lack of reviewers, we are trying to keep noms from 1 specific user to at most 3.--TRUCO 01:48, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Stifling article production? Hardly the way to build an encyclopedia. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Stictly speaking it isn't stifling article production (as this is just a gold star), but regardless seeing as we are short of reviewers it would be much appreciated if you could help out by reviewing a few of the other candidates (like how PR operates). Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:35, 22 February 2009 (UTC) And if they're articles/lists that are being built on a topic, like here, sub lists of a main list that would be too big if all in one list, WP:FT requires, commonality. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I have no problem with users with multiple noms (I do it all the time myself), but it wouldn't hurt to wait a week before submitting any more. -- Scorpion0422 01:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I have lots of work to do on the next one. ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 01:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Review from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead The CNO reports directly to the Secretary of the Navy for the command, utilization of resources and operating efficiency of the operating forces of the Navy and of the Navy shore activities assigned by the Secretary -- The statement after the comma makes no sense: Revise, in addition to adding a period at the end of it. Fixed. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Since the United States is referenced a lot. After the first occurrence of United States use the acronym form for latter references, which means that you will have to pipe some of the links to use the acronym. Fixed. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Students do not become astronauts upon graduation, rather those who enter aviation and space-related fields have the opportunity to be selected for astronaut training by NASA. -- This should be reworded because this is not an Astronaut list so it stands out in its current wording, so it would be best to reword it accordingly. Fixed. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The first alumni to graduate and go on to become CNO was William S. Benson, Class of 1877. -- (1)Add "a" before CNO (2)I would add "who graduated from the" before Class of 1877. Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Over 50 U.S. astronauts have graduated from the Naval Academy, more than from any other undergraduate institution. -- This shouldn't be in this list as this is about CNO's not Astros. Cut. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The lead should summarize the list more, as in stating significant alumni and the most recent. Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:20, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Alumni The notability sections have many entries with full stops which shouldn't be there, replace them with semi-colons. Like Admiral. Done, Ah, you weren't specific enough the first time, thought you were talking about . at the ends. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Yeah. This also applies to all the full stops, in the middle as well.--TRUCO 02:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC) This still has to be done.--TRUCO 15:58, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Like Chief of Naval Operations (1919–1923).--TRUCO 18:05, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Ah, fixed, I hope. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Decrease the size of the first two columns, there is no reason for them to be that wide and have all that room. Several names already word wrap, so that is not a valid concern for the name column. The class column is mostly taken by the header but I'll the person who made the template to see if class column can be cut some. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The template has been adjusted— the year is now at minimum. I removed "Class" from the header since "Class Year" wrapped and it looked really odd with the sortable icon. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 03:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC) --TRUCO 01:48, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Oh, I didn't know it was a template. I thought it was a regular wikitable. Okay, I see now.--TRUCO 15:58, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Yep. I developed {{tl|mem} for this project as it allows a consistent design across a series of several different types of lists. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 16:21, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 03:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I think most of my comments on the Astronaut list also apply to this one. Please review those. Reywas92^Talk 16:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "highest ranking active"-->highest-ranking active "this usage is officially endorsed." Source? My comment on the image captions on the astronaut list applies here. "The curricula is heavy on engineering fields."-->The curricula emphasizes engineering fields. "Four subsequently"-->Four graduates subsequently Dabomb87 (talk) 21:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC) All fixed. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• New York Times-->The New York Times
• TIME-->TIME Dabomb87 (talk) 21:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

All fixed. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 21:50, 7 March 2009 [17].

---

List of Olympic medalists in speed skating

Nominator(s): Scorpion⁰⁴²²

This is one I've had ready for a while now, but I decided to hold off on nominating it. It's a wikicup entry, fully sourced and all concerns will be addressed by moi. Enjoy. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:26, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead Speed skating is a sport that is contested at the Winter Olympic Games. Speed skating events have been held since first Winter Olympics in 1924. -- Add "the" before first. Done. Speed skating events have been held since first Winter Olympics in 1924.[1] Speed skating has been on the Olympic programme since the first Winter Olympics held in 1924. -- Thinking about it, aren't these two just repeating the other? Yes. Fixed. An all-round event was also held, combined the points from the results of four distance races. -- I think a word is missing after the comma because its current revision does not make sense. Fixed, and I tried rowording the entire bit about the all-round event. Lidiya Skoblikova, who represented the Soviet Union, is one of only two female Winter Olympians to win six gold medals (cross-country skier Lyubov Yegorova is the other). -- The Soviet Union is a pretty common term considering the Cold War. Done. Andrea Schöne, won won a silver medal in 1976, is the youngest female athlete in an individual event to win a medal. -- The first won should be "who" ;) Yep, I need to start getting a copyeditor to check these over before submitting, because these little errors are somewhat embarrassing. It's okay. It happens to all of us, trust me :)--TRUCO 01:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Medals per year (key) The least you can do for appearance purposes is make it into a table, or at least capitalize the first word. Did the latter, it doesn't need a table since it's just one item. References Ref #4|The work is from SLAM! Sports and the publisher is Canadian Online Explorer, so the fields should be fixed accordingly.--TRUCO 23:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC) I don't know if I agree with that, but done anyway. As always, thanks a lot for taking a look. -- Scorpion0422 00:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Well its mostly because COE is the publisher and their subsection of SLAM! Sports is the working contributor to the work itself.--TRUCO 01:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 01:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• There is a main article template at the top of the article pointing to Speed skating at the Winter Olympics, but it is also linked to in the first line under "is contested". Since Andrwsc considers these to be companion articles I don't mind if there's the template, but only one should be linked; pick one or the other. This should be consistant with all medalist articles, including List of Olympic medalists in alpine skiing and List of Olympic medalists in freestyle skiing.
• Support Everything else is excellent. Reywas92^Talk 16:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
  • The main templates were stuck in a few days ago by Maxim and I haven't decided if I like that or not. I guess the main template is a much more obvious link to the other article, so perhaps it is best. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Which one are you going to remove? It should not be linked twice. Reywas92^Talk 00:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
      • Left in the seealso, removed the lead link. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• In the medal sweep section you should say something about Eric Heiden's sweep of all the male medals.
• Should this be separate from short track speed skating? Short track should be mentioned somewhere in the article I think.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008

Comments - Looks like a great list overall. Just some picky things before I support: "All ten events have been held at every Olympic Games since". I know 10 is the cutoff for many editors in terms of spelling numbers, but should it be given as a numeral? Done. "in 1928, he became the first speed skater to successfully defend their Olympic title." Their is plural, but I know you want to avoid gender-specific language. Therefore, I'd replace it with "an Olympic title." Done. "Claudia Pechstein and American Bonnie Blair...". Don't think Pechstein's first name should be repeated. Done. Couple of requested citations. First, one for Pechstein being one of four athletes to win gold at five straight Winter Games. Second, one for Cindy Klassen being one of five athletes to win five medals at a Winter Games. Considering that they both won gold at the last Winter Olympics, it shouldn't be too hard to find sources for them. I should be able to find sources, but is it really needed? That info is right out of the tables, and the tables are fully sourced. The medals they won are cited fine, but the "one of" parts aren't. There's nothing in the tables about what other athletes did. Giants2008 (17-14) 23:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Oh, I just realized which part you were talking about. All of that stuff is sourced to this. -- Scorpion0422 02:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC) In the country medals per year table, replace the hyphens with en dashes. I normally use the larger em dashes to fill blank spaces, but I think the smaller dash will work better in this table, where the columns are small. Giants2008 (17-14) 17:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC) I'll get someone with a script to do it. Thanks a lot for taking a look. -- Scorpion0422 18:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - List looks good to go after the changes. Giants2008 (17-14) 00:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "one of only four " Done. "one of only two " Done. "which is the most that any Winter Olympian has" Done. "one of only five" Done. "A total of 152 gold medals"-->As of the 2006 Winter Olympics, 152 gold medals Done. "Nikolai Gulyayev"-->Nikolay Gulyayev Done. "Catriona LeMay Doan"-->Catriona Ann Le May-Doan Done. "Ireen Wust"-->Ireen Wüst Done. "These are events where athletes from one NOC won all three medals." "where"-->in which Dabomb87 (talk) 21:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Done. Done, thanks for taking a look. -- Scorpion0422 02:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 21:50, 7 March 2009 [18].

---

List of Philadelphia Phillies no-hitters

Nominator(s): KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that it meets all of the FL criteria. It is fully referenced and contains appropriate images and content. Disclaimer: The list contains only 9 items, but contains notes about each unique no-hitter. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comment -- Before I review, I want other reviewer's input on this list on the 10-item limit rule. Notes are added, but this is a list that can be built upon (since its a list in the present and not a list in the past) and the notes don't really add to the entries to exemplify it from the rule; this from my standpoint. But if other disagree, I would be happy to review.--TRUCO 23:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Well I was convinced that its exempt.--TRUCO 16:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Review from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead A no-hitter is officially recognized by Major League Baseball only "when a pitcher (or pitchers) retires each batter on the opposing team during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings". -- Since the MLB is spelled out earlier, use the acronym form here while adding it in parenthesis next to the first occurrence. As I've explained before, I don't use acronyms unless completely necessary. Here, I don't deem it necessary. If we are featuring a professional standard of writing, per WP:FL?, we shouldn't be using acronyms anyway. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Well the MOS states that acronyms are acceptable so its a standard of writing per WP:FL?. But its not a hard-rule, so I'll leave it alone.--TRUCO 18:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The largest margin of victory in a Phillies no-hitter was ten runs, in a 10–0 win by Chick Fraser. -- Add "a" before victory. "Margin of victory" is a distinct term and shouldn't be altered. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) As defined by Major League Baseball, "[in] a perfect game, no batter reaches any base during the course of the game." -- Acronym form. See above. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The longest interval between Phillies no-hitters was between the games pitched by Lush and Bunning, encompassing a total of 58 year, 1 month, and 20 days. -- year --> "years" Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The last paragraph can be merged with the second-to-last paragraph. Merged higher to keep perfect game topic separate. Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Key I think just the color or just the symbol suffices to explain the perfect game, I think both don't need to represent it. I would prefer to use only the color, but that's prohibited per WP:ACCESS, so I added the symbol. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Table Why is the umpire listed? The lead doesn't establish any notability for them for "no-hitters". Since the viability of a no-hitter rests on the strike zone set by the umpire, such as it does in high-strikeout games, the umpire is an integral part of the no-hitter being completed. Well explain this in the lead because it leaves the reader (like me) in question as to why they are in the list.--TRUCO 18:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The notes should have the first word capitalized. Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Since you are listing the notes in each column it would be best to add bullets to them. That's definitely doable but I don't quite understand the reasoning behind it. Could you explain further? KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Appearance purposes. Since you are listing, a good way to present a list is through numbering or by bullets IMO.--TRUCO 18:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Understood. Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC) References In the general reference, why is the work field have ESPN.com and the publisher ESPN, they have no distinct difference so its not necessary to state the work. The same applies to other references from ESPN. As with List of Philadelphia Phillies Opening Day starting pitchers, the organization ESPN and the website ESPN.com are distinct entities, just like Retrosheet, Inc (the company) and Retrosheet.org (the site). This is similar to the TV network MSNBC and the website msnbc.com. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I understand Retrosheet, but I don't understand ESPN. ESPN is the name of the company and their official website is named after them so there is no need for the work field. I mainly write professional wrestling articles and I've gotten 3 to FA status, and when I source to the official company like World Wrestling Entertainment, I don't write WWE.com in the work field because its their website.--TRUCO 18:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I'll buy that. Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Ref #5|The work is from the Phillies but the publisher is the MLB. So that should be fixed accordingly. Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 17:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC) --TRUCO 16:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 03:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

This one is a very hard one to decide whether or not it is an exception. In my opinion, a no-hitter in a season only occurs 1-4 (IMO approx.) times a season. that's around 1-4 times per 30 seasons for a team. According to calculations, the Phillies should get one in 2009 or the 2010s. In my conclusion, I think the user should wait until 2013, OR if more people support, then I will support the community's decision. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Leaning to oppose I oppose the inclusion of this list as a featured list per the 10-item limit rule. I see no reason whatsoever why this list should be exempt from the rule. That said, I can be persuaded if the nominator can justify his/her reasoning.—Chris! _ct 02:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

My reasoning behind this is simple: a list of this length is perfectly able to satisfy all of the written FLC requirements. The 10-item rule is an unwritten guideline, however strictly it made be adhered to or not. Admittedly, this is not the format that I originally wanted to use for this list; the format I desired would have made this list itself much longer and more likely to ignore this guideline. However, the list features professional standards of writing (Cr.1), has an engaging lead and a title which clearly defines the scope of the list and explanatory material for those outside the baseball community (Cr.2), comprehensively covers said scope (Cr.3), is easy to navigate and sortable (Cr.4), complies with the MOS (hopefully so far, Cr.5), makes use of appropriate color and images (Cr.6), and is as stable as any other list in the present (Cr.7). I don't know how much more clear I can be. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 04:22, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

So what you're saying is that any list with 9 entries are allowed for FLC? I'm going to notify WT:FLC about this. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 04:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• That is not what I said by any means. I simply think that a 10-item minimum is arbitrary, especially if the content meets the requirements laid out in WP:FL?. As I said, I doubt that we would be having this discussion if I were able to put this list in my intended format. If consensus on this issue goes toward opposing this list, I would be willing to withdraw the nomination at this time until I can locate the proper offline sources to make this list into my preferred format. However, I see no valid reason why it could not at least go through a nomination process. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 13:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I think User:Dabomb87's comment on WT:FLC really convince me that this list should be exempt from the rule. I no longer oppose the inclusion of this list as a featured list.—Chris! _ct 04:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support —Chris! _ct 22:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Chrishomingtang

Comment What is sourcing the "note" column? I think some items (e.g. Game one of a doubleheader) need a citation. The reference given in the column. If you look at the link for the Bunning game, there is a large (1) after the box score (also in the title of the article) indicating this. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 20:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC) So, the reference given in the column can verify everything in the "note" column. Just making sure.—Chris! ct 20:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Well, are you going to answer my question?—Chris! ct 06:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC) I didn't realize it was a question, I thought it was just a statement. The answer is yes. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC) General references --> General (in the "references" section; the heading already tells readers that the section is about references) In-text citations --> Specific (in the "references" section) To the two above: the current style is acceptable; see Philadelphia Phillies seasons. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 20:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I guess this is not a big deal.—Chris! ct 20:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Everything else looks good—Chris! ct 19:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from SRE.K.A.L.24

Comments from -- SRE.K.A.L.24[c] Please fix the disambiguation links (toolbox). The middle image is not sourced. Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:48, 25 February 2009 (UTC) -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC) Could mention that Jim Bunning is the only one to have been elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:09, 25 February 2009 (UTC) Check. Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 21:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC) Should also be noted on the table. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC) Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 21:32, 25 February 2009 (UTC) Comments from -- SRE.K.A.L.24[c] (continued) Why not have a background for pitchers who were left-handed? Because it's not necessary, and because there exists the possibility that a player may be both left-handed and throw a perfect game. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Couldn't you also metnion who was the opposing team on the table? I could, but the table is already cramped on a 1024x768 monitor (how I am viewing it now). KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC) -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 07:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

• Support Well done on the list. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 18:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

• "Also known in their early years as the "Philadelphia Quakers",[1] pitchers for the Phillies" The way this is phrased, it sounds like only the pitchers were known as the Quakers.

• I can't think how to rephrase it, but I want to mention the Quakers since Ferguson's no-hitter was thrown during that era. Suggestions are welcome. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

• "encompassing a total of 58 years"

• Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

• "which involves judgment, such as, but not limited to, whether a batted ball is fair or foul, whether a pitch is a strike or a ball, or whether a runner is safe or out… [the umpire's judgment on such matters] is final." WP:PUNC logical punctuation, the period should be outside the quotes.
• "is defined as that area over homeplate (sic) the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the kneecap." Same comment.

• (two above) The periods are both part of the quotes; they are included from the source.

• "a special type of no-hitter" Would "a special subcategory" work better?

• Much, thanks. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

• "and stands as a defining moment in National League history" Not really necessary, let the facts stand for themselves. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:02, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

• Changed, though it makes the paragraph look stubby. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:02, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 21:50, 7 March 2009 [19].

---

List of winners of the Chicago Marathon

Nominator(s): TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM)

I am nominating this for featured list because I have finally taken the time to split this off properly. TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from KV5

Comments from KV5 "The United States has been represented by the most winners (8 men and 12 women).[4][5] After a sixth conecutive win by a Kenyan man in 2008, Kenyan men have won more times (9) than men representing any other country.[4][5] The United Kingdom is in third place among both men (5) and women (3) as well as overall.[4][5]" "conecutive" - "consecutive" O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC) All of the numbers should be written out. Only one number is over ten requiring a numeral per MOSNUM; the majority are below ten and twelve is a one-word number, so these should all be spelled out. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC) In the lead, you link Brazil but no other countries. All or nothing on this front. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Way too many redlinks, both in the lead and in the list. Remove some of these or, better yet, create stubs. Delinked.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC) "Deena Kastor in 2005 is the last victor from the host nation" - consider a re-word, it looks like "Deena Kastor in 2005" is a person in the current format. Done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I suggest removing the ampersands from the lead; it creates a higher professional standard of writing. Done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC) "the last American-born male winner was Greg Meyer" - follow by a comma O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC) "There have been several two-time winers" - "winners" O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC) "(couting Khannouchi, five men and six women)." - "counting" O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC) "No one other than Khannouchi has won three races and not even Khannouchi has won three consecutive." - re-word. This makes it sound like an impossible, god-like task. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC) "There have been two male and two female world records in the race" - change to "set in the race". O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC) "The most recent world record was by Paula Radcliffe" - was set by, and add comma after Radcliffe. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC) The picture of Evans Cheruiyot does not show up on my system. Try changing browsers.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Picture captions should only end in a period if they are complete sentences. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Rather than putting "15 years old" in the table for Laura Michalek, make it a footnote at the end to save space. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I actually meant in a footnote section at the end of the table, but it works in the lead too. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:21, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I have a 1152x864 monitor resolution at work and the table is still cramped; I can only imagine what it looks like on a 1024x768. Something needs to be done to fix this, either an adjustment of the table width, an adjustment of the image sizes, or consolidating information. I resized the images.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC) The list must be categorized. Also, are there any appropriate external links per WP:EL or navboxes to include in this article? Do you want the same navboxes as are at Chicago Marathon? I thought peer review excluded lists? I added four cats (three copied from Chicago Marathon).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC) The two winners' navboxes would do quite nicely. Peer review doesn't exclude lists; I've taken several through there myself. I will come back later to do another once-over, no time at work right now. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 20:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC) O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC) "The following is a list of Chicago Marathon Champions.[4][5]" - remove this. We know from the title. What do I do with the refs?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Make them general references; split the references section into general references and in-text citations using semicolon headers (see current FL Philadelphia Phillies seasons for an example). KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:21, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Please consider a peer review next time to catch the copyediting issues. Hope this helps. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Support - all other concerns resolved to my satisfaction. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Oppose/Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) -- Prose/Formatting issues Lead The Chicago Marathon, which will next be held on October 11, 2009,[1] is one of the five World Marathon Majors. -- The statement about the 2009 event really stands out, especially being the introductory sentence. I recommend moving it further down the lead. What about this?--TRUCO 23:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Once again, what about this comment?--TRUCO 00:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Sorry.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Since 1983, it has been held in October every year. -- Reword to Since 1983, it has been held annually in October. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC) The United States has been represented by the most winners (eight men and twelve women) -- Unlink United States, per WP:LINKS, common geographical terms should not be linked. Do you want to all countries delinked. The respondent comment wanted all or none.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC) After a sixth consecutive win by a Kenyan man in 2008, Kenyan men have won more times (nine) than men representing any other country. -- Like I stated above, Kenya is a common geographical term, remove link O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC) The United Kingdom is in third place among both men (five) and women (three) as well as overall. -- (1)As state above, unlink United Kingdom (2)Reword to The United Kingdom is in third place overall among both men (five) and women (three). O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC) I tried a slightly different rewording.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC) All four of Brazil's victors have been male,[4] and all three of Portugal's winners have been female. -- You have several options here, reword the gender part of the sentence to "have been a male", "have been males", or "have been men" (this applies to the females as well) O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Runners representing the United Kingdom swept the race in 1996 (Paul Evans and Marian Sutton). -- For one, unlink United Kingdom per above, second, it shouldn't even be linked twice per WP:OVERLINK. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC) The first six pairs of races were swept by the United States.[6] Runners representing the United Kingdom swept the race in 1996 (Paul Evans and Marian Sutton).[7] Kenya has swept the race twice (1998 and 2001) and is the most recent country to do so with (Ben Kimondiu and Catherine Ndereba). -- Repetition of swept, please reword accordingly. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Kenya has swept the race twice (1998 and 2001) and is the most recent country to do so with (Ben Kimondiu and Catherine Ndereba). -- (1)Comma before the and (before the parenthesis) (2)the last part should be "to do so with representative Ben Kimondiu and Catherine Ndereba." [the original was grammatically incorrect. Adding a comma would improperly conjoin the phrases. It would indicate that the latter is independent, but the latter has no subject and is thus dependent on the former. As a result no comma.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC) ..who is also the most recent American male to have won the Boston Marathon. -- why is this relevant to this list? Removed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Merge the second and third paragraphs into one, they are too short to stand alone. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC) There have been several two-time winners (counting Khannouchi, five men and six women) -- Reword to There have been several two-time winners including Khannouchi, five men and six women. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC) No one other than Khannouchi has won three races and no one has won three consecutive. -- Did Khannouchi win these consecutively? If so, the way this is written does not state that, it should then be "No one other than Khannouchi has won three races or three consecutively." It means to say that Khannouchi is the only runner who has won three but not consecutively.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Well consecutive should be "consecutively"--TRUCO 23:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC) O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC) 1979 winner Laura Michalek was just 15 years old. -- This statement just stands out in the paragraph about the world records, it should be moved somewhere more suitable. O.K. How do you like the current placement?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC) I would state what country she is from as it is not clear in its current wording.--TRUCO 23:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC) O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC) There have been two male and two female world records set in the race. The United Kingdom has had both a male and a female world record in Chicago. The most recent world record was set by Paula Radcliffe, who succeeded Catherine Ndereba as a world record holder in 2002.[3] Khannouchi set the last male world record in the Chicago Marathon in 1999.[3] After Ndereba set the record in 2001, both the men's and women's current marathon world records had been set in the Chicago Marathon. -- It would help the reader if they actually knew what the records were for. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC) This was only done to one, the latter need to be stated as well.--TRUCO 23:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Winners The following is a list of Chicago Marathon Champions. -- Yeah, I think the reader is aware of that, no need to state that. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC) There is an error with the sorting of the date column. There was a partial date that I have fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC) The blank entries of 1987 should also have emdashes that are centered aligned versus a blank cell. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Country Summary The Summary in the name of the header should not be capitalized. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC) The following table summarizes victors by country. -- The reader is aware of that, no need to state it. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC) No need for the refs, it will be covered by the general references. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Notes Since a footnote will be added and a general reference will be added, this section should be renamed to References This is against MOS. References is for a separate section from the footnotes, which belong in the Notes section.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Link to Bank of America since other publishers are linked as well. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Images Caption: The 2007 men's race was extremely close. -- This is WP:POV, rewrite something else. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Caption: 2005 winner Felix Limo in 2007 race -- Reword to 2005 winner Felix Limo in the 2007 event. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Reword this 2006 winner Robert Cheruiyot in 2008 accordingly as well (like stated)TRUCO 22:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC) O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC) The references, [4] and [5], should be made into general references, see the reference section of this FL on how to complete this. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC) This wasn't done. --TRUCO 00:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC) They are in the external links section.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC) That's not the same thing as referencing. See the reference section in this FL. That's how it should be formatted.--TRUCO 16:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC) You need to add an accessdate to the general references.--TRUCO 17:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC) O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:35, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The 1987 entry is awkward, can a footnote be added explaining what this means. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 09:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC) In addition, the correct wording should be "ran as a half marathon" or "ran as half a marathon". Plus, for my original comment, I meant a add a footnote explaining what this means or why this occurred not add a reference footnote.--TRUCO 16:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Is it as you requested now?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I copyedited it a bit, but its fine.--TRUCO 22:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards. --TRUCO 22:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• The year and date columns of the table need to be combined. You may want to try {{dts}}.
  • I am not sure about this template, but I combined the columns.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
    • For 2008-10-12 just make it {{dts|2008|10|12}}, which reads as October 12, 2008 and is sortable.
      • It is sortable on my browser (Firefox) now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
• Retry the hyphens for 1987 with a footnote and a dash.
  • Can you be more clear.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Sorry. Change "-ran as half marathon-" to a dash centered in the cell and move the footnote from the date to next to the dash.
      • I can not figure out how to format footnote next to dash.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Very good to me overall. Reywas92^Talk 03:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Support Great job! Reywas92^Talk 02:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:13, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "by both men and women" O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC) "The next edition of the race will be held on October 11, 2009,[5]" Is this an incomplete thought? O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Use symbols to accompany the colors per WP:COLORS. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC) I'd prefer if you used the US date format instead of ISO in the table. O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Note 11 should have a period at the end. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC) O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:32, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 21:50, 7 March 2009 [20].

---

Arnold Schwarzenegger filmography

Nominator(s): Nehrams2020 (talk)

I have been working on this list for the last two weeks and believe that it meets the FL criteria. There currently are not that many actor filmographies that are featured and I plan to expand on this in the future, starting here with Schwarzenegger. I have looked to similar lists for formatting and made some modifications to make it a little different. Let me know if you see any issues and I will get to them as soon as possible. Thank you for taking a look and happy reviewing! Nehrams2020 (talk) 22:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

"This is a list of..." FLs don't start like this. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. I had referred to this revision of Christopher Walken filmography when it had passed as a featured list. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Strong Oppose/Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) -- WP:FLC is not a substitute of WP:PR, many problems against WP:WIAFL. I recognize this. I asked two editors to look over the list and had not heard back at all, so I had assumed it was fine. In addition, several of these suggestions were about elements that I had used from other Featured Lists at the time of their passing. Thank you for reviewing the article, I'll work to address your concerns. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Lead This is a complete filmography of Arnold Schwarzenegger. -- (1)This is the same thing as "List of___", reword to something like "Arnold Schwarzenegger is a ______ and so on" (2)Besides, no links should be in boldface in the lead per WP:LINKS. Fixed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Schwarzenegger's beginning career started primarily with small roles in both film and television. -- Bad wording. Should be something like Schwarzenegger's began his acting career primarily with small roles in both film and television. Reworded as suggested. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) For his first film role, he was credited as "Arnold Strong", but there-after was credited using his birth name. -- Should be For his first film role, he was credited as "Arnold Strong", but was credited with his birth name there-after. Reworded as suggested. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Schwarzenegger began acting in films in 1970, and with a few stints at directing and producing, has acted in over thirty films. -- These clauses are in no way connected and throws off the meaning of the sentence. I reworded the sentence, please take another look. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) These are just a few examples of the problems with the prose, and thus not meets criteration A. Before I continue reviewing, please seek a copy-edit, from the first glance I had the lead had all types of problems that could have been resolved at WP:PR. So before I continue reviewing the prose, seek a copy-edit.--TRUCO 22:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I respect your opinion on the prose of the following paragraphs so I'll have somebody take a look. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Once one is completed, notify me so I can review the lead fully.--TRUCO 23:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Tables Colored tables should be avoided in lists like these. Is there somewhere that states this? Looking at List of No Country for Old Men awards and nominations, it appears to use the colors which I thought was similar. In addition, per the WP:WIAFL, I followed the "It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and color." I figured that was a requirement for including the color. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) WP:COLOR. But you've removed them already.--TRUCO 23:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Yeah, Drewcifer provided the link below so I removed them. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The Additional Information column should be called "Notes" Fixed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) The 'Notes' in this column should start with a capitalized word Capitalized all instances. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Blank entries should have center aligned emdashes not blank spaces. Are you suggesting this for the "Notes" parameter in the tables? I'm not seeing this in some other FL/FLCs, and just want to make sure. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Yes I am because its seems unappealing and dashes confirm that something did not happen/was involved/etc.--TRUCO 22:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I added the dashes. I saw a few recently passed FLs such as List of Knight's Cross recipients of the Kriegsmarine that hadn't used it, so I was unsure. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC) You know, I think I must be smoking or something. I have no idea why I just told you to do that, please remove them, I was thinking of something else. Sorry.--TRUCO 23:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Done. I was just starting to get attached to them too. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC) What is verifying the awards? There are not inline citations or general references that verify them.--TRUCO 23:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC) As I mentioned above, I had referred to this revision of Christopher Walken filmography when it had passed as a featured list. Many of its awards were not sourced, so I figured it was not required by reviewers. As you can see for the rest of the article, I have sourced everything else, and had thought it strange not to source it. I'll look to adding sources today. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Well they need to be sourced because it is a major part of the list itself. Please, also, mention his awards in the lead, since its part of the list, the awards need to be mentioned in wording as well.--TRUCO 22:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC) What about this?--TRUCO 23:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Per the suggestion of Drewcifer below, he pointed out that no other featured filmographies include the awards so he suggested that I move them to a separate lists which has been done. He has also raised the question as to whether the awards and box office information should be mentioned in the lead since they are not covered in the list anymore. What do you think? --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Well I agree that the awards should go into a separate article, but the box office statistics should have remained in this article. Thus, the statement in the lead about his awards should be removed and the statement about his box office should remain.--TRUCO 00:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC) There never was any information about his box office career beyond the single sentence in the lead. At the Christopher Walken filmography FLC, reviewers were against adding box office takes for each film since the actor may not have played a vital role in the film to indicate they were responsible for the success/failure at the box office. However, since we are talking about his career in appearing in film and television, would it allowable to include this brief paragraph detailing the fact that he had won awards and the total box office take? Those both seem like important details to mention about an actor over the span of their career. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC) That would be more suitable in his article not in this one since the lead is suppose to summarize the list itself. Unless you can merge some of those statements with others to imply the same meaning and still note the accomplishment, then possibly yes. For example, "Schwarzenegger directed the 1990 (film) film, which he earned a (award) award for.--TRUCO 00:49, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I reworded the lead a bit to mention one of the films where he received a Golden Globe and another detailing that the had been nominated for various awards for his work in a list of several films. Hopefully that is a better representation then just listing random awards he had won. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Looks great from my view. I just did a few minor copyedits.--TRUCO 16:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 16:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Neutral I've removed my oppose, since alot of progress has been made. I still have reservations with portions of the lead, which bring up awards and box office gross, which are not mentioned anywhere else in the article. So, per WP:LEAD, I believe they shouldn't be there. But, given the excellent state of the list otherwise, I don't want to hold up its nomination if everyone else is ok with it. So, I'll just refrain from either opposing or support. Drewcifer (talk) 03:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Drewcifer

Weak Oppose I guess I'm somewhat to blame for the confusion, given I was the author and nominator of the Christopher Walken filmography. That said, that was the first filmography list promoted to FL, and standards and conventions have improved since then. I've continued to work on that particular list to bring it up to snuff, which I believe it is now, but I feel this list is somewhat lagging behind, still basing itself on an old standard. So, a few suggestions: The colored-header should be avoided, per WP:COLOR. Thanks for the link, removed the colors. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I'm not so hot on the quotes, as some of them don't apply to his filmography as a whole (which the list is about). I'm not 100% against, I guess I'm just not sure how to feel about it. I took out the two that were in the awards section since they wouldn't fit with the size of the filmography table. I still left in the one next to the television roles. If others don't care for it, I won't fight removing it. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Year columns should be centered. Sorry, could you clarify? They look centered to me. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC) They don't to me. Maybe it's a browser thing or something. But I can tell they're not just by looking at the wikicode. I'm using Firefox and don't see it. However, if other browsers are having issues then it should be fixed. How would I fix that, by adding <center>Year</center>? And do I need to do it just to the heading or each individual year? --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC) It may also be a resolution/font-size thing. All you do is add "|align="center"| 2008" to the year columns. Drewcifer (talk) 20:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Fixed all of the occurrences. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The list of awards should also be avoided, perhaps moved to a separate awards page (List of awards and nominations received by Arnold Schwarzenegger). I don't think any current FL filmographies still include awards. I created the new list, moving over all of the awards. I still left in the sentence in the lead about the awards, should that remain there as well? --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I don't think so. Per WP:LEAD, the lead of an article/list should summarize the content of it, without mentioning stuff that isn't found elsewhere, which the lists aren't anymore. Thinking about it some more, I think it should stay in since the lead is also mentioning his total box office take (which isn't mentioned in the filmography). In addition, it isn't listing every award, and just provides a brief overview of some of the awards he has won in his career. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC) That's exactly why I think it should be taken out. If it's not in the list-proper, it shouldn't be mentioned in the lead. The lead is meant to summarize, not to address additional information. That goes for the awards and the box office data. Drewcifer (talk) 20:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC) As the awards and box office total cover the details over the span of his film career, I think that should be relevant. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC) I'm also not sure about the notes section, especially its main content of his salary. I feel this is better suited to the films' pages, but not a list like this. Drewcifer (talk) 06:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I figured that covering the details about all of his films should also mention something as important as his salary for each film. I was going to add a box office take as well, but saw the discussion at the CW nomination that shunned on it. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I kind of think the salaries are in the same vein as the box office stuff. But I will defer to other's opinions on this one. Drewcifer (talk) 03:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Sounds good to me. I'm open to others' opinions on the topic. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC) I have now removed the salary information and moved it to the various film articles instead. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "in both film and television" Should have caught that. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC) "there-after" No hyphen. Fixed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC) "Over the span of his career" Redundant phrase, delete it. Fixed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC) "Throughout his career," Another redundant phrase. Fixed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC) WRT the comments above, I don't think the salaries should be there either. However, I don't mind keeping the info about the awards he won, as long they pertain to films he acted him and nothing else. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The salaries have been removed and added to their respective film articles. The details about the awards and box office cover all of his films and do not mention awards of other aspects of his life. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• BusinessWeek is one word (ref 13).

Fixed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• Only publications should be italicized. Websites and publishing companies (Canwest News Service, NBC News, Box Office Mojo, The Numbers, CBS News) should not. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Fixed all occurrences for the ones that remained in the article (since some were being used to source the salaries). --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009 [21].

---

List of Los Angeles Kings head coaches

Nominator(s): -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]

-- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 03:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead The franchise's first head coach was Red Kelly, who coached for two complete seasons. Andy Murray is the franchise's all-time leader for the most regular-season games coached (480), the most regular-season game wins (215), and the most regular-season points (519); Tom Webster is the franchise's all-time leader for the most playoff games coached (28); Barry Melrose is the franchise's all-time leader for the most playoff-game wins (13), and the highest playoff winning percentage (.542), which is the only one over .500. -- the only one over .500 in what? NHL history or the Kings' history? Kings. Added. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Melrose is the only coach to have won a conference championship in the Kings, which was won in the 1993 Stanley Cup playoffs. -- Don't you mean "with the Kings" and not in the Kings? Fixed. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC) References For refs like number 4, wouldn't the publisher be NHL.com and the work would be from Lincoln Hockey and National Hockey League, like SLAM! Sports is the work of the publisher Canadian Online Explorer. Do, it shouldn't, since Lincoln Hockey and National Hockey League are the publishers, and NHL.com is where the work came from. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Gotcha.--TRUCO 00:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Who/what is Lincoln hockey? I don't see it stated anywhere on the sites in the refs that have it. Fixed all the refs. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC) --TRUCO 23:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support - previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 00:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support: No concerns here; looks good as usual. – Nurmsook! ^talk... 01:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "who coached for two complete seasons. " Some coaches coaches for two season, but may have been fired during the season. also, it's nothing wrong with putting "complete". -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC) "complete" is understood unless you specify otherwise. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC) I just said that some coaches don't complete their last season, or came in when the season started. Also, there's no clear reason why "complete" should be removed. What matters is that the grammar is all right, which it is. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC) It is a unnecessary word. When readers see "coached for two seasons", they will assume "complete" unless otherwise told. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Done, but still believe removed it is not needed. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 03:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC) "which was won " Removed "which was won", since it'll sound awkward with the "won" when having "which was" removed. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Image caption: "coached the Kings for four complete seasons." Above. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Above. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC) Dabomb87 (talk) 21:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009 [22].

---

List of Cincinnati Reds managers

Nominator(s): jj137 (talk)

This is a nomination which I will be a part of, but without a nomination credit. I truly believe that this article should have been promoted if jj137 was still editing. To WikiCup nominators, jj137 will not be answering the comments unless he returns. I have fixed all the comments from the last FLC, and truly hope this list will be promoted. I repeat, I will not be accepting the nomination. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- My issues in the previous FLC were resolved, in addition to me supporting the original nomination. I also was unable to find any flaws in this revision of the list.--TRUCO 23:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments Some of these were not resolved from the last FLC. File:BuckEwing.jpeg doesn't have a source. Removed. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC) I would prefer to see inline citations for the awards. I think you meant Achievements, and done. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC) "history; four during the era"-->history: four during the era Done. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC) The last image caption should not have a period at the end. Re-phrased. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Dabomb87 (talk) 23:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC) File:BillMcKechnieBaseballHallOfFamer.jpg is incorrectly licensed; ownership of the image means nothing. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Removed. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• The Baseball-Reference sources are still inconsistently formatted. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008

Comments - Can we have a citation for the old stadiums? There's a good page on the Reds' website that can handle this. Added citation. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The League Park link goes to the former stadium of the Cleveland Indians. League Park (Cincinnati) is the link you're looking for. Fixed. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC) "Moran was the manager during the infamous 1919 World Series." To provide context for readers, this should explain why it was infamous. Just add something brief about the Chicago White Sox throwing the Series. The readers could easily click the wikilink on the word "infamous", couldn't they? -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC) They could, but Easter Egg links are discouraged per WP:PIPE. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 21:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Done. By the way, sorry to Giants2008 for calling him iMatthew on the edit summary. Laugh out louds. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Pop Snyder is double-linked in the lead. Fixed. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Any chance for a playoff winning percentage column? Added. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The current playoff stat columns aren't sorting properly. When placed on the top of the table, all double-digit numbers are only sorting by their first number. Fixed. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 21:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Giants2008 (17-14) 20:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - Another in the series of fine manager lists that FLC has produced lately. Giants2008 (17-14) 19:58, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009 [23].

---

List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Astronauts)

Nominator(s): — Rlevse • Talk • and -MBK₀₀₄

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria. It is a full list of all US Naval Academy graduates who became astronauts (over 50 of the them, more than any other university). All images are free licensed. All entries have refs. I'm in WikiCup. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Oppose/Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) - problems against WP:WIAFL. General comment Is this list complete? Why is the cutoff at 1993? Alumni means former so why aren't any more from further years (except for the present year) not listed? The lead doesn't explain this. Yes it is complete per the official site. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Oh okay, I had doubts since it stopped at 1993.--TRUCO 00:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC) I don't like the formatting of the footnotes, [b][>]. The letter suffices enough. That is the way the template does it. Other FLs use this template too. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Lead Over 50 U.S. astronauts have graduated from the Naval Academy, more than from any other undergraduate institution. -- U.S. needs to be spelled out in its first occurrence in the lead. Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC) The United States Naval Academy is an undergraduate college in Annapolis, Maryland, United States, that educates and commissions officers of the United States Navy and Marine Corps. -- No need to state that MD is in the U.S., we are aware that it is a U.S. state done — Rlevse • Talk • 23:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC) The Academy often is referred to simply as "Annapolis." It is also called "The Academy," "The Boat School," or "Canoe U." -- Remove the bold per MOS:BOLD, the quotation marks are enough emphasis. done — Rlevse • Talk • 23:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Sports media refer to the Academy as Navy; this usage is officially endorsed. The students are called Midshipmen. -- (1)My comment above about the bold applies here as well, except add quotation marks for emphasis (2)Merge these two sentences with a semicolon or through rewording. done — Rlevse • Talk • During the latter half of the 19th century and the first decades of the 20th, the United States Naval Academy was the primary source of U.S. Navy and Marine Corps officers. -- WP:OVERLINK of United States Naval Academy Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC) The list is drawn from graduates, non-graduate former students, current students, and faculty of the Naval Academy. -- The --> "This" Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC) The summary prose (the last paragraph) should note the first class (or first graduate) and the most recent class (or recent graduates). Done — Rlevse • Talk • 00:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC) That's not what I meant, names of the people should be mentioned in summary. For example, "In 2008, so and so graduated as the first so and so" [this is a example for a significant entry. "The first alumni to graduate and go on into a field of so and so". What I mean is that the lead should give a summary of the table, that's basically what I mean.--TRUCO 00:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC) The lead doesn't explain much about the astronaut program at the Academy. Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Table Remove all full stops from the notes, they are not complete clauses. Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Do words such as "Pilot" and "Commanded" need to be capitalized? done — Rlevse • Talk • 00:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC) The notability column should not be sortable. fixed by Gadget850. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:04, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Remove 2 images, it stretches the section. Done but I don't understand what you're talking about. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC) It makes a lot of white space go under the table ;)--TRUCO 00:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC) References My main concern is the use of primary sources, at least one secondary/tertiary source should be used.--TRUCO 22:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Was this done?--TRUCO 00:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC) >I don't like the formatting of the footnotes, [b][>]. The letter suffices enough. That is a function of templates {{cnote}} and {{cref}}, which have been used on other FLs. They are used for a reference that is reused many times and where the standard <ref>...</ref> tags would result in an unacceptable number of backlinks. >The notability column should not be sortable. Fixed. (I thought about that the other day and forgot) --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 23:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Sources-both USNA and NASA, are official sites. I don't consider NASA primary here, here it's secondary because the article is about USNA graduates. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC) It's primary because its an official government owned website that published that information.--TRUCO 00:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Are you saying NASA isn't reliable? Or that we can never use a government source on a government program and that we need some 50+ more refs so each person would now have 3-4 refs each? Seems like overkill to me. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC) No, I'm saying that at least one secondary/tertiary sourced should be used, such as a reliable third party website, a newspaper or magazine among others.--TRUCO 00:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Basically, that's what you are saying, that NASA can't be used as a ref here because you consider it primary (though I don't), but okay, I'll add another ref on each person, so they'll all have at least three. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC) No no that's not what I meant. Primary sources can be used as long as there are some secondary and tertiary sources as well. This can be accomplished by just adding one to one entry if possible, not all of them.--TRUCO 00:55, 21 February 2009 (UTC) I just added Shephard, Schirra, Irwin refs, all non NASA non USNA. I'll keep going til you say there are enough. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 02:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• FWIW, regarding the above comments, NASA isn't a primary source; even if it was, it wouldn't be a problem as the information is highly uncontroversial. This seems to be addressed, however. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 04:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Why are all the other Naval Academy alumini links listed in the General references. They should be removed, escept for the astronauts.

I meant to do this but forgot. I've cut the unused ones. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• This list of alumni is a not a college or university, so the template at the bottom should be removed. That one especially, but none of the navboxes link to this list. I generally believe that navboxes should only be on the article if the article is in the navbox.

Cut it. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• "This list is drawn from graduates, non-graduate former students, current students, and faculty of the Naval Academy." None of the astronauts are current students, and I don't think they're faculty either, and surely all of them graduated.

Fixed it. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• Maybe a more specific lead image than a generic hat toss?

Looking, hard to find one that says "Naval Academy and Astronauts". — Rlevse • Talk • 03:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

ADDED an astro pic to the lead. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• I don't see the need for any of the collquial names of the Naval Academy, especially Canoe U. and Boat School.

Cut. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• "This list is drawn from graduates, non-graduate former students, current students, and faculty of the Naval Academy." What does this have anything to do with astronaut alumni?

Tweaked. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• • The table is very good, but the lead isn't very descriptive of it specifically. I see that most of copied verbatim from List of United States Naval Academy alumni, and I really don't like that. Reywas92^Talk 03:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Pls revisit, worked your issues. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

The lead really needs to be more specific to the astronauts. You can't just copy and paste the lead from the main article. "A few are also given the option of entering the United States Army or United States Air Force. Most students are admitted through the congressional appointment system." This is not relevant to astronauts. Many good lists have statistics in the lead. What year(s) had the most future astronausts graduate? How about a breakdown by NASA project - Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Shuttle? How many naval grads actually walked on the moon? Did any naval grads go on the the same flight together? Reywas92^Talk 16:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support as a co-nom since I did a large quantity of the work when this list was still integrated with List of United States Naval Academy alumni. -MBK₀₀₄ 18:33, 21

February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) Pretty good list Delink United States, it is a common geographical term and should not be linked per WP:OVERLINK. Done — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC) "often is referred to simply as Annapolis. "-->is often referred to as Annapolis. Done — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC) "this usage is officially endorsed." Source? Done — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC) "upon" Done — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC) "The Academy was founded in 1845, graduated its first class in 1846." Missing verb before "graduated". Done — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC) "Two alumni were part of Project Mercury, three part of Project Gemini, seven part of the Apollo program, three have walked on the moon, one was part of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, and 42 were part of the Space Shuttle program." "42"-->forty-two, comparable quantities should be written the same. Done — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC) "The most recent alumni to go on to become astronaut"-->The most recent alumni to become an astronaut Done — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC) List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Chiefs of Naval Operations)—Why is this linked in the see also? Dabomb87 (talk) 20:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Same reason the main list it, it's a topic. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Mercury 8 redirects to Mercury-Atlas 8. Done — Rlevse • Talk • 21:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Can the image captions be a bit more descriptive, such as what the astronauts did? Other than Shephard, they're not doing anything, just official poses in astronaut gear. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Dabomb87 (talk) 21:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• The work should only be used if the website is a publication or is different from the parent company, i.e., "Biographical Data" in the NASA refs should not be there. Same with USNA Astronauts. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

See email and juliancolton's stmt above. NASA is not a primary ref and both are completely uncontroversial. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

You misunderstand. I didn't say don't use the sources, I am talking about the formatting. See this sample edit. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry I misunderstood, apologies. Done (in a few minutes). — Rlevse • Talk • 21:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009 [24].

---

List of Pittsburgh Penguins head coaches

Nominator(s): blackngold29

My third and final nomination of head coaches in Pittsburgh sports. I will address any issues to the best of my abilities. Thank you! blackngold29 20:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Comment Not sure that I like this new format. Where is the playoff win percentage column? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Done blackngold29 20:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Weak OpposeComments from Truco (talk · contribs) -- Mainly due to the table formatting. Lead Established as one of six new franchises of the 1967 NHL expansion, the Penguins are members of the Eastern Conference's Atlantic Division. -- The two clauses do not connect, as the first one implies. Split or reword. Reworded The franchise is co-owned by Ronald Burkle and Mario Lemieux—the only player/owner in the modern era. -- modern era of what? Clarified Eddie Johnston—who along with Patrick and Ken Schinkel served two tenures as head coach—leads Penguins' coaches in games coached (516), wins (232), losses (224), and ties (60). -- Link to Eddie Johnston and Patrick Schinkel? Linked Johnston and Ken Schinkel. Patrick refers to Craig Patrick who is linked above. Scotty Bowman leads coaches in winning percentage (.628) and playoff victories (33). -- Since Bowman is noted beforehand, just mention him by his last name. Done Bob Johnson led the Penguins to its first Stanley Cup victory in 1991, but was forced to retire due to health problems—he died later that year. -- (1)It should be stated whether his retirement was also in 1991 because the wording doesn't imply that. (2)Johnson is mentioned beforehand, only mention him by his last name. Done Hired during the 2008–09 season,[9] current head coach Dan Bylsma took over for Michel Therrien who won the Prince of Wales Trophy, as Eastern Conference champion, during the 2007–08 season. -- The many commas makes the statement confusing, its best to split these two sentences. Split Key Each column can be sorted to the viewer's preference. Due to this feature head coaches with multiple terms are counted once, and are presented along with their total career figures. For a specific order of the coaches see the Footnotes section. -- This should be made into a footnote, not located above the key. What column should the footnote go on? It applies to all of them. Well (1)Remove the first sentence, its obvious that it can be sorted since the sortability keys are available. (2)The footnote should go either on the years column or on the name of the coach's column.--TRUCO 23:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Done The key needs to be revamped if my comment below is consulted. Coaches I don't really like this format either, the sortability does not function as a result of this new formatting, most likely due to the integration of the Season in progress, see 2008–09 Pittsburgh Penguins season for details. row. These tables are best as unsortable, and in smaller sizes, like it is List of Washington Capitals head coaches#Here. In addition, the column headings don't really match the proper wording, like in the FL I mentioned. I understand that the format is different than others, but I don't think that it prevents the list from meeting the FL criteria. Yes, the "Season in progress" thing messes it up, the recent coaching change kind of screwed that over. I can change it back to blank columns until the end of the season if you want. blackngold29 04:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC) No, that would look unappealing. These types of table are not meant to be sortable. That's why the previous format is preferred. Another thing to point out is that the Years column is redundant to have sortable since some coaches had more than 1 term and the sortability function isn't representative of that.--TRUCO 23:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Why are they not meant to be sortable? From the comments below and at WP:HOCKEY, it would seem that the sortability option is preferred; I personally prefer it, that's why I made it that way. Just because it's different doesn't mean it doesn't meet the FL criteria. blackngold29 00:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Due to the sortability mishap. Something has to be done about that. It can't just be left like that. In addition, did you remove the sortability function of the Years column?--TRUCO 00:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I removed the years sortability. The other columns now sort properly; if yours does not they I would guess you have Firefox. The same thing happend with the Pirates coaches list. I've heard no word on if there is a way to fix it yet. Anyone? blackngold29 00:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I cleared my cache and some sort now, but others dont, mostly the last 3-5 columns.--TRUCO 01:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Hmmm, true. Why can't we go back to this style until the end of the year? Or we could actually just update the figures now and have the footnote ("Through Feb. 22"). Just as a one-time special case. blackngold29 17:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC) I don't see a problem with that format except that you need to make the # column sortable and make fixes to the table presented above like making the Years column unsortable.--TRUCO 03:19, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Reformatted with all FL review changes incorporated, how's that?--— Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackngold29 (talk • contribs) I would add Season in progress, see 2008–09 Pittsburgh Penguins season for details. as a footnote to the 2009 entry.--TRUCO 03:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Did you see the one I put there? Dan Blysma's statistics will be updated upon the completion of the 2008–09 season. Is that alright? blackngold29 03:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Now I did.--TRUCO 03:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Footnotes Note B: Gene Ubriaco served as the Penguins head coach to begin the 1989–90 season, the team began with a 10–14–2 record. -- The comma should be a semi-colon. Done Under Patrick the team went 22–26–6 and did not qualify for the playoffs. -- Comma after Patrick. Done Note C: Coach Eddie Johnston was replaced by Craig Patrick who finished the season 7–10–3 and lost in the first round of the playoffs four games to one. -- Comma after Patrick Done Images Scotty Bowman — 2006 -- this doesn't really say much, reword to something like "2006 Penguins head coach Scotty Bowman" Same thing with Michel Therrien — 2008--TRUCO 22:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC) Reworded The year is the year the picture was taken (not when they were coach).

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 03:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from SRE.K.A.L.24

Comments from -- SRE.K.A.L.24[c] A lot of hate for this aritcle's format...anyways... See above comment to Truco Currently I need consistency with the colors and the table format. That is because I want more consistency right now for the topic. If you want the format to change into something else with the sortable function, then please talk to WT:HOCKEY. I will support this format if you do, but I'm currently busy at the moment. I don't care about the color, I just felt that the blue meant more to the team than pink; that can easily be changed. As for the format and the FT: Does the format on every list have to match? I would think that as long as all of the lists are FLs it shouldn't be a big deal. blackngold29 04:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC) I think it does say something about consistency on WP:WIAFT. Anyways, just ask WT:HOCKEY about the consistency problem, and it'll be fine. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 04:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC) From my POV, anything that improves on our current standards is a good change. Certainly most of the other coaching FLs are not sortable at this point, but really, when I look at this list vs. List of Calgary Flames coaches, I really see only two real differences, neither of which I consider major: this list is sortable, where the Flames one is not (and that would be easy to change), and this list uses a reference for each coach, while thanks to the Flames media guide, I was able to get away with a single general reference. Trivial differences in my book. I wouldnt oppose based on slight differences from other lists If list A is FL calibre, and this list is FL calibre, I'd say support it now, and we can decide which format we wish to use after. Resolute 05:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC) So could you or Blackngold29 notify WT:HOCKEY about this, just since I believe that notifying the WikiProject is mandatory. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 05:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC) WP:HOCKEY coversation can be found here. I understand your POV SK and I'll do everything I can to help you get the FT, but if they refuse to allow a topic to be approved because all are FLs but a few are sortable and a few aren't that seems ridiculous. As Resolute said, the differences aren't major, so it really comes down to personal preference (which one is better could be debated forever) so I think we should first try to get all the teams to FLs and then see what the FT reviewers think. blackngold29 18:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Good luck with the FLC, and there will be more comments from me soon. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC) On the list, the column "Managers"....managers? these are head coaches. (you probably copied List of Pittsburgh Pirates managers) Yep, fixed The notes don't work. Done More to come... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 20:11, 22 February 2009 (UTC) To be consistent... List --> Coaches Coach --> Name Years --> Term Games --> GC (your choice) WPct --> Win% (your choice) Achievements doesn't have to be aligned center. Done "Games" is probably as descriptive as GC so I left that one. In the Pittsburgh Penguins navbox, it should be "Head coaches", not "Coaches". Done -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 01:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Do you really need to say former? aren't all the head coaches (besides Bylsma) "former"? I believe it's more nicer mentioning how many years the coach coached. Done Also, on the image captions, "–" --> "to". Done champion --> champions? I really don't know... I don't really know either, I figured something like "The coach (singular) was a champion, the Penguins (plural) were the champions" On the Achievements, it should be "championship" because it is an achievement. Truco mentioned about this on one of my FLCs. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 05:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Oh, right. I don't know how I missed that.--TRUCO 12:31, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Done 2007–08 season could be wikilinked. Done Why not link the years on the table? You could, but needs to include a note (ie. List of Los Angeles Kings head coaches) Eh, they're done by year and not season (i.e. 2005 could be during the 2004–05 or 2005–06 season) I never really felt the links added a whole lot. True, but I still wikilink them. Just look at List of Los Angeles Kings head coaches. It has "1987–1987". -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 05:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Done Elected to the Hockey Hall of Fame († denotes induction as a builder) --> Elected to the Hockey Hall of Fame († denotes induction as a player). This is because the article is about the head coaches, and should be mentioned first. Switched Builder first... -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 05:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Done Again, Achievements doesn't have to be aligned center. I like them centered. Stats are as of...? Note added, obviously I'll update after the season. -->"through the end of Michel Therrien's term as head coach." --> "as of February 15, 2009". Some readers don't know when was the end of Michel Therrien's term as head coach. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 05:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Done -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 02:21, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support with one comment; switch the last and second last sentences, as the current head coach sentences are usually last. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 23:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008

Comments - A citation would be useful for the Penguins coming into the league as part of the 1967 expansion. Done "Since its founding, the Penguins have played their games...". Tense problem here; this refers to the Penguins (plural) as "their" (plural) and "its" (singular). Done "The franchise's first head coach was former New York Rangers' captain and head coach Red Sullivan." I don't think Rangers needs an apostrophe. Done "Sullivan. Sullivan...". Change the second to avoid repetition. Same with "Kelly. Kelly..." Done Another tense issue: "Johnson led the Penguins to its first Stanley Cup victory in 1991". Done Consider shortening the last column to Ref. That would get rid of some white space. Done Also would like to see a playoff win percentage column, as it would be a nice touch. Giants2008 (17-14) 19:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Done Thanks! blackngold29 20:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC) The changes all look good. One more thing from note e: "Coach Eddie Johnson was replaced by Craig Patrick, who finished the season 7–10–3 and lost in the first round of the playoffs four games to one." Technically, the team did those things, not the head coach. Giants2008 (17-14) 02:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Done. blackngold29 16:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - Meets the standards after the fixes above and below. Good work. Giants2008 (17-14) 16:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:26, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) I will leave the formatting issue alone for now, but when this topic is completed, I think the all these lists should look the same. "Since founded"-->Since their foundation Done "whereas"-->and Done The image caption in the lead should have a period at the end. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Done

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009 [25].

---

System of a Down discography

Nominator(s): Cannibaloki

I am nominating this for featured list because after putting it on a peer review with all concerns adressed, I think it is more prepared to meet the WP:FL?. Thanks in advance, Cannibaloki 03:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Support Looks good, and I'm happy to support. Great work! Drewcifer (talk) 00:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Cannibaloki 01:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Drewcifer

Comments Looks good, but I have the same old comments I usually make: Per MOS:DISCOG, 10 is the recommened limit for charts. Here you have 13. Done. "The discography of System of a Down" is a lame/boring way to start the list. We already know what the list is about from the title. Any suggestions? How about a general overview on the band? See Pendulum discography as an example. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC) The album column for the music videos is unnecessary. We already know that information from the singles table. Drewcifer (talk) 04:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Removed. Cannibaloki 05:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC) The lead needs citations, specifically for chart positions. And repeat what is already on the table? Yes. But basically the only thing you need source are the specific chart positions in the lead, since those are specific statistics, rather than broad notes that you'll go into more detail about in the tables anyways. Drewcifer (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Done. I'd recommend presenting chart numbers as "#37" not "number 37". Why? Just my own personal preference I suppose. Drewcifer (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Done. Your vandal! "Gremlin"! Many of the similar columns aren't similar widths, mainly the detail columns. Drewcifer (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Done? Cannibaloki 20:43, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Why do we care how Hypnotize and Lonely charted in Finland? I mean, nothing wrong with Finland, but they charted better elsewhere. Why is Finland specifically relevant to mention here? They were better charted on two Billboard's component charts, already mentioned. Ok, fair enough. "numbers four and 16" should be "#4 and #16". The # to be consistent with everything else, and four shouldn't be spelled out since it's a statistic. Drewcifer (talk) 03:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Done. Cannibaloki 17:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC) In the lead you've got "U.S." and the tables you've got "US". Stick with "US". The "U.S." of the text is based on this: "The United States of America (commonly referred to as the United States, the U.S., the USA, or America)..."; The "US" in the table is just an abbreviation. OK, I know what U.S. means, thanks. But U.S. and US are both abbreviations, so you should stay consistent whether or not your using it in prose or tables. They both refer to the same thing, so there is no reason for them to bifferent. Drewcifer (talk) 20:52, 28 February 2009 (UTC) Done. U.S. → US Cannibaloki 00:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Why were the Extended Plays and Other appearances removed from the article? From what I can see most other featured lists have them so I don't really see any reason to remove them, especially when they were sourced. Silver Sonic Shadow (talk) 23:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • What extended plays? If you're refering to Lonely Day, it is a maxi-single not EP.
  • The section Other appearances was added.

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead By the end of 1997 the group had signed to American Recordings, then distributed by Columbia Records. -- (1)Comma after 1997. (2)The by should be "as" Done. The following year they released their eponymous debut album, which peaked at number 124 on the U.S. Billboard 200 and number 103 on UK Albums Chart; Years later it was certified platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and gold by Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA). -- (1)Comma after following year (2)UK needs to be spelled out in its first occurrence (3)The Years later should be de-capitalized. Done. The follow-up, Toxicity (2001), topped the U.S. and Canadian charts and also reached the top 10 in Australia, Finland, and New Zealand. -- Comma after and. Done. The album was certified triple platinum in its home country, as well as double platinum in Australia and Canada. -- (1)the last part should be "as well as double platinum in Australia by the _____(industry) and the (acronym) in Canada." Done. Toxicity produced singles for the title track, "Chop Suey!", and "Aerials". -- Remove the comma after "Chop Suey!" Done. This album's first single "B.Y.O.B.", peaked at number 27 on the Billboard Hot 100, and number 26 on the UK Singles Chart. -- Remove both commas. Done. The follow-up "Question!", reached top 40 in the Ireland and United Kingdom charts. -- Comma before "Question!" and add "the" before top 40. Done. Also, they are the first band since The Beatles to get a pair of chart topping debuts in the U.S. within the same calendar year. -- Reword the beginning to "They are also the first band since..." [its improper to begin a sentence with Also] Done. In 2006, the group went on a hiatus and since then, all members have begun work on side projects. -- Comma before and since then. Done. Tables Check out fine. References If you are going to link some of the publishers, you may as well link the rest of them, like Allmusic and MTV.--TRUCO 01:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Done. Take a look in everything (again), please. Cannibaloki 04:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Followup comments Lead The following year, they released their eponymous debut album, which peaked at number 124 in the United States' Billboard 200 and number 103 on the United Kingdom's Album Chart; years later it was certified platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and gold by Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA). -- I reworded this a bit, but the end needs to be reworded as "; it was certified platinum ___(# of years) years later by the...." Reworded. It produced two singles, the title track and "Lonely Day", which reached numbers 4 and 16 in the Finnish chart, respectively. -- The formatting of the integers should be consistent, per MOS:NUM numbers usually under 9 need to be spelled out (in this case). Reworded. References Allmusic should be linked in the general references. Done. If you want to avoid overlinking, only link the publishers the first time they appear within this section. Done. Remove the link in Ref 16 since other publishers that don't have articles aren't linked.--TRUCO 22:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Done. Cannibaloki 00:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.TRUCO 21:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "at #124 in the United States' Billboard 200" "in"-->on "which reached top 30" Add "the" before "top". "The follow-up"-->Their follow-up album, "reaching only the top 20 in the U.S. and Australia."-->reaching the top 20 in only the U.S. and Australia. "UK Singles Chart.[3][2]" Put the inline citations in numerical order. "They are also the first band since"-->System of a Down is the first band since "to get a pair of chart topping debuts"-->to release two chart-topping debuts "within the same calendar year"-->in the same year "reached numbers four and 16" Write the numbers the same way. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC) All done! Cannibaloki 17:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009 [26].

---

Yeah Yeah Yeahs discography

Nominator(s): Drewcifer (talk)

A fairly straight-forward discog from a relatively new band with relatively few releases. As always, any feedback and opinions are welcome and appreciated. Drewcifer (talk) 06:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) Lead The Yeah Yeah Yeahs followed this with another EP a year later, titled Machine, which spawned an identically-title single that charted on the UK Singles Chart. -- (1) EP should be mentioned earlier in the lead as 'extended play (EP)' (2)identically-title should be 'identically-titled' DONE AND DONE The band's first album, Fever to Tell, was released in 2002, and peaked at #55 in the United States and #13 in the UK. -- The specific UK Chart was stated, but the specific US chart should also be stated. DONE In April 2009, the band is set to release its third studio album, It's Blitz!. -- Source? I don't see it sourced in the article either. DONE This would actually be worded better as 'The band is set to release its third album, It's Blitz!, in April 2009.'--TRUCO 21:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Passive voice. Yuck. Fixed. Drewcifer (talk) 21:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC) The lead is a bit broad, I would actually tell the ranking of some of their work, like charted on the UK Singles Chart isn't really saying much, how about 'peaked #__ on the UK Singles Chart' I just didn't find #87 and #26 to be that notable of chart positions. The important thing is that charted in two countries, not how marginally popular they were. I figure such (relatively) uninteresting data is better left to the tables, not the lead. Oh okay, I didn't know they ranked that low.--TRUCO 21:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Singles The last three entries need verification of some sort since they didn't chart and no wiki articles are written on them. I agree for Zero (added it), but the other two are covered by the Allmusic source. Just because they didn't chart and don't have articles doesn't mean they can't be covered by general references like everything else. Gotcha.--TRUCO 21:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC) References For Ref #9| Yes the publisher is COE, but the work is from JAM! Music, so add that parameter into the {[tl|cite web}}template DONE --TRUCO 23:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC) All done I think, except for where I've made extra notes. Thanks for the helpful notes. Drewcifer (talk) 03:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--TRUCO 21:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and your support. Drewcifer (talk) 23:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Can you get rid of "Max Knies Photography Sample" from the photo, please? Its very distracting

The author of the photo wanted it to stay. It's an otherwise awesome photo, so I think it's worth it. Then again, since it's GFDL-approved, anyone could come along and Photoshop it out... But I'll leave it as is in good faith, since the author trusted me with his photo, and it doesn't particularly bother me. Drewcifer (talk) 07:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• I'm not sure whether It's Blitz can be included in the discography yet as it hasn't been released

Yeah, technically it shouldn't be included, given the verbatim definition of a discography. But I've realized in situations like these it's best to just let the will of the people take over. The entry was added literally like an hour or two after the announcement, and I guarantee it'll be put back up right away if I take it out. So why fight it?

All good otherwise. Nice to see you back. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notes, and the warm welcome! Drewcifer (talk) 07:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• Comment - the BPI certification ref (no 9) points to the listing for "Pretty Hate Machine£ by Nine Inch Nails?!?!?!? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Woops! Got a little carried away with the cut+paste I guess. Fixed it. Drewcifer (talk) 20:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Another comment - the self-titled EP's peak position of #1 was on the very minor UK Budget Albums chart (as denoted by the ¥ symbol next to it on the zobbel.de page) - this should probably be noted, as currently it could give the impression that the release actually topped the main UK Albums Chart (which in fact it seems to have missed completely) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Good catch. Took it out. Drewcifer (talk) 03:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support - all looks good now -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Cool, thanks alot for the help. Drewcifer (talk) 16:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) "The Yeah Yeah Yeahs are a New York City-based alternative rock band, formed in 2000. " No comma necessary. Alternatively, you could move this nonessential clause to the next sentence "Rormed in 2000, the band consists of " "identically-titled" -ly adverbs should not have hyphens after them. "From Fever to Tell came four singles-->Fever to Tell spawned four singles "later with another EP" "with" is a poor connector, why not "by"? "The Yeah Yeah Yeahs are set to release their" Why not a simpler "The Yeah Yeah Yeahs will release their"? Dabomb87 (talk) 02:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

• What makes http://www.everyhit.com/ a reliable source? Dabomb87 (talk) 02:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Rearranged the citations so that it's no longer needed. But, for the record I believe it is reliable, but I can't remember where I found it officially recognized. I'll look into that for next time. Drewcifer (talk) 03:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The BBC. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/chart/ Right hand side menu column, at the bottom. It's a shame you can't link to the actual results page with this site :( Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 19:38, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Cool, good looking out. I've added that link to MOS:DISCOG, so hopefully we don't have that issue again, at lease with this site. Drewcifer (talk) 20:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Took care of your other comments, by the way. I kind of didn't notice them until just now. Drewcifer (talk) 03:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I asked User:Ealdgyth about EveryHit. I want to resolve it once and for all. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

She says that more than one reference to EveryHit would be good. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Seems as the reference was removed, so I will strike. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved stuff from Cannibaloki

Comments from Cannibaloki (talk · contribs) Hide "It's Blitz!", has not yet been released. See my similar comment above. I could delete it, but it will just be added back in right away anyways, so what's the point? I don't think it's doing any harm there for the next month or so. I hide this album. Cannibaloki 15:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Is Is Mexican chart position Show Your Bones chart positions DVD album? → video album Formats released. CAN → CAN "Date With the Night" → "Date with the Night" Don't have other appearances? mimimi, mimimi... Cannibaloki 21:55, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Nope, no other appearances as far as I've been able to research. And all your other comments are hopefully addressed. Good catch for the Austrian and Mexican charts! Drewcifer (talk) 03:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

• Support, all done. Cannibaloki 15:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Closing note: Since everyhit.com is no longer being used in this discog, there is no point keeping the nomination to continue the discussion about it. Best place is WT:DISCOG. Since there are no other outstanding concerns, I'm hereby promoting the list. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009 [27].

---

List of Numb3rs episodes

Nominator(s): NuclearWarfare _(Talk)''

Did you know "...that you can get a million dollars for solving a millenia-old math problem?", but that even locking yourself in a garage as Charlie Epps did many times in a Numb3rs episode does not help solve it.

Well, I have spent the last few days working on this article, and I really feel that it meets the Featured List criteria now. There isn't a lot of prose, so I didn't feel that grabbing a copy editor was necessary, but feel free to tell me how awful I am at writing them. So...here you guys go :)

Also, this article had existed for a long time before I started my work on it, so if you feel that you were a primary contributor to the article, just add yourself. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 06:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

It has come to my attention that this article does not meet one of the seven criteria of a FL: "Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; it has images if they are appropriate to the subject, with succinct captions or "alt" text; and it has a minimal proportion of red links." This seems to go against one of the philosophies that made Wikipedia grow, Wikipedia:Red link. I'd take an editor being interested enough to write an article over visual appeal anyway, so I do not wish to remove the redlinks. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 07:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Redlink is all well and good, but the idea is that Featured content should exhibit some of Wikipedia's best work. Links that go nowhere and gaps in the surrounding knowledge are not conductive to this idea. Ironholds (talk) 07:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

• Comments

• The prose needs to be referenced.

• Done. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 07:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

• The redlink:bluelink ratio is too close for my liking. WP:REDLINK is all well and good, but this many redlinks seems to violate section 6 of the FL criteria which requires that a featured list "has a minimal proportion of red links". Options: either write articles or just delink.

• Replied in original post. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 07:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

• Is BIGWentertainment considered a reliable source?

• I was told that it is kind of the Amazon of Australia. I figured that was good enough. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 07:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

• That be all. Ironholds (talk) 07:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs) General comments Prose and list checks out fine. My main concern is also the red links, like Ironholds stated, its all well and good, but for featured content (like the criteria states) less of it is needed. In this case it would be best to unlink them all. I've started a discussion about this at WT:Featured List Criteria. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 00:48, 18 February 2009 (UTC) What are the Amazon sources citing specifically about the DVD? Its use as a source is limited depending on what is cited. This also applies to BIGWentertainment. I would have rather cited this to TvShowsOnDVD, but it doesn't have the information. Basically, the Amazon links cite the fact what I say is in the Extras section is actually true, as it is mentioned in the product description. BIGWentertainment is used for Region 4 dates; I can't find that information anywhere else. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 00:48, 18 February 2009 (UTC) --TRUCO 23:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

My issues were resolved but I will wait until there is some outcome on the discussion opened above on the redlinks, because that is substantial to FLs.--TRUCO 02:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

• File:Numb3rs Insignia.jpg is not acceptable due to it's digital watermarking.
  • This issue should be resolved soon by the Graphic Lab: [28]. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 20:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
    • pd_Thor has kindly given us an SVG version to use. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 05:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
      • This new SVG simply is not the Numbers logo, it is misleading and frankly offensive to the show and the logo designers to claim otherwise. It would have been better just to edit the previous image to rubber stamp out the offending watermark. This new image is not an improvement by any means. Sorry.-Andrew c ^[talk] 22:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
        • Andrew, I really cannot see a difference between the original and the SVG version, besides the watermark. I'll create a "rubber-stamped version, but can you explain why you dislike the SVG one? NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 16:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
• "Numb3rs" should be italicized.
  • It was like that, but someone removed it. Readded. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 20:20, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
• Lead: Year ranges should be ndashes per WP:DASH
  • I'm unsure where you mean. Instead of say, "September 2007 to January 2008", should I do "September 2007–January 2008"?
    • In the lead and now general ref. It is "2005-2006" etc. but should be 2005–2006. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Fixed, I hope. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 16:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
        • Not quite. I've done it though. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
• "Seasons One, Two, Three, and Four have" - why the capital letters?
  • Fixed. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 20:20, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
    • There is still some more of these in the lead. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Fixed, I hope
        • Almost Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
• Since this FLC the consensus is not to use transclusion for the episodes. This will also allow alot of errors from the transclusion to be fixed. e.g. uncentered headings.
  • I could substitute all of them, but as this is a currently running series, I am unsure if season five should be substituted. If we left season 5 transcluded, it would make updating things a whole lot easier. Would it be acceptable to leave that transcluded? NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 20:20, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
    • I can compromise if you really wish, but one of the reasons to not transclude was accessibility. This would alow people to update it who don't know how transclusion works (and might reduce the work). Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
      • All five seasons transcluded. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 16:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
• The Visual Appeal would be greatly improved if alternate rows were coloured along with the headings (like this)
  • Done. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 20:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
    • It doesn't really matter but normally, like in the example I showed you, the colours reflected the DVD colour (so here season 3 would be maroon. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Ah, I see. Colors changed to match up with Region 1 DVDs, except for season five, for which I picked an arbitrary color. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 16:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
• Are there other media releases? (e.g. Hulu, iTunes, Amazon Unbox etc.)
  • Nothing that I could find any reliable sources for. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 20:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
    • I disagree. The first search I did gave this. That mentions Unbox. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
      • I don't think these are notable (sorry, that's what I meant) enough to mention, but I did add a paragraph on iTunes and Unbox. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 17:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
        • I have tweaked the wording, but feel free to revert/change/discuss. Also are you in the US, becuase I think they are available from the CBS website, but cannot check as I am not. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:28, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
          • Usually about the previous three episodes are available for free at cbs.com. Is that available for inclusion? NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 21:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
            • I think it should be included, but is there anybody you know (I'm thinking onwiki) that is in the US and could confirm the number available? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
              • Right no, there are 16 (Wow! That's higher than usual) episodes that a US resident can watch for free, though many are from season four, and were rebroadcast recently during weeks where there were new episodes. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 16:04, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
• The piped links of the seasons don't work in the "Series overview" table.
  • The formatting changed. I'll fix the links. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 20:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
• The "DVD releases" table experiences some strange text wrapping. I suggest making only the "Region 1 Extras" wrap onto one or more lines. To be honest I'm not fussed about having that column at all and would remove it completely.
  • I'll move the entire thing to the Numb3rs article. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 21:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
• Season 1 and 2 are completely uncited. The IGN links for those seasons contain no information that can verify the airdates, directors etc.
  • IGN replaced with DVD booklet. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 23:35, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Does the DVD booklet really cite the airdates? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
      • TVGuide added for the airdates. I personally do not have the DVD; I had to call a friend who does. He isn't around at the moment, so in the interest of expediency, I have added TVGuide. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 16:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
• Production codes: Are these right or verifiable in any way. It appears they are just the season number + episode number. I thought they were usually something like they are here.
  • Usually, but not always. IGN should verify these ones, at least for the later seasons. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 21:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
    • IGN does not seem to verify these (e.g. in [http://uk.tv.ign.com/objects/142/14274718.html season 5). I would strongly suggest removing this column per se, but you could add in a column equivalent to listing the "# in series". Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Google Numb3rs production codes, for example, comes up with several links to IGN. IN the two lines below the title/hyperlink, you can see: "TV Network: CBS Airdate: May 18, 2007. Episode Number: 324. Production Code: 324. Runtime: 60 minutes. Genre: Crime Series: Numb3rs ..." NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 16:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
        • Hmm I am less than convinced but will ignore whether they are right for now. Assuming they are, I still don't think they are worthy of inclusion. This FLC also wanted the prod. codes removed. I especially share this view on this list, because they are all exactly Series #, Season #. They presume (not all cited) that they were all produced in the order they aired, but there is no reason this should be the case. I would still strongly suggest swapping it for a "Seasons #" column, which contains all the same information without having any controversies. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
          • I converted the format a little.[29][30] I hope it is good now. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 05:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
            • Much better. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

• Can you stubify some redlinks
  • I would prefer to wait until the discussion at WT:Featured list criteria is over. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 21:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
    • The discussion is completely stalled. If you have to rely on a massive policy change to push an FL through then you're grasping at straws; simply create some stubs, it'll take an hour at most. Ironholds (talk) 16:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Update please - are you planning to do this? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 19:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
        • Oh yes, I missed this comment. I have set aside some time in a few days; I should be able to do it then. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 19:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) Spell out FBI on its first appearance. It is linked, but I expanded it in any case. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 04:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC) "five seasons consisting of 94 episodes" Comparable quantities should be written out the same; either all numbers or all words. I had always learned that any value that didn't have a zero at the end and was less than twenty should be written with digits. Should I still change it? NuclearWarfare (Talk) 04:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The comparable quantities thing is an exception to that rule. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC) I see. Changed to digits. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 20:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC) "Seasons two and three aired normally from" Can you be more clear than "normally"? Done. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 04:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC) "In addition to being broadcast on television, Numb3rs is also available on DVD. Done. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 04:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC) "four have all been released Done. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 04:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC) Dabomb87 (talk) 02:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

• What makes http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2006/06/08/now_on_itunes_csi_survivor_ncis_aamp_num a reliable source?
  • I'm not sure if this is enough, but it has partnered with IGN, so it isn't just a run-of-the-mill site. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 04:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
• Likewise http://www.bigwentertainment.com.au/product/numb3rs_705875_229972.html?
  • Someone, who I cannot remember now, told me that it was a smaller version of Amazon in Australia. I didn't dig deeper than that. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 04:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
    • It's one of the websites of Aussie retailer Big W. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:40, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Web titles should not be in all caps; convert them to title case.
  • Doing. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 04:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Dabomb87 (talk) 02:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Image fails WP:NFC, specifically Criteria #8: "its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."
  • The image is in the public domain. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 17:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• American television series →→ American television series
  • Done. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 17:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Perhaps wikilink pilot episode
  • Good idea and I have done that. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 17:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• As of February 16, 2009, five seasons consisting of 94 episodes have been broadcast. needs updating ;)
  • Hey, I'm only two days late :) NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 17:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• The first season was the shortest of the five, and spanned 13 episodes from January to May 2005. could you perhaps say it was a midseason replacement, perhaps even what it replaced?
  • Added and cited. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 17:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Maybe link "2005–2006 and 2006–2007"
  • I forgot those articles even existed. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 17:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Season six is projected to begin in early September. What year?
  • 2009, it is. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 17:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Redirects:
  • CBS
  • Federal Bureau of Investigations
  • Region 1 Regions 2 4 (plus WP:OVERLINK)
  • Amazon Unbox
  • TBD (Plus WP:OVERLINK)
  • Martha Mitchell
  • Fred Keller
  • Frederick K. Keller (the same person)
  • Michael Watkins
    • All redirects done. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 18:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Dabs:
  • Dennis Smith
  • Peter Ellis
  • Andrew Black
  • Amazon in references
    • Done. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 18:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• References:
  • Dates should be in the same format as the article
    • I can't believe I missed that. All changed to mdy format. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 18:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm also unsure about the reliability of the Starpulse article.
    • replaced with CNet reference. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 18:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Bigwentertainment references: please attribute to Big W
    • That makes more sense. Thanks. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 18:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

That's all. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:40, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.