Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/July 2010

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 The Rambling Man 15:49, 6 July 2010 [1].

---

List of presidents of Washington & Jefferson College

Nominator(s): GrapedApe (talk) 17:21, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because...it seems ready. This is a unique list, since there do not appear to be any lists of presidents of colleges that have achieved FL status, so I had to create the format from scratch. Please see the peer review for background on how the current format came to be. GrapedApe (talk) 17:21, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Jujutacular T · C 17:46, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments Jujutacular T · C 18:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC) "established by three Presbyterian missionaries to the American frontier in the 1780s" - strange wording: shouldn't 'to' be 'on', or 'in'? I see your point, but I think that language is correct. It's like saying "missionary to India."--GrapedApe (talk) 01:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC) Oh! I see now. I was reading the sentence differently - I took it too mean "three log cabins...established...to the American frontier" which wouldn't make sense. I would say reword it, but this was probably my own misreading and not a problem. Jujutacular T · C 04:05, 19 June 2010 (UTC) "No one may be excluded from holding the presidency "account of the..."" - do you mean 'on account'? --Yep. Fixed "James Dunlap was a student of McMillan in his early years of teaching" - not immediately clear what this sentence means (pronoun usage - 'his'). Reword.--Reworded, as "one of McMillan's early students" In the 'Founding' section, the first sentence is nearly identical to one in the lead. Reword one of them to keep the reader interested.--mixed it up "...teaching mathematics and the classics" - what are the classics (wikilink it)? - linked A few dates in the Notes columns are separated by hyphens - should all be dashes. --done "A "–" indicates that the individual served as President pro tempore." Reword this sentence so the dash doesn't appear that near the beginning. A tad confusing as is. Also, move this point down to just above the first list section. Since that is acting like a key for the list, it seems to me that the symbol that is being identified is fine at the beginning of the sentence. Like, if you're reading the list and wondering what the hyphen means, you'd expect it to be on the left. As far as its placement below the lead, that seems right to me as well, since the "Founding and early leadership" section is part of the list, albeit in prose form. Let me know what you think about all of this.--GrapedApe (talk) 01:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC) Yea, later when I was reading through the lists I saw the dashes and thought, 'what do these dashes mean?', and immediately looked up and saw the dash at the front of that bullet point. It did seem odd to me however when I first got to it after reading the lead. What would you think of converting it to a note (cited to the notes section below)? Jujutacular T · C 04:05, 19 June 2010 (UTC) I think that placing that information in the Notes section would bury important information down towards the bottom of the page. I agree that its current location might not be odd, but I can't think of a better place for it.--GrapedApe (talk) 04:41, 19 June 2010 (UTC) I'd like to hear another reviewers opinion. If no one else thinks of better options I will support. Jujutacular T · C 06:13, 19 June 2010 (UTC) The current president: it says under "Term end" - "Present". Technically this would mean she is currently ending her presidency. Solution? Set to "Incumbent" to match List of Presidents of the United States.--GrapedApe (talk) 01:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC) Still a little strange, since I've only ever heard incumbent used to describe political candidates, not presidents of universities. How about putting a dash in that column and writing "Current president" in the notes column? Jujutacular T · C 04:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC) To be honest, I still think that just "present" works better. It seems intuitive. I don't think anyone would be confused by it.--GrapedApe (talk) 04:43, 19 June 2010 (UTC) Ditto as above. I'd like to hear additional opinion. Jujutacular T · C 06:13, 19 June 2010 (UTC) Not really a big deal actually. Jujutacular T · C 17:46, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• Support Jujutacular ^T · C 17:46, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• Support—everything looking good, no problems. Ucucha 17:16, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 06:19, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments "a historic building" in English I would normally see that as "an historic building" but perhaps USEng doesn't do that? Done Is the President a male-only post (as you use "he" a bit)? I suppose more pertinently, are women prohibited from the post? Aha, got to the end of the lead and found a woman. So does "provided he shall demean himself " still stand? That's apparently still language in the charter, but is apparently not used to exclude women from holding the office. I guess that's what you get when you operate under a charter written in the 1860s.--GrapedApe (talk) "A "–" indicates that the individual served as President pro tempore." would be better at the top of the table rather than at the end of the lead. Done Is it President pro tempore or president pro tempore? All instances of "president" or "president pro tempore" have been changed to lowercase, except for proper names like "Office of the President" and "President's House."--GrapedApe (talk) 20:58, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Any reason why to not make the tables sortable? It doesn't seem likely to me that someone would want to view the list in any way other than chronological. --GrapedApe (talk) 20:54, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Fair enough. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:19, 2 July 2010 (UTC) Ref 15 and 18 look identical to me. Done Ref 37 needs an en-dash. Done The Rambling Man (talk) 19:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Wizardman Operation Big Bear 04:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

*Comment: "Washington & Jefferson College originates from three log cabin colleges established by John McMillan, Thaddeus Dod, and Joseph Smith," They're linked in the lead, so they probably don't need to be again here.--done "In 1806, Matthew Brown began his term that would end in 1806" 'would end that same year' sounds better to me, less repetitive.--done Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

• Support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

• Ought to have stopped by earlier, as a lot of my nitpicks were dealt with during the peer review. Only two minor points remaining, I think: (a) I'm still not entirely certain what the President does, if anything (e.g. is it a ceremonial, or an executive, position?); (b) is Wikisource a reliable source? Bencherlite^Talk 10:53, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

(a): should be clarified in paragraph 3. (b): The wikisource text came from the Coleman book. I changed the references to go straight to the Coleman book instead.--GrapedApe (talk) 15:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

You missed one more instance of ref 7, but you could add a sisterlink template to the charter somewhere so the link isn't lost. Anyway, support. Nice work. Bencherlite^Talk 17:46, 5 July 2010 (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 The Rambling Man 15:49, 6 July 2010 [2].

---

List of Washington Capitals seasons

Nominator(s): -- Nomader ^(Talk) 03:02, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it now meets the FL criteria. I've based it mainly off of the List of New Jersey Devils seasons, which was in turn based on List of Calgary Flames seasons, List of New York Islanders seasons, and List of New York Rangers seasons. Sorry I haven't been around here lately, and I look forward to any feedback you have to give me. Thanks. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 03:02, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Support Comment Good work on addressing concerns (Wd like to know if there's a script for capping cmts) Sandman888 (talk) 20:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Sandman888 (talk) 21:39, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

* lead cd be longer, see List of FC Barcelona seasons for an example. To be fair, the Capitals don't have half the tradition FC Barcelona does-- the Caps have existed for less than half of the time that Barcelona has and Washington has never won a championship. I'll put in some more details around the edges and I'll make a note here once I've added to the lead. -- Nomader (Talk) 15:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC) Sorry for the time delay, but I've expanded the lead to address your concerns. -- Nomader (Talk) 23:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC) what makes hockey-reference.com a respectable source? Has any reliable third party commented on it? I used it because it's been used extensively in List of New York Islanders seasons and List of New Jersey Devils seasons. This is a Yahoo! Sports story about the website, although I'm not sure if that's a good enough source. If it isn't I'll ask WP:HOCKEY about it. -- Nomader (Talk) 15:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC) I'm not entirely convinced by a blog on yahoo. In fact the blog seem to lend greater credence to hockeydb.com. Why didnt you use that one instead? Sandman888 (talk) 15:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC) Actually, I did-- I used hockeydb.com for all of the general information in the graph (I listed it under "general" in the references section). However hockeydb.com doesn't have specific stats from the playoffs, so I used hockey-reference.com for playoff specific stats. It has precedent in the other lists I mentioned in the nomination so I figured it was reliable. I've asked WP:HOCKEY if they can show its reliability on their talk page here. -- Nomader (Talk) 16:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC) The NY Times uses it here as a source about Brian Leetch. -- Nomader (Talk) 16:11, 15 June 2010 (UTC) Hmm the NY Times ref is a little weak, as it is not a comment, and could be a sloppy journalist including a link. However if it's systematically used by the times, or any other newsservice, I'll grant that as evidence of RS. Sandman888 (talk) 19:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC) See all the news articles that talk about it here. Also, it's run by the same company (Sports Reference LLC) as Baseball-Reference.com, which you said you weer OK with here. Google News is usually good to prove a websites reliability. Mm40 (talk) 19:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC) I know what I've said. The respectability of baseball-reference does not spill over into hockey-reference.com. 14 news hits is hardly much, but some of the articles seem to comment on it, which proves reliability (for me). However on the WT:HOCKEY talkpage, it seems there are better sources available, so will not support using hockey-reference Sandman888 (talk) 20:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC) I've removed the www.hockey-reference.com references and replaced them with a reference from the Washington Capitals media guide per discussion at WT:HOCKEY. -- Nomader (Talk) 20:54, 17 June 2010 (UTC) I'm frankly curious - if a blog isn't convincing you of hockey-reference.com, why would the self-same blog convince you regarding hockeydb.com to the point where you recommend using it instead?  Ravenswing  16:15, 15 June 2010 (UTC) Obviously because the phrasing of the blog makes it highly likely that a reliable third party has commented on it, if it is self-published. Sandman888 (talk) 19:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC) note g doesn't read right to me. I tried to fix it up. -- Nomader (Talk) 15:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC) why two columns of seasons? Isn't one sufficient? You cd just include the NHL seasons as a see also. The amount of NHL seasons would just be overwhelming and would require another separate graph. The two columns allow the reader to look at both general information about the season while also allowing them to see specific information about the Capitals' performance that year. If you insist I can remove it but it was used in the List of New Jersey Devils seasons and I rather like the format. -- Nomader (Talk) 15:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC) I mean isn't there a "List of NHL seasons" or a template you can use instead? Sandman888 (talk) 15:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC) Oh, yeah there is: List of NHL seasons. I'll go ahead and remove that column and put that under a "see also" section. Sorry about the confusion. -- Nomader (Talk) 16:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC) Removed the column. -- Nomader (Talk) 16:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments – Did someone mention the Rangers season list I worked on? :-) Who better than the nominator of that list to review this one? First, I do think Hockey-Reference is reliable; it has passed muster in featured article candidate source reviews in the recent past. Of course, that doesn't mean it has to be used; HockeyDB.com is fine as well. More specific points: En dashes are needed for a few of the linked seasons in the lead. Looks like the links actually linked in the first part with en dashes but just used the "-"'s for the part that showed to the reader. Weird mistake on my part-- I went ahead and fixed them up. Comma should be used in the number 1200 toward the end of the first paragraph. Fixed. "The team set records in their inaugural season for their lackluster record." Some redundancy in the writing regarding "records" and "record". Would "performance" work for the second one. Good suggestion, I went ahead and changed it. "The Capitals won the Eastern conference...". Capitalize Conference? Changed. Reference 4 makes no mention of the Capitals drafting Ovechkin in 2004. I added in another reference which mentions both his draft and his recent importance to the team. Decapitalize Key in the Table Key heading, since it is not a proper noun. Done. Bolding is becoming discouraged as a way of highlighting items in tables. I know it isn't being used now, but it is listed in the key, and there's always the possibility that the Capitals could win the Stanley Cup in the near-future. I would recommend using italics to identify a potential Cup win instead. I went ahead and changed it in the key. If I may make one more suggestion, I think it would be better if italics was in alphabetical order in the key. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Alphabetized per your suggestion. -- Nomader (Talk) 23:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Reference 6 doesn't mention the Capitals at all. I don't think it needs to-- the Capitals are part of the NHL, and the source adequately explains why the amount of games changed from the prior season. If you think that's not sufficient though I'll go and see if I can wrangle something up. The reference number may have changed when you added the Ovechkin cite. The one I meant to refer to is current reference 7, which cites the note on the realignment. That reference doesn't mention the Capitals, though it can be used to cite the general fact that there was a change in the system. To cite the Capitals' placing in the Atlantic Division, you could use this Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Thanks for the reference-- I added it into the note. -- Nomader (Talk) 23:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Reference 1 needs an access date, along with a note that it is a PDF file. To do the latter, use the format= parameter of the cite templates. Added both. -- Nomader (Talk) 23:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC) I don't see the access date. Is the formatting correct? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Whoops. I wrote the parameter as "accesdate", not "accessdate". I changed the minor spelling error. -- Nomader (Talk) 23:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC) References 6, 7 and 11 should have the publishers in italics, since they are all printed publications. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC) Sorry, I wasn't familiar with the "cite news" template. Looks like it automatically italicizes for you-- I went ahead and fixed it up so it's italicized now. One more thing I just saw now: The totals are misaligned, as each row is one column right of where it is intended to be. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC) Whoops-- looks like I accidentally shifted all the columns over when I deleted one earlier. I'll see what I can do, gimme a sec here... -- Nomader (Talk) 03:35, 30 June 2010 (UTC) I went ahead and corrected the OT column of the chart, for some reason the totals were incredibly off. Otherwise I don't see the problem you were referring to. Do you see any other totals that are incorrect? -- Nomader (Talk) 03:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC) No, that fixed it. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• Support – After the resolution of the comments, everything looks to meet FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:07, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:39, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments Not sure either caption needs a period. Removed the period from both captions. "qualified for the Stanley Cup playoffs 21 times and have never won a Stanley Cup...." "and" seems a little odd here. Maybe "but"? Changed to "but", I think it works better. "The team set records in their inaugural season for their lackluster performance.[2] " discuss and quantify this please. They have the worst all-time NHL record with 70+ games, and they were just rather horrible. I'll dig around tonight when I get the chance for more specific sources. Here's the team page on Wikipedia, unfortunately mostly not sourced. It gives you an idea though about how awful they were. I specified about their record. -- Nomader (Talk) 13:37, 3 July 2010 (UTC) "and qualified for the playoffs for 14 straight seasons" for the next 14 seasons from their first qualification? it's unclear. I understand what you meant: I changed it to "... and qualified for the playoffs for 13 more seasons in a row afterwards." I'm not really a fan of what I changed it to, but I'll see what I can work with when I get back from dinner tonight. I reviewed it today but I can't really think of any better way to put it. Let me know what you think. -- Nomader (Talk) 13:37, 3 July 2010 (UTC) "for 4 of their next 5 seasons" - four of their next five... Switched to the words. I'd prefer to see the totals comma-separated for thousands. I added commas to all thousands-place numbers. Note g needs an en-dash, not a hyphen. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:52, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Changed to a hyphen. -- Nomader (Talk) 23:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• Comment: I see no issues myself, will support when TRM above marks his concerns resolved. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:45, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:32, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Support This is a very indepth list of the overall seasons with all of the FL criteria met.BLUE_DOG^TN 17:01, 5 July 2010 (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 The Rambling Man 15:49, 6 July 2010 [3].

---

List of FC Barcelona presidents

Nominator(s): Sandman888 (talk) 13:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this exciting list of Presidents of Barcelona to FL. It's been through PR and obtained two copy-edits by other editors. Sources should be a-okay. I have another list here, which has two supports and is a month old now. Sandman888 (talk) 13:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

• Disclosure: I have informed all reviewers of the previous article I've had here, to garnish reviews. Sandman888 (talk) 06:51, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments (sorry it's taken a while to get to this...) I think five paragraphs of lead is a little too much for a list of this size. Deleted some text. Consider a translation for the lead image, this is English Wikipedia and our target audience probably doesn't speak fluent Spanish. translation is in alt text, thought that was a neat solution. Do you think it should go under the picture? Maybe a little text box in the lead with the most relevant part of the advert would be neat? I like the alt text too though. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC) I put in a box, it's not very pretty, but okay. I would feel cheated as a reader if some parts where missing, so I think it shd include the whole translation. Sandman888 (talk) 12:55, 26 June 2010 (UTC) "Spain's first truly national league" what do you mean by "truly"? There where some attempts before 1929, but not all of Spain was included (but included more teams than in a strictly regional league). I've removed truly, as this is the first official league. advert->advertisement. Done "players of the standing of Josep Escolà," this is POV. Part of del. text "In 1978 Josep Lluís Núñez became the first elected president of FC Barcelona, and since then members of the club have elected the club president." was Nunez elected by members? If so then the subsequent sentence isn't strictly correct. "ever since", is that better? " longest serving" hyphenate. Done Be consistent with the diacritics on Nunez. fixed 1 instance two and a half or two-and-a-half... Both with hyphens. Worth mentioning Rosell in the lead as the "president-elect" Wrote a line. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:22, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you very much for the thorough review (and any pending). Sandman888 (talk) 20:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:07, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments – "taking over the presidency in order to save the club from extinction. Done "The process of electing a president of FC Barcelona was closely tied to Spain's transition to democracy in 1974 and the end of Franco's dictatorship." It would be nice if Franco was linked here. Linked Spain under Franco Few concerns regarding the last paragraph. First, what is Rosell's first name? Done This is the only place in the lead where Presidents is capitalized. Judging by the rest of the page, it shouldn't be. Done "and he will formally take over the presidency on June 1, 2010." That was almost four weeks ago. my mistake, is July, 1. This entire paragraph is only one sentence, which is not overly long. How about merging it with the prior paragraph? Doesn't really fit in. I wanted to wait to July 1 to make changes to it, didn't expect the FLC to take this long (nom. before election). Looked at as a whole, the lead is very long (currently seven paragraphs). In addition to the merge suggested above, the fourth and fifth paragraphs aren't long and seem like viable candidates for combining. That would leave five paragraphs, which is still long but not overwhelming. I am a bit confused, usually a long lead is a good thing. I've merged 4&5, but they are about different topics, hope none will mind that tho. Again, why is Presidents capitalized in the List of Presidents section heading? This should be consistent throughout, one way or the other. Yep, fixed. What makes Bleacher Report (reference 6) a reliable source? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:34, 26 June 2010 (UTC) Replaced with cnn ref. Thank you very much for the review, hopefully all concerns have been addressed. Sandman888 (talk) 20:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:07, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

• I have no problems with this becoming a featured list, although i have never edited in anything similar (club presidents, club owners, etc). However, it is definitely WP material. I am neutral. - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 01:54, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

• • Thank you for the review, if there's something you could see improved, please do advice :) Sandman888 (talk) 19:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
• I support the featured list nomination. However, I would suggest we remove the "Managing Commission" ones. I think it is better to see Joan Laporta listed as one single line instead of 2 lines. Jordiferrer (talk) 08:19, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

• • Thank you for the support, I can perhaps have both managing commissions included as notes rather than separate entries. Would that be better? Sandman888 (talk) 19:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Struway2 (talk) 14:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments haven't looked at the prose *Honours column. No need for microscopic font. full sized Nationality. I'm not totally comfortable with "nationality" at the head of a column of countries and present-day flags. In sportsperson lists, the nationality is the country for which they played or were eligible to play sport. What does it mean in context of this list? it's not nationality in the FIFA sense, but in the wp:names sense. Wd you rather do w/o the column? I've had little to do with non-sporting lists, so had a look at various FLs that use a country or nationality column, and there's quite a difference in approach. List of Nobel laureates in Chemistry has a note at the top of the country column which explains the meaning of "country" in that list, and the FLC had a lengthy discussion on the matter. The lead of Rumford Medal implies that the nationality column refers to citizenship, but there are few sources. And Freedom Award's nationality column doesn't appear to have any rationale at all: David Dubinsky (born in what was then Russia and is now Belarus, lived in Poland from age 3 and went to the States as a teenager) is listed as Russian, David Sarnoff (born in what was then Russia and is now Belarus, went to the States age 9) is listed as American, and Prince Sadruddin Aga Khan is listed as all sorts of things. I have no issue with a column for nationality, even if it just means how the people concerned were described at the time (like English isn't really a nationality, but people were referred to as English whether technically they were or not). But, in my opinion, they do need sources, and they do need a note clarifying what "nationality" refers to. The flags should go, though. They add nothing apart from decoration, it's anachronistic to use modern-day flags, and we get into all sorts of complications about whether to use the historically-appropriate flag for when the person was born, when they were president, or what. I believe the Spanish flag changed on a regular basis during the 20th century. No flags now. If flags where used, they should be for when they became notable, i.e. were presidents (just like nationality). Of course that period can coincidence with flag-changes, but that is just the same problem with nationality. However I do think the use of historical flags (which is used all the time on es.wiki) wd add some nice historical information to the list. Sandman888 (talk) 12:01, 30 June 2010 (UTC) *What's the source for Otto Gmelin(g) being German? His FCB page doesn't give a nationality, and also spells him without the final 'g'. this Austrian site has him as German, http://www.laola1.at/911+M5fbf8538dcb.html, with extra G. There is a trend in Catalonia to 'localize' foreign names. References. Please give the actual titles of the pages as the reference titles. e.g. the page cited at ref#5 is entitled From the 75th Anniversary to the European Cup (1974-1992), ref#12 is Managing Commission (2006), etc... Done Ref#1: the English for Athletic Club is Athletic Bilbao, so for clarity, that's what I'd use as the publisher (either instead of Athletic Club, or in brackets after it) the team is known as Athletic Bilbao, but the publishing entity is Athletic Club, since the other doesn't exist. I do not believe we use common name for publishers. Ref#3: needs a publication date done Ref#5: the page cited doesn't have a publication date, and if it did, I don't think it'd be 1992 done *Ref#9 has lost its year retrieved done *Ref#6: I'd also question the reliability of Bleacher Report. Need to see some evidence of editorial control, fact-checking, etc. this gives 240 results for Bleacher Report reports at cnn.com - see also http://bleacherreport.com/about I'm aware that some of the articles first published on Bleacher Report are syndicated to other publications. But it's still a community where anyone can write an article, and from the FAQs I can't tell whether the editorial process concentrates on libel and literacy or whether it goes deeper than that. However, even if that writer's view of that part of the club's history is a reliable source, I can't find where it actually verifies "After the departure of Núñez in 2000 came some initial instability when Joan Gaspart took over the club in 2000." (hadn't noticed the repeated "in 2000" til I c&p'd that sentence :-) Uhh, rmvd second 2000. Have replaced source with cnn ref, and re-written to reflect that. Sandman888 (talk) 12:01, 30 June 2010 (UTC) In the lead, you use both the Spanish and Catalan names for the Catalan championship. One or the other, presumably the Catalan, would be best. And you only need to link it on the first mention. Done Your general reference, and even the Catalan-language version, uses Hans rather than Joan Gamper. Joan Gamper is the common one (123.000 on google vs 12.000 for "Hans Gamper") Tomàs Rosés should have a grave accent not an acute My mistake. Done But I'd definitely expect Montals father and son to sort under 'M' rather than 'C' and 'G' respectively? oh yes, certainly. For information, the link=off parameter in the date sort template isn't needed and advice is to remove it. date-script introduced it for some reason. Removed. Presume in the names, you've chosen to use just the one surname apart from to distinguish the Montals, but was wondering why Joaquim de Vargas rather than Joaquim Peris de Vargas? I don't understand that sentence. Sorry, I often fail to make myself clear. The Barca website lists him as Joaquim Peris de Vargas, and that's also the name of his WP page. If Vargas is his paternal surname, and Peris a forename, it seemed inconsistent to omit Peris when you included a second forename in Josep Lluís Núñez. Yes of course. Fixed. I'm sure you'd know this better than me, but is it right that Narcís de Carreras etc should sort under 'd'? see Spanish naming customs At both the Spanish and Catalan WPs, Narcís de Carreras is sorted under 'C'. Also, Enric Martí Carreto is listed as Martí i Carreto, sorted under 'M', which looks to me like Martí is his paternal surname rather than a second forename. Good call on Martí. Hmm. Sometimes people include the de/De. I'm not sure whether they shd sort one way or the other, but I've changed to the catalan convention you presented. One thing you may want to consider in future, if you have what appears too much information for the lead section, is separating the detail into a history section, leaving a basic lead, as was done at List of Manchester City F.C. managers. made it as such. Now the lead is a presentation to what FC Barcelona is, which, I must remind you, is often requested by a non-football editor at PR. Indeed. Though as this article deals with the club's presidents, a brief presentation of the president's role and how he is chosen should also appear in the lead. wrote a bit more. If you think a more formal presentation of the presidency is in order I have the statues kicking about somewhere. Content's fine by me, maybe the new stuff in the prose could do with a look-over by a friendly native-speaker, if such exist Struway2 (talk) 19:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC) Thank you vmi for the review. Hopefully all concerns have been addressed. Sandman888 (talk) 20:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC) More comments:

• There are 16 redlinks, and 23 blue. If all the redlinked persons are notable, then I wonder whether 16 out of 39 presidents i.e. 40+% satisfies Criterion 5a: "a minimal proportion of items are redlinked". I'm not a fan of the mass creation of unsourced uncategorised stubs "Fred Smith is a footballer who played 120 times for Template FC." like used to happen when redlinks weren't allowed at all, but I've opposed at other FLCs on this point and will probably do so here. The directors and other reviewers may well take a different view of the interpretation of "minimal".
  • Tbh, I'm unsure if the first couple of presidents can be said to be notable. Barcelona wasn't the same back then as it is now and several of the redlinks have only been there for a very short time. They are not covered by WP:ATHLETE, so wd like some input on this Sandman888 (talk) 11:02, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
    • It comes down to whether the president of FC Barcelona is inherently notable. If they're not, which is probably the view I'd take, then those names currently redlinked should be de-linked and the minimal proportion problem disappears. See what other people think. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 14:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
      • I doubt we can say that without overriding regular guidelines. I think it wd be dubious at best, to make the presidency of FCB a sufficient criteria of notability. Sandman888 (talk) 15:00, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
    • Now you're down to 6 redlinks out of 34 definitely-and-or-possibly notable presidents, I won't oppose on 5a. Struway2 (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Support on everything but prose quality, I haven't reviewed the prose and will leave it to others to decide on that. After a considerable amount of work, I think the list now satisfies the remaining criteria. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Wizardman Operation Big Bear 22:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

*Comment: "the club has changed president a total of 44 times." changes presidents sounds better to me. Would it not be easier and more direct to just say "The club has had [insert number of presidents] presidents"? Dabomb87 (talk) 03:47, 3 July 2010 (UTC) "the club has had 39 different presidents." is inserted. Sandman888 (talk) 06:32, 3 July 2010 (UTC) "The club is owned by the members of FC Barcelona," the link goes to the supports of FC Barcelona; when I hear member, I think of the players and managers on the team, which doesn't seem to be the case. Maybe just have the link show as Supporters of FC Barcelona? well if you (right now) became a supporter of FCB, in the ordinary sense, that wd not make you a member. how about "club-members" ? That sounds better, yes. Wizardman Operation Big Bear "Núñez' main objective was to develop Barça into a world-class club" Núñez's you mean? Changed it. "During his two-and-a-half years with the club, the club won no trophies and, after three years Gaspart resigned his position immediately on February 12, 2003" Two things here. First, was it 2.5 or 3 years? Needs consistency. Second, immediately's probably not needed, since it brings a reader to a halt halfway through a sentence, if that makes sense. yeah makes some sense. now is "During his presidency of the club, the team won no trophies and, after two-and-a-half years Gaspart resigned his position on February 12, 2003" Put periods at the end of captions. If it feels like a fragment then expand it slightly. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:17, 3 July 2010 (UTC) added one period. Thanks for the review, hope everything is in order! Btw do you have a comment on whether the redlinked presidents are really notable (see struways cmt above) Sandman888 (talk) 06:32, 3 July 2010 (UTC) As for the presidents, I would think the president of a major club is notable. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:23, 3 July 2010 (UTC) Yes on that we agree, as a rule of thumb a president of a major club is notable (as there isn't a policy for this). But does that also mean that previous presidents who were in charge when the club wasn't well known, as a rule of thumb, will probably meet the general notability guidelines? Sandman888 (talk) 19:29, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

• Support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 22:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

• (OD) I've created some stubs and delinked some who where presidents < 6 months and no honours. There are 6 redlinks left, and all of them have been president for more or less a year and won no honours. Shd they be delinked? Sandman888 (talk) 16:05, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
  • It doesn't matter to me either way personally. They can stay linked, that's fine. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 22:02, 5 July 2010 (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 Dabomb87 14:51, 2 July 2010 [4].

---

List of number-one singles from the 1970s (UK)

Nominator(s): Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:41, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because over the past month it has been extensively re-written from this to its present form. The expansion started when I was background reading for (recent FL) List of Record Mirror number-one singles and I just got a bit too involved so here I am again. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:41, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Support.Oppose A few problems need to be resolved:

Resolved comments from Ruslik_Zero 18:10, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

#The UK Singles Chart is a weekly record chart. In the 1970s, it was compiled each week... There is no need to repeat two times that it is a weekly chart. Removed first instance. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC) Prior to 1969 many newspapers commissioned their own music charts but, on 15 February 1969, the BMRB was commissioned I do not like two "commissioned" in one sentence. Yes, the first instance was incorrect. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC) The chart was published weekly with a two-week break at Christmas; This repeats what was already said in the first two sentences. Whoops, sorry about that. Fixed, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC) Thirteen records were released and sold one-million copies within the decade and "Mull of Kintyre" became the first ever single to sell over two-million copies. Do you mean "over one-million copies"? It is unlikely that they sold exactly one million. In addition, does these thirteen include "Mull of Kintyre"? Done, and yes it does. Clarified slightly by putting "also". Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC) Were all these thirteen records number-one singles? Yes they were. And I believe per WP:LEAD is summarises the "#Million-selling and platinum records" section. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC) "Mull of Kintyre" was the biggest selling song of the decade This repeats the previous sentence. Nor true. It was the first to sell >2m but that does not necessarily mean that it was the best seller of the decade. In the 'Million-selling and platinum records' section. Are "Merry Xmas Everybody" and "Another Brick in the Wall (Part II)" same "two number-one songs from the 1970s were classified as platinum in the subsequent decade"? Yes, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC) Ruslik_Zero 15:49, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, for your comments. Much appreciated. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

• Comment - the images need to be placed better. On my monitor I have to scroll down through nearly three screens' worth of blank white space with images at the right before I get to the first table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

  Out of interest what resolution are you running and do you the same problem with this? The table is obviously a bit too wide for your monitor but I cannot tell by how much. I've forced some wrapping which has taken quite a bit off the width but I don't know if it is enough for you. Unfortunately this is also one of the adverse affects that increasing thumbnail sizes would have. Can you let me know if it is better now or, roughly, how much is left to go. Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:58, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

  On the 2000s list I only get a small whitespace before the 2009 table, the rest is OK. On this list the whitespace is now down to about 2.5 screens' worth. Apparently (someone more knowledgable than me tells me) my resolution is 1280 x 1024 pixels, hope that means something :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:04, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

  Okay I've reduced the image sizes. Is it any better? I must say this problem suprises me as the table wraps on my computer until the window is very thin. Do you have quite a narrow monitor? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

  My monitor's approximately 34cm wide. Is that narrow? I don't know..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:48, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

  Are you measuring diagonally? If so, that would be about 13 inches, which is pretty narrow. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

  No, side to side -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:57, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

  Hmm, in that case it seems your monitor is smaller than any of those listed at viewable image size. See this for an idea of the sizes people mostly use. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 07:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

  It's 17" diagonally. Blame work, they gave it to me :-) But if I've got some sort of freaky-weird non-standard monitor and it displays OK on all normal ones then I guess I support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

*Comment: "The longest duration of a single at the top spot was 9 weeks and this was achieved on three occasions:" The number can be spelled out. Plus, this can be split (i.e. ...nine weeks. This was achieved...) "The 1970s also saw the formation of the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) who classified the sales of records over certain thresholds:" You use a much more specific date (April 1973) later on; does that work up there too? "after sales from it's re-release were included." Remove apostrophe. Just fix these and I'll support. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:19, 21 June 2010 (UTC) All done, thanks for taking a look. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

• Support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:57, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments Opening sentence is a little bit weak. Is there no other really top-level info you could add here to bulk it out a bit? Better? Record Retailer is overlinked in the lead. Done "the full amount of sales figures" is there really a need for "amount of" here? Contextually yes, as it was a sample not the full sales figures. Clarified now. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC) "by phone" "by telephone" Done "sales figures" used three times in two sentences. Done "The longest duration of a single at the top spot " -> "at number one" to avoid quickly repeating "the top spot". Done "were released and sold over" I think "which" (or "that") rather than "and". Done You link £ on its second use. Done Abba image seems to be missing the thumb parameter (at a guess)? Done According to us, "Boney M" is "Boney M." Not sure about this. The source gives it without the period as does a chart scan from 1978. I prefer to go with sources rather than Wiki. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Actually, having looked at the singles and album covers for the band they all have "M." so I guess in this case the official source is overruled. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Also "I Love to Love (But My Baby Loves to Dance)" doesn't capitalise the t of To. Done "December, 1963 (Oh, What a Night)" doesn't have a , after December. It does in the official source though. What do you suggest? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Song page moved. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Ernie's The should be a the. Done Hit Me with Your .. not Hit Me With Your... Done "Oh Boy" links to "Oh Boy!". Updated link destination, but pipe remains as it was changed stylistically on rerelease - see sources. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Check capitalisation of Like to Teach the World to Sing... And Love Me For a Reason. And Cum On Feel the Noize. And The First Cut is the Deepest. I know these redirect adequately but it'd be better to have titles Wikipedia-internally-consistent with their articles. Isn't "The First Cut Is the Deepest" instead of "The First Cut is the Deepest" fairly strange by how songs are normally named? I've fixed the others. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Well the album has the track name in ALLCAPS. So I guess Yahoo! music and Last.fm are the next best sources which suggest capital "Is", however they may have just copied the Wiki title. Anyway, changed link in list accordingly. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC) We also seem to have a space for T. Rex Done, all spaced. Brotherhood of Man, not Of. Done Floyd's en-dash breaks the year of millionth sale sorting, and why is it an en-dash in any case? Um, it isn't an ndash (it's an mdash) and it doesn't break the sorting. For me at least. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 12:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC) As always, thank you for your thorough review. I believe I have addressed you comments with queries mainly about whether we should follow sources or current article names? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC) You got yourself a B+, the em-dash kills sorting in Safari. A typical problem for me.... As for the odd capitalisations here and there, my preference would be to make the Wikipedia correct per reliable sources. If that means moving destination pages, then so be it... Happy with everything else... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Okay, moved one page and found good reason to deviate from offical type listing in the other cases. Hopefully it is all sorted now. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

• Support The Rambling Man (talk) 18:38, 1 July 2010 (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 Dabomb87 14:51, 2 July 2010 [5].

---

List of Madonna concert tours

Nominator(s): --Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe this is a comprehensive list of Madonna's world and promotional tours, as well as her live performances. The article has gone through a Peer review and hence I believe that with the consensus of my fellow editors, the article can be promoted to a Featured List. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TbhotchTalk C. 16:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

*Comments by TbhotchTalk C. Lead X-STaTIC PRo=CeSS -> Wikilink Wikilink will take you to Steven Klein's page. Is it appropriate to have same links twice? --Legolas (talk2me) 12:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC) I thought it had its own article. TbhotchTalk C. 17:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC) grossing tour ever for a female artist -> grossing tour ever for a female artist at that time Done Reference 9 -> ISBN failing Google gives this isbn only *confused* --Legolas (talk2me) 12:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC) According to this the ISBN is 9085950026 not 9085950023, but the first does not appear too. TbhotchTalk C. 17:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC) I'm so sorry. I corrected. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:08, 16 June 2010 (UTC) Concert tours Duration (for all) -> Source? This doesnot require source as it is taken from the article itself. OK The Virgin tour Critics panned the tour, calling it atrocious and deducting that Madonna "will be out of business in six months". -> Source? Added Taraborrelli. were completely sold out in a record-breaking 34 minutes. -> Source? Added. million.[15][1] -> million.[1][15] Who's That Girl World Tour Reference 16 -> ISBN failing, I think you should change it for the ISBN I provided you at Spotlight (song). Added that. Blond Ambition World Tour aka -> also known as Reference 19 -> ISBN failing Worldcat lists it with the same isbn as Google. False positive, sorry. TbhotchTalk C. 17:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC) Promotion tours Duration (for all) -> Source? As before. Don't Tell Me Promo Tour were

• Thanks a lot for your comments. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

  Your Welcome Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• Support. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 16:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

• Live Performances

The The Power of Good-Bye and Shanti/Ashtangi and Ray of Light performance order is incorrect, the vmas was before the emas. Also the 2005 ema Hung up performance is not included. Johnnyboytoy (talk)

• • It was added. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:08, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from 12345abcxyz20082009 (talk) 15:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments Comment: Well, this is a good list, definitely FL material, so my objections are just nit-pickings. "and in Italy the Pope called for a boycott". "in Italy" is an apposition, so it must be separated by commas. Done. "dancers of both sex" -> "dancers of both sexes" Done "Madonna was inspired to create the tour, after taking part[...]". No comma. Done. "This record was broken in 2008 with the[...]" Those words are used in the previous sentence. Maybe reword it to "This feat was surpassed in 2008"? Good. Is it worth noting that Madonna hasn't toured Australia since 1993 and has since apologized for it? Added a small part. In the Virgin Tour synopsis "Madonna" is repeated too often. Corrected. Is the "See also" section needed for one link? You can link it in the lead, here: "Sticky & Sweet Tour, which went on to become the highest grossing tour ever by a solo artist". Done. Well, that's all from me. I'll happily support once these minor tweaks are done.--12345abcxyz20082009 (talk) 22:48, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

All concerns have been addressed. Thank you for your comments. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:48, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

• Support. --12345abcxyz20082009 (talk) 15:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
• Support. WereWolf (talk) 03:08, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments "concert tours, seven of which have been world tours" any way to avoid repeating "tours" in here? Changed. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) " Her 1985 debut, The Virgin Tour, was based in North America only. Critically panned, the tour went on to collect more than US $17 million." I'd merge these two sentences. Joined? --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) "embarked" repeated rather quickly. Find another phrase. Done. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) "showmanship and exquisite dresses" -> is "exquisite" a quote? If so, put in quotes, if not, it's a bit POV. Quoted. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) "an Afro wig" is this clear to our international audience? changed to the wikilink, that should be clear enough. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) "Madonna once the Harlow harlot and now a perky harlequin, is" this is a direct quote, are you sure there isn't a comma before once? Ya there is, sorry. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) "ne of the most successful and highest-grossing concert tour" -> tours. Done --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) "top grossing tour" hyphenate? Done --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) Same for "highest grossing" Done --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) "Both Confessions and Sticky & Sweet Tours had planned to go to Australia.." don't think the tours themselves had planned that, maybe "the tours had been planned to ..." Tweaked. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) "record breaking" hyphenate. Done --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) "prestigious" cite. Removed for POV. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) Ref 38 has "Jo Whiley" while all other refs are surname, first name. Corrected --Legolas (talk2me) 06:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 20:19, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

• Comment: Make sure American English is used in this article, as Madonna is an American recording artist. For example, favorable, not "favourable". That's the only issue I found, fix anything like that and I'll support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
  • LOL, even I found that spelling to be non-American only. Gave a thorough read nevertheless. :) --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:10, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:47, 1 July 2010 (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 Dabomb87 14:51, 2 July 2010 [6].

---

Hugo Award for Best Novelette

Nominator(s): PresN 04:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

In what must be a total surprise, fresh after the successful Novel and Novella FLCs, here is the Hugo Award for Best Novelette. The works are shorter but the lists are similar, so as before, any concerns raised in the other FLCs have been fixed here as well. Thanks for voting! --PresN 04:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Support. This list is of the same quality as Hugo Award for Best Novel, which I supported. Ruslik_Zero 17:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

• Comment: "or Worldcon, and the presentation evening constitutes its central event." the evening presentation would sound better, I think. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 21:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

• Except that Worldcons are 3-4 days long. I made it "award presentation". --PresN 23:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

• Support. I just realized I never finished this review up. I didn't find anything else though. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:53, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

• Support - Looks as good as the other Hugo Award lists. GamerPro64 (talk) 13:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
• Support The Rambling Man (talk) 18:26, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

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