Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/August 2009: Difference between revisions
failing 4 FLCs |
+1 withdrawn |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{featured list log}} |
{{featured list log}} |
||
{{TOClimit|limit=3}} |
{{TOClimit|limit=3}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of districts of Sri Lanka/archive1}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of College of William & Mary people/archive1}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of College of William & Mary people/archive1}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of number-one albums of 2008 (Australia)/archive1}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of number-one albums of 2008 (Australia)/archive1}} |
Revision as of 02:20, 7 August 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 not promoted by Dabomb87 02:20, 7 August 2009 [1].
- Nominator(s): ≈ Chamal talk +Under house arrest!+ 11:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I'm withdrawing this nom. I have done this in rather a hurry, and there seems to be a major error with the article. I cannot work on this right now, so I'll withdraw it now and come back when the article is fixed and ready for another try. Thanks to everyone who reviewed the article and helped improve it :) ≈ Chamal talk 01:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've been working on this article for the past few days. Featured content are an extinct species at Wikiproject Sri Lanka so I thought it was about time it got another one. It was hard to find references -especially web based ones- about the subject (please remember that this is not a highly developed country we are talking about :)) Sources are very few even in the national library. But I have tried to find as many reliable sources as possible, and I think the sources given qualify as that. Anyway, I will make the best effort to address any issues raised here. ≈ Chamal talk +Under house arrest!+ 11:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Quick question - What is the list sorted on? It doesn't seem to be in alphabetic order of district name which is what I was expecting. Boissière (talk) 19:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It's sorted by Province. Think it'd be better to change it to alphabetical order of districts then? ≈ Chamal talk 01:30, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Basically yes. See similar featured lists such as List of counties in Texas, List of counties in New York or, nearer to Sri Lanka, List of districts of West Bengal. Boissière (talk) 18:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed - arranged by alphabetical order. ≈ Chamal talk 04:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That's fine. I've had a longer look at the article and have made some more general comments below. Boissière (talk) 23:08, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed - arranged by alphabetical order. ≈ Chamal talk 04:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Images need alternative text. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:12, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Images in the article already had alt text, and I've made them more descriptive now. However, there is one image in a template that doesn't have alt text, and I don't think the Template:politbox supports it. I'll check. ≈ Chamal talk 04:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed - I've added a new parameter to the template and alt text added. Hope it's ok now. ≈ Chamal talk 13:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately that didn't work; see the "alt text" button in the toolbox on this page. Looks like there's a typo in the template. More important, the alt text doesn't tell the non-expert visually impaired reader what each image looks like. For example, "Area map of Badulla District in the Uva Province of Sri Lanka" is a bit helpful, but unless you already know what the Uva Province is, you'll be out of luck. Since that image already appears in the Badulla row of the table, which already says that the Badulla district is in the Uva province, most of the alt text is redundant anyway. It might be better for the alt text to read something like "This district in east central Sri Lanka runs roughly north–south." That way, it'll be giving useful info, which is not mere repetition. There's a similar problem in the (non-working) alt text for the coat of arms. Eubulides (talk) 06:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Somebody had changed the template parameter. Fixed now. I'll get working on the article ASAP. Please give me a day or two; I'm a bit busy in real life now. ≈ Chamal talk 16:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've changed the alt text for the maps and coat of arms. Hope it's improved now. Also, another user added some images to the article and I've organized these into a gallery. I thought a gallery could be included per WP:IG in this instance. Unfortunately the Template:Gallery does not support alt text so these images are without it. I have tried to add this to the template but it's hard without changing the way it is used (which is not practical considering the large number of pages it is used on). What would you suggest about this? ≈ Chamal talk 15:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The gallery doesn't satisfy the WP:IG criteria: it's just a random set of images as far as I can see. Better would be to add a column to the table, containing an example image from each district. It's OK to leave a lot of entries blank in that column. If a gallery is really required, please use a table to create it as per WP:PICTURE #Gallery of images; then you can add alt text for each image. Eubulides (talk) 18:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Another option, if a gallery is really required, is to use {{Image gallery}}, which I just now created. It's like {{Gallery}} but it does alt text. Eubulides (talk) 21:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've removed the gallery. I didn't intend to include one in the first place anyway. ≈ Chamal talk 02:15, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Another option, if a gallery is really required, is to use {{Image gallery}}, which I just now created. It's like {{Gallery}} but it does alt text. Eubulides (talk) 21:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The gallery doesn't satisfy the WP:IG criteria: it's just a random set of images as far as I can see. Better would be to add a column to the table, containing an example image from each district. It's OK to leave a lot of entries blank in that column. If a gallery is really required, please use a table to create it as per WP:PICTURE #Gallery of images; then you can add alt text for each image. Eubulides (talk) 18:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've changed the alt text for the maps and coat of arms. Hope it's improved now. Also, another user added some images to the article and I've organized these into a gallery. I thought a gallery could be included per WP:IG in this instance. Unfortunately the Template:Gallery does not support alt text so these images are without it. I have tried to add this to the template but it's hard without changing the way it is used (which is not practical considering the large number of pages it is used on). What would you suggest about this? ≈ Chamal talk 15:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Somebody had changed the template parameter. Fixed now. I'll get working on the article ASAP. Please give me a day or two; I'm a bit busy in real life now. ≈ Chamal talk 16:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately that didn't work; see the "alt text" button in the toolbox on this page. Looks like there's a typo in the template. More important, the alt text doesn't tell the non-expert visually impaired reader what each image looks like. For example, "Area map of Badulla District in the Uva Province of Sri Lanka" is a bit helpful, but unless you already know what the Uva Province is, you'll be out of luck. Since that image already appears in the Badulla row of the table, which already says that the Badulla district is in the Uva province, most of the alt text is redundant anyway. It might be better for the alt text to read something like "This district in east central Sri Lanka runs roughly north–south." That way, it'll be giving useful info, which is not mere repetition. There's a similar problem in the (non-working) alt text for the coat of arms. Eubulides (talk) 06:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed - I've added a new parameter to the template and alt text added. Hope it's ok now. ≈ Chamal talk 13:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some more general comments
- I am a bit concerned about the Notable Attributes column. Whilst there is nothing wrong with the information that has been put here, there are no criteria listed as to what is a "notable" attribute. There is quite a range of different sorts of information in this column and a lot of them don't really have much to do with the districts has administrative entities. Another consequence of having this column is that in future people may be tempted to add what they consider "interesting" bits of information in there claiming they are notable attributes.
- The lead mostly describes the history of various sub-national administrative units over the years and I am not sure how relevant much of this information is to a list of the modern districts. I think that you could remove (but not lose - see below) much of paragraphs 2 and 3 and perhaps add some more info about present day districts - for example are they divided into further subdivisions?
- I was slightly surprised that there isn't an separate article about districts in Sri Lanka - are they run by an elected council? - what are their competencies? etc. Now I know that the presence or absence of such an article isn't directly relevant to this FLC but if you had one then you could put the history into that article. (Actually I have just noticed that the List of districts of Sri Lanka was originally Districts of Sri Lanka. Perhaps the latter should be made into a more general description of what a district actually is.)
Boissière (talk) 23:08, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- First point: I wasn't too sure about that column too. I've added the things that these districts are famous for in the country. I'll trim it a bit and remove the less significant stuff. ≈ Chamal talk 02:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- As for the second and third points; there isn't much to say about the districts. They don't really have administrative powers; it's really the provinces and municipal councils etc (which are not directly under the districts) that have actual adminitrative powers. The District Secretariat has very limited powers. There is nothing much to include in an article really apart from the history. I don't think there'd be much point in keeping a separate article since it can have no more info that this :) The original article was a list too, and I just improved on it. It was User:Dabomb87 who renamed it per WP:LISTNAME (which I wasn't aware of) :P Anyway I will add some more info on the current structure and powers as you suggested. ≈ Chamal talk 02:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've made a note about what is included in the notable attributes column and removed some info that was not very significant. Hope this helps to reduce the confusion. ≈ Chamal talk 15:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Added tasks of the district secretariat. Only stuff like coordinating are done at district level since as I've already mentioned, the actual administration is done at provincial and municipal level. ≈ Chamal talk 06:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What you have done does give more of a feel as to what a district actually "does". I suppose the only real remaining question that springs to mind is who appoints the District Secretariat? Are they appointed by the central government, by the provinces or perhaps nominated by the municipalities? As for the notable attributes column, I feel that it may still be a bit too wide ranging in its potential content, but we'll see what other reviewers think. Boissière (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed - Added the info. Do you have any suggestions about the notable attributes column? ≈ Chamal talk 08:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What you have done does give more of a feel as to what a district actually "does". I suppose the only real remaining question that springs to mind is who appoints the District Secretariat? Are they appointed by the central government, by the provinces or perhaps nominated by the municipalities? As for the notable attributes column, I feel that it may still be a bit too wide ranging in its potential content, but we'll see what other reviewers think. Boissière (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Added tasks of the district secretariat. Only stuff like coordinating are done at district level since as I've already mentioned, the actual administration is done at provincial and municipal level. ≈ Chamal talk 06:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've made a note about what is included in the notable attributes column and removed some info that was not very significant. Hope this helps to reduce the confusion. ≈ Chamal talk 15:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk) |
---|
* Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:57, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll stop there for now, and pick up from Matale later. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
Neutral I'm awaiting other reviews. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All newspapers, magazines and journals should be italicized. You can do this easily by changingpublisher=
towork=
in the reference templates.Spell out UNESCO in the publishers.Ref 16, there should be a space after the comma.Ref 19, changepages=
topage=
in the template.Refs 5, 6, 35, 48, 52, 55, 58, 59 and the first general reference; addformat=PDF
to the template.Ref 61, Reuters is not a publication and should not be italicized. Change "work" to "publisher" in the template.Dabomb87 (talk) 00:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]- All fixed I think I have fixed everything mentioned. ≈ Chamal talk 06:04, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
I have a serious problem with the notable attributes column as it is so subjective and varying. One describes why it was significant in terms of historical features, one the agro. output Frankly I would just remove it.- Fixed: That's the second time concerns have been raised about this column, so I have removed it according to both suggestions. ≈ Chamal talk 12:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Can we have a population density column? It would be informative, and easy to do.
- Fixed: I didn't add this earlier because it would clutter up the page with the attributes column. ≈ Chamal talk 12:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you link Population density in the table header? Also use {{Pop density km2 to mi2}} to give us the unit as well as the conversion? So, for the first one you would use
{{Pop density km2 to mi2|140|abbr=on|precision=0}}
Woody (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you link Population density in the table header? Also use {{Pop density km2 to mi2}} to give us the unit as well as the conversion? So, for the first one you would use
- Fixed: I didn't add this earlier because it would clutter up the page with the attributes column. ≈ Chamal talk 12:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- An established column? Reading the lead it seems they were all formed at different times or am I incorrect in my interpretation?
- 21 formed in 1833 (as mentioned in lead), and four later. Do you think this should be added as a column (since most of it would read 1833), or shall I just mention the creation of the other four in the lead as well? ≈ Chamal talk 12:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I see you have worked this into the lead, it looks good. I do wonder though whether it should be in the table as well though. After all, the lead is meant to summarise and introduce the table and I think it would still be a useful thing to have in the table. Woody (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 21 formed in 1833 (as mentioned in lead), and four later. Do you think this should be added as a column (since most of it would read 1833), or shall I just mention the creation of the other four in the lead as well? ≈ Chamal talk 12:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- So, a few concerns at the moment. Regards, Woody (talk) 09:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
My understanding is that population density should be calculated by dividing population by area yet some of the figures in the population density column are well off, for example Mullaitivu should be 77 people per square km but is listed as 50. Even more bizarrely Vavuniya and Mannar are both 81 yet Mannar has a larger population and smaller area than Vavuniya. It would be worth checking some other sources, if possible, to found which source/data is unreliable. No original research states you aren't forbidden from routine calculations so I'd rather see some simple math used on reliable data instead of quoting some which isn't for the sake of having a reference. --Jpeeling (talk) 21:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Damn... you are right. Looks like I've done this in too much of a hurry. Population and population density are taken from the government's department of census and statistics, so they would be correct (if we assume they are incorrect, there's no point keeping the article at all :)) So area must be the erroneous column, which is taken from statoids (which claims to have taken it from government websites). I used it because I couldn't find this information on government sites. I'll have a look again. ≈ Chamal talk 01:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was not promoted by Matthewedwards 20:48, 2 August 2009 [2].
- Nominator(s): Jrcla2 16:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm nominating List of College of William & Mary alumni because it fulfills all FL criteria that I can see and has been peer-reviewed. The suggestions and necessary corrections have been fixed, and it now deserves to be a candidate for FL status. Jrcla2 16:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
*Oppose - some opening thoughts...
The Rambling Man (talk) 16:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Further oppose with further comments
- What does 17?? mean? It needs a note.
- Fixed.
- I suspect that "Dropped out for military service" should sort in the early 1800s.
- Fixed.
- No need to link common terms, like France - think how would this benefit a reader of this list?
Currently working on.Fixed.
- Why are abbreviations in bold in the lead and not in the tables? I'd unbold all instances, probably in accordance with MOSBOLD.
- Fixed. Removed bold from lead.
- Some entries in the Year column have additional information, different degrees for instance. Does that mean they received both the BA/BSc and the other degree, or just the one noted? It's unclear.
- Fixed. There used to be a note in the lead, but then during a peer-review someone suggested I remove it, but I'll put it back. It reads "This list uses the following notation (In the event that multiple years are listed, the student attended William & Mary for both undergraduate and post-graduate degrees as specified):"
- "148–year " shouldn't that just be a hyphen rather than an en-dash, per WP:DASH?
- Fixed.
- "U.S." or "U. S." - be consistent.
- Fixed. There was only one instance of "U. S." but it's been corrected.
- "mayor or Hampton, Virginia" should that be "Mayor of Hampton"?
- Fixed.
- "A Democratic member ..." just "Democratic member" to stay consistent with all other entries. Check 'em all.
- Fixed. I went through every single notable and made sure none of their notability started with "A", "The", "An" etc. All are now consistent.
- Not keen on small text. Why, for instance, does ref 9 need to use small text? Is it your choice or determined by a template?
- Fixed. Removed small text from ref 9.
- Ref 49 needs accessdate.
- Fixed.
- Ref 105 needs to use the same PDF code as ref 86.
- Fixed.
- I've been told many times, it's The New York Times...!
- Fixed.
- Why is "pro-football-reference.com" a "work" while "databaseFootball.com." is a publisher?
- Fixed. I think I was in a hurry at the time I was filling out the football-reference one and accidentally placed at as a work.
- What does 17?? mean? It needs a note.
- The Rambling Man (talk) 10:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed all comments from The Rambling Man. Jrcla2 01:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll be the judge of that, thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:36, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I was referring to the ones in the list above, not necessarily all of your problems with it in general. Don't get defensive, it's hostile. Jrcla2 talk 20:03, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What I meant was that it should be up to me to decide that you've fixed everything to my satisfaction. Not defensive, just you don't need to tell me when you've fixed my comments, I'll let you know. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I was referring to the ones in the list above, not necessarily all of your problems with it in general. Don't get defensive, it's hostile. Jrcla2 talk 20:03, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll be the judge of that, thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:36, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed all comments from The Rambling Man. Jrcla2 01:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- More comments from The Rambling Man
- The images are still squashing text for me.
- Fixed, although it's your resolution, which is probably really high. I don't know what else I can do at this point so if it's still squashing text for you but nobody else, it's not my fault.
- " is also the nation's oldest and most prestigious ..." oldest, sure, but just a single source to suggest it's the most prestigious - this is just someone's opinion.
- Fixed.
- "the country's initial 10 " why not just "first ten"?
- Response: Because then the sentence would read, "Four of the country's first ten presidents were educated there, including the first, George Washington (class of 1754)." It's incredibly redundant.
- It's not clear what the year after, for instance, George Washington means. I would guess it's the year they graduated? But to a non-expert it's not obvious, particularly when you refer to people in other contexts (e.g. the president).
- Comment. I put "(class of 1754)" after Washington in the lead, so I am wondering if that's sufficient/acceptable notation for readers to safely assume that the years in parantheses are therefore graduation years?
- "over half a dozen " why not just state how many rather than being a touch sensationalist about it?
- Response: Because this is an incomplete list. If I were to say that, for example, "William & Mary has graduated seven ambassadors" it sounds like a definite, finite number. I don't know if there have been more (very possible, to be honest) but since I can't find them online, I don't want to assume there are no more.
- MLS or Major League Soccer. Be consistent, or use Major League Soccer (MLS) the first time (in the lead) and then MLS thereafter.
- Fixed.
- What's NASL?
- Fixed (North American Soccer League, btw).
- "1968-1969" needs an en-dash, not a hyphen.
- Fixed.
- Very very heavy dependency on the primary source, a lot of these could be referenced from third-party reliable sources. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:36, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
--Truco 503 20:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Weak Support -- I still feel there are issues with the article as stated below, but my comments were resolved.--Truco 503 19:08, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- No need to link United States.
- Fixed.
- "and is one of
onlyeight schools"- Fixed.
- "provide an Ivy League collegiate experience at a public school price." Per WP:PUNC, the quotation mark should be inside the period.
- Fixed.
- "During and slightly after the" "slightly after" sounds strange; how about "shortly after"?
- Fixed.
- "This explains the thirteen missing graduating classes" "thirteen"-->13 per WP:MOSNUM
- Fixed.
- "while graduate degrees can be earned " "while"-->and
- Fixed.
- "The College offers 36 undergraduate programs, 12 graduate and professional degree programs in business, education and law."-->The College offers 36 undergraduate programs as well as 12 graduate and professional degree programs in business, education and law.
- Fixed.
- "including the
veryfirst"- Fixed.
- "In academia, the College is home to the co-founders of the" So it literally houses these people?
- Fixed.
- "A number of William & Mary Tribe alumni"-->Several William & Mary Tribe alumni
- Fixed.
- "have found success in professional sports"-->have succeeded in professional sports
- Fixed.
- "Mike Tomlin (1995) is the current head coach of the NFL's Pittsburgh Steelers and became the youngest head coach in League history to win a Super Bowl at 36 years old."-->Mike Tomlin (1995), the current head coach of the National Football Leagues's Pittsburgh Steelers, became the youngest head coach in League history to win a Super Bowl, at 36 years old.
- Fixed.
- "The NCAA college basketball " Spell out NCAA on this first appearance.
- Fixed.
- "(In the event that multiple years are listed" Decapitalize the "In".
- Fixed.
- For the notation explanations at the end of the lead, wouldn't it make sense to link the full term rather than the abbreviation?
- Fixed.
Dabomb87 (talk) 16:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- All problems by Dabomb87 have been fixed.
- Noted; more coming. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- All problems by Dabomb87 have been fixed.
- Notes from Bencherlite
A good list, that with a bit more work will become one of Wikipedia's finest pieces of work, I'm sure. I have a number of points, some minor, some not, so mine is an oppose for now
- Two instances of "the The" or "the the"; change both to "the", per the next comment
- Fixed.
- Unless "the" comes at the start of a sentence, it shouldn't be capitalised – see here for an example of W&M not capitalising "the" mid-sentence.
- Fixed.
- My view (and others may differ) is that "the College" ought to be turned to "the college" throughout; I appreciate that W&M may refer to itself as "the College", but that doesn't mean that Wikipedia has to follow suit when talking about the institution in a general way.
- Fixed.
- "This list includes those who have either attended or graduated from the The College of William & Mary as well as every commencement speaker from 1930 through 2009. For inclusion on this page, the notable person must have attended William & Mary for a minimum of two semesters, or the historical equivalent. Those who either transferred to another university, dropped out, or were fully educated at the College but were never conferred a degree are also included." Two points (a) Why two semesters? Is that your standard for inclusion, or the college's standard definition of what's needed to qualify as an alumnus? (b) This paragraph should be lower down in the lead section.
- Fixed. (a) I removed that sentence entirely to avoid confusion. (b) Moved paragraph to just above notation at bottom of lead.
- Three names are referenced using NNDB which Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_26#NNDB this discussion at WP:RS would tend to suggest is not a reliable source. Can you find better sources?
- Fixed.
- Ref 14 and all other references from the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress: the surname should not be capitalised, even if the source capitalises it.
- Fixed.
- Ref 11 – the website says "(c) 2008", so you should use "date=2008" in the citation template; and the same for all references where any indication of the date of the website page is given.
Will work on soon.Fixed. If any references are missing a date, it's because none was provided for that site and/or article. All of those that do contain copyright dates now have them.
- Ref 109 (Henry Lee IV) and ref 143 (William Gilham) – use {{cite book}}, not {{cite web}}, and use all the appropriate parameters
- Fixed.
- What makes http://footballcardgallery.com a reliable source?
- Fixed. All references directing to that website have been changed to RS.
- There are too many names without articles. WP:STAND says that "Selected lists of people should be selected for importance/notability in that category and should have Wikipedia articles (or the reasonable expectation of an article in the future)." To be a properly-comprehensive list, these peoples should have articles written about them if they are notable in Wikipedia terms (as many would appear to be) or removed from the list if they are not notable in these terms.
- Fixed, although I would like to point out that I have left a handful of athletes (specifically basketball players) who do not have their own pages on the list. Since they are relatively new professional basketball players (most graduated this century) there is still high potential for someone to come along and make their pages. I got rid of at least 75% of all people who didn't have their own pages off this list. Some of the "fictional people" will obviously never have their own page, but for the sake of that specific category, I don't think it's fair to say to remove them.
- Following on from this point, what efforts have been made to make this as comprehensive a list as possible? I'm not expecting everyone who ever attended the college who is "notable" to be included, but I'd like some idea of the research that you've done to find names for the list.
- Response: A great number of them I incorporated via Category:College of William and Mary alumni (and its sub-categories). I also found a decent amount by using variations of keywords in Google, such as (but not limited to) "notable alumni", "William & Mary", "College of William and Mary", "famous alumnae" etc. I then checked Wikipedia to see if there were articles for them, and many times there were.
- The list of commencement speakers doesn't belong in this list, in my view. The list should be restricted to alumni (and that would allow the page to be renamed appropriately). Listing commencement speakers means that you list people with a purely trivial connection to the college e.g. Desmond Tutu. In any case, if the list stays (a) the list is in the wrong order (see this style guideline) (b) you ought not to be linking to another wiki for pre-1929 dates (c) there ought to be some link explaining what a commencement speaker is/does (I'm based in the UK and it means very little to me)
- Fixed. Per the suggestion, I moved the commencement speakers back to W&M's central article. When the time (inevitably!) comes that this is a FL, we can move the page to read "List of College of William & Mary alumni" then.
- If you want, we can move the article now, too. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm going to move the page to "List of College of William & Mary alumni". Consequently, I'm going to need to re-do all of the section redirects that are within the article itself. I'll begin work on that right now, so please don't mention that there are (at present) redirects in the article. It will be fixed soon enough.Fixed. Jrcla2 05:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- If you want, we can move the article now, too. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Per the suggestion, I moved the commencement speakers back to W&M's central article. When the time (inevitably!) comes that this is a FL, we can move the page to read "List of College of William & Mary alumni" then.
- What does "L.H.D." mean for Robert Gates?
- Fixed. That was a mistake on my behalf for putting that in there. I was quickly adding notable alumni toward the beginning of this process and put in an honorary degree for Gates, which is what L.H.D. is.
- Do you really mean "Never conferred a degree" for William Barton Rogers? Perhaps "Never obtained a degree" or "received" would be clearer, as "conferred" makes it sound as though he was conferring the degrees.
- Fixed. Changed "conferred" to "received" in all instances.
- "The College of William & Mary was also home to alumnus Jon Stewart." Dabomb87 raised this point above about another sentence, so it ought to be fixed here too.
- Fixed.
- "and George Wythe, the
veryfirst law professor in the United States." Dabomb87 raised this point above about another sentence, so it ought to be fixed here too.- Fixed.
- I regret your decision to remove images to avoid the requirement of alt-text. The list is duller as a result.
- Response: As nice as it would have been to have all of those pictures, I was just not willing to have to write alt captions for hundreds of face portraits, most of which looked the same (paintings of middle-aged, white male faces wearing white wigs...how many ways could I possibly describe that?). As aesthetically disappointing as that decision was, it wasn't a back-breaker for FLC status. List of Dartmouth College alumni doesn't use pictures and thats's a FL.
That's all for now; I'll keep on reading and see whether anything else catches my eye. (Incidentally, I speak as a veteran of several featured alumni lists...) BencherliteTalk 13:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed all of the above-mentioned objections raised by Bencherlite. Jrcla2 talk 20:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments – Just glanced at the sports part of the list, and I saw a few reference issues that I feel should be addressed.
- References 142 and 151 have no listed publishers.
- What makes the following reliable sources?
- http://www.thedraftreview.com/
- How is this not a RS?
- http://www.databasefootball.com/
- How is this not a RS?
- http://www.fanclub-teufelsrochen.de/roster.htm (This also lacks a publisher)
- http://yanks-abroad.com/
- http://www.campvarsityrunning.com/
- http://www.findagrave.com/ Giants2008 (17–14) 22:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: It's usually the nominator's job to prove whether a reference is reliable or not. To determine the reliability of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliability that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further information. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- http://www.thedraftreview.com/
- 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 not promoted by Matthewedwards 20:48, 2 August 2009 [3].
- Nominator(s): Sk8er5000 (talk) 09:24, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I have worked tirelessly for the last few days, and believe this article is now compliant with all the Featured List Criteria. When I started working on this list, prose was virutally non exsistant, and the table formatting was as far from standard as possible. I worked on improving references, the prose, and all the table formatting. I now believe this list now meets the Criteria, and will review the nomination frequently. -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 09:24, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"This list deals with albums that reached number one on the ARIA albums chart in 2008." This sentence is wholly unnecessary. Also, check the toolbox to your right; there's a disambiguation link to be fixed and several dead links (is the ARIA site down?). Dabomb87 (talk) 14:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed all. -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 19:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nice expansion. I made a few changes myself and have a few minor issues left, if you fix them I will support.
- Image caption "...and reached number two on the end of year albums chart". It sounds a bit strange, maybe "...and became the second most-popular album in Australia in 2008". Also could you link to List of Top 25 albums for 2008 in Australia?
- "This data are..." incorrect. Either "This data is..." or "These data are...", I would advice the first one.
- Remove the extra dot after ref [2].
That's it. Happy editing.--Music26/11 14:00, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Image needs alternative text. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Edited article per Music2611 and Dabomb87's suggestions. -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 21:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
|
- Support -- Previous issues resolved/clarified; list now meets WP:WIAFL.--Truco 503 20:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:05, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk) |
---|
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
Did the album's success led to the band's winning the Best Group award. Otherwise, it seems irrelevant. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. No issues left. Good work :) --Music26/11 16:14, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
--Crzycheetah 05:04, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
reset indent
--Crzycheetah 07:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Oppose
- A shame that physical media is a red link. Is there nothing you could link it to, or rephrase without linking and expanding to include compact disks, DVDs etc?
- Seems a little odd to me to use the ARIA abbreviation before explaining what ARIA is.
- Question : should end of year be hyphenated?
- "number one" or "number-one".
- Note: the hyphen usage depends on whether "number one" is used as a noun or an adjective. "Other albums with extended chart runs include Funhouse by Pink, which spent nine weeks at number one," but "number-one albums". I caught one unneeded hyphen, but everything else should be fine. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:05, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Was Pink's run consecutive or non-consecutive? Who actually had the most consecutive weeks at the top?
- "won the ARIA award for Album of the Year and Best Dance release" presumably these are separate awards, so it "won the ARIA awards for..."
- The repeated use of "week" in the table is unnecessary given the column heading. And I would centrally align that column.
- Sometimes there are multiple references so the column heading should be "Reference(s)".
- Sortable table so relink things on every instance, such as Jack Johnson.
- Presumably "Issue date" relates to the chart, not the album - I'd make that clear.
- Is it "Australian Recording Industry Association Ltd" or just "Australian Recording Industry Association"? (see refs).
- Is there a 2008 in music style category this could be added to?
- The Rambling Man (talk) 10:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note, user is on an enforced wikibreak until September.[4]
- 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 not promoted by Matthewedwards 20:48, 2 August 2009 [5].
Third time the charm... Nergaal (talk) 02:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- My issues were resolved in the previous FLC, and I see no further issues on my behalf ->Meets WP:WIAFL.--Truco 503 01:49, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Dabs and external links check out fine.--Truco 503 01:49, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) I'm copy-editing this article. I'll post any questions I have here.
- "Debra goes on a date with the prosthetics expert who worked on the limbs of an Ice Truck Killer survivor." What does it mean to "[work] on limbs"?
- Clearified.--Music26/11 08:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Meanwhile, Paul begins to slide back into his old habits when he" Habits of what?
- Clearified.--Music26/11 08:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "A call from her ex-husband makes Rita suspicious of Dexter and his behavior." Was it the call itself or something said in the call?
- Something he said in the call.--Music26/11 08:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done with the lead and first season so far. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:43, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "a used-car salesman who targets beautiful brunettes" What do you mean by "targets"?
- changed to kills
- "of ADA Miguel Prado" What does "ADA" stand for?
- expanded
- "Dexter and Rita try take a decision about her pregnancy" This phrase doesn't make sense.
- changed
- "Angel becomes entangled in a sting operation when he picks up a prostitute" "sting operation" is a bit jargony. Please clarify.
- wikilinked
- In episode 32, you say that Miguel made an unannounced visit to Ellen's house. In 33, you say that Ellen has disappeared. How did this happen? Dabomb87 (talk) 14:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- added explanation. how's now? Nergaal (talk) 00:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sources
- Ref 40 (IGN) is not formatted.
- Done.--Music26/11 16:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What makes http://www.buddytv.com/articles/dexter/cbs-welcomes-dexter-tonight-16698.aspx?pollid=360&answer=1444#poll360 reliable? Dabomb87 (talk) 14:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- BuddyTV is considered reliable because it bases its articles on published articles and press releases (which it sometimes also links too). The source for a BuddyTV article is always below the author's name (in this case Showtime and TV Guide). In addition BuddyTV is used in various new FAs ("Through the Looking Glass", "Pilot", "Premiere", "The Beginning of the End") on Wikipedia.--Music26/11 16:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm on the fence about it. Here's an LA Times article that can replace the air date source. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose
- Why not use Bloodstain pattern analyst rather than spatter?
- changed, but spatter is the term used on the show. Nergaal (talk) 04:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Premium cable channel is linked on its second use, not its first.
- done
- "Writer Daniel Cerone said ..." confusing whether this is the novel writer or the screenplay writer.
- done
- Why isn't a season 5 mentioned in the table, albeit with TBA all the way across?
- done, but it looks kinda bad. Nergaal (talk) 04:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Originally Aired in..." ->aired.
- done
- "DVD Release"->release.
- done
- No mention of DVD releases in the lead.
- You mention recurring characters by actor name, but I can't find who plays the protagonist anywhere.
- good catch. I added only the main actor, as the teenager protagonist is only a recurring one. Nergaal (talk) 04:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "1.1 million American viewers" presumably you mean viewers in America, not necessarily American nationality.
- done
- Why not use Bloodstain pattern analyst rather than spatter?
- Deal with those and I'll review the episode synopses as I'm a little pushed for time now. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Episode synopses
- "...to mysterious murder scenes ..." just murder scenes - the mystery follows and is evident for the lack of blood.
- "and a personal message" what personal message?
- Does Dexter work for just the Police Department or for the Homicide Department which Debra is trying to join?
- Not sure why we need to link "ice rink".
- " Here, Dexter selects his next murder victim" - where's "Here" in this case?
- "..is over-committed..." - could you explain this to me?
- Why is the killer suddenly "irritated"?
- "Rita takes drastic steps " tell it how it is - does she kill it? If so, say so, we're not trying to sell the show at this point.
- "Ice Truck victim" do you mean "Ice Truck Killer victim"?
- "nd decides to kill both of them. Afterwards, he dumps their bodies" - well, he didn't just decide, he actually did, so perhaps just "and kills them both."
- "described Jesus " - as in the Jesus or a character called Jesus?
- "strange suicide" what made it strange?
- "consummating it." consummating what? Presumably their relationship?
- "who he was told had died thirty years ago, has recently died" - reads poorly.
- "gathers its contents" of the whole house?
- "but is gripped by" - "but he is gripped by"
- Doakes or Sgt. Doakes? After you've said he's a Sgt (the first time) I think just Doakes is fine.
- "a real nightmare before Christmas" again, a little too much like trying to sell the show. Stick to the facts.
- not yet done. Nergaal (talk) 04:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Season premiere" is linked on the second occasion.
- " "The Ice Truck Killer's" -> the Ice Truck Killer's (i.e. not capital T and no need for the quotations any more - you didn't use them after the first use in season 1 synopses).
- "Miami Police Department" or "Miami Metro Police Department"?
- "played by Judith Scott" all the other instances you would have just written (Judith Scott) after the character's name.
- "eventually destroys the videotape" quite a leap from finding out he was filmed to discovering it and destroying it..
- "Dexter questions the inclusiveness of Harry's code when realizes"... word missing here?
- Episode 36 is redlinked, none of the others are, why?
- it is one of the few episodes that still definitely deserves a separate article. Nergaal (talk) 04:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- MOS says consistent date formats in references. Currently you have a mix of ISO and human-readable.
- ISO for accessdates and human ones for actual publishing dates. isn't that ok? Nergaal (talk) 04:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man (talk) 11:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment
- Per WP:RED I'd say all episode names without an article should still be linked. I know this was submitted before the "redlink" rule was put back in so it's may not subject to the guideline of 1/3, but they should still be linked - unless deemed not notable enough to get a wikipedia article? MPJ-DK (No Drama) Talk 10:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Replies gimme time till next weekend and I'll fix all of these issues. The redlink is because I think the episode deserves an article; all tge other episodes are probably less notable they probably won't get articles soon. Nergaal (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Technically you're going to overrun the nomination by quite a long way... would you prefer to take this offline and go for a fourth run? I think, as long as you are actively editing, the nomination can remain open, but if nothing's going to be done for a while, it may be better for us to restart when you're done? Just thinking out loud... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:00, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was not promoted by Dabomb87 22:35, 1 August 2009 [6].
- Nominator(s): iMatthew talk at 13:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've read this over a few times, and everything looks okay to me. However, when we write things, they always look fine to us. So any and all help is appreciated. Nonetheless, I believe it meets the criteria. iMatthew talk at 13:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment There's an error in Potvin's playoff stats:
. Otherwise it looks OK. --Maxim(talk) 15:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. iMatthew talk at 15:40, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There's one disambiguation link; check the toolbox. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:56, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. iMatthew talk at 17:23, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
|
- Neutral -- Previous issues resolved/clarified; 3b issue needs discussion.--Truco 503 15:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Support; although all issues were resolved and the list meets most of the criteria, I'm not sure it meets 3b, and it's worth more discussion. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk) |
---|
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
"The franchise has had a total of eleven team captains."-->The franchise has had 11 team captains.
|
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:17, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Netural I see it being FL level, but the possiblity it could be merged is still there so I don't feel like I should vote support nor should I vote oppose.--WillC 15:14, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Wrestlinglover
|
---|
|
- (ec) Oppose – 3b. Sorry to come in and drop a bomb on this discussion, but at the last NHL captains FLC, it was decided that a seperate list was unnecessary. Several reviewers, including myself, suggested that the captains be highlighted on teams' player lists instead. Taking into account the fact that this list is much shorter than the Blackhawks' list, I believe this fails the much-discussed new criterion against content forks. Giants2008 (17–14) 01:32, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd have to disagree. This list goes into more detail about the team's captaincy, and I do believe (not just because I'm looking for this to pass) that it deserves it's own article. It could probably be merged with the players list, but that gets rid of a lot of the information. It doesn't allow readers to know when the players was captain, and their statistics from their term as captain. iMatthew talk at 01:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think that Wikipedia's only coverage on the history of Islanders' captains should be covered by a silly color code on a (currently non-existent) table, containing every player to ever play for the team. iMatthew talk at 01:40, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've also questioned if this is long enough for its own article. I can see this easily fitting into another article.--WillC 01:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you read my reply? iMatthew talk at 02:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I did.--WillC 02:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking at the list again, I'd have to agree that this could reasonably be merged. If you wanted, you could create a separate section in the players list in which you could put this table. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:20, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think that's possible. The players list is already long enough as a plain list. It's on my list of projects to do. When I expand it, the list will be turned into a big table, like the other players lists. In that huge article, which I was trying to even cut in half (see User talk:Resolute) I don't see room for another list and more prose. iMatthew talk at 10:28, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- List of Chicago Blackhawks players has a paragraph in the lead on team captains, so some of that detail could be included in a players list. Also, I'd expect that all of the table's information would be included as well. Unfortunately, there's nothing unique about this list that merits a split, hence the 3b problem. Giants2008 (17–14) 22:13, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think that's possible. The players list is already long enough as a plain list. It's on my list of projects to do. When I expand it, the list will be turned into a big table, like the other players lists. In that huge article, which I was trying to even cut in half (see User talk:Resolute) I don't see room for another list and more prose. iMatthew talk at 10:28, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you read my reply? iMatthew talk at 02:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've also questioned if this is long enough for its own article. I can see this easily fitting into another article.--WillC 01:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - per 3b - sorry, but in my opinion, this list is a content fork because it can be merged.—Chris! ct 01:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you explain how it could be merged, and where? I gave an explanation above about why it really can't be merged. A list of team captains shouldn't have colors on a (currently non-existent) table be it's only representation on Wikipedia. It is a notable topic. It was also suggested adding the table and prose to the players list. That wouldn't work, because it's already very long. A discussion is even going on about splitting the goalies and skaters on the players list (into different articles) because it's so long. iMatthew talk at 11:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment -- I see how this could potentially be 3b, just because it passes the "theoretical" 10-item rule does not mean it automatically deserves a list by itself. The only way I see that this could pass 3b is if the tables were expanded to add more about the captains and not just stats, or just make 'em larger in general. If not, I think a fix-up of List of New York Islanders players might be needed and this captains list merged in there.--Truco 503 15:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree totally with Truco.—Chris! ct 19:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- If the Islanders players list proves to be too long, you can always split it alphabetically: List of New York Islanders players (A–M) and List of New York Islanders players (N–Z). Dabomb87 (talk) 19:22, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What additional information do you suggest adding to the table? Dabomb, then where would the team captains go? A-M or N-Z? iMatthew talk at 19:24, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You could put in a dedicated table for captains whose last names begin with the given letters, and use a {{see}} link for convenient access to the other list of captains. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:35, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What additional information do you suggest adding to the table? Dabomb, then where would the team captains go? A-M or N-Z? iMatthew talk at 19:24, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- If the Islanders players list proves to be too long, you can always split it alphabetically: List of New York Islanders players (A–M) and List of New York Islanders players (N–Z). Dabomb87 (talk) 19:22, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree totally with Truco.—Chris! ct 19:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - This is how it would look like if the article was merged into the main one. The only thing that could strike my oppose is if new information is given for the NYI captains. Also, could someone nominate List of Vancouver Canucks captains for FLRC? That would be appreciated. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 19:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll figure out what to do with it soon. I'll probably wind up merging it back into the main NYI article. Thanks for your input, everybody! Please close this as withdrawn, iMatthew talk at 22:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- ^ "Top 50 Albums (week of January 6, 2008)". australian-charts.com (originally from ARIA). 2008-01-06. Retrieved 2009-07-12.
- ^ "Top 50 Albums (week of January 13, 2008)". australian-charts.com (originally from ARIA). 2008-01-13. Retrieved 2009-07-12.