Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/September 2012: Difference between revisions
Withdrawn |
add one |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Featured list log}} |
{{Featured list log}} |
||
{{TOClimit|3}} |
{{TOClimit|3}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/ |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Neftchi Baku PFC in European football/archive1}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Danuta Gleed Literary Award/archive1}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Danuta Gleed Literary Award/archive1}} |
Revision as of 07:33, 18 September 2012
- 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 The Rambling Man 07:33, 18 September 2012 [1].
- Nominator(s): --►Safir yüzüklü Ceklimesaj 11:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list as I believe, that after quite some work, it's ready for FL Status. --►Safir yüzüklü Ceklimesaj 11:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - not ready for FLC.
- Lead is too short per WP:LEAD.
- Lead bold links incorrect per WP:CONTEXTLINK.
- References need to be correctly and comprehensively formatted.
- Whole article is referenced to "wildstat.com", is that a reliable source? Links don't even work for me.
- Basic issues like you have Q1 in the key and 1Q in the table.
Overall, just feels really lightweight, there's no analysis of any of their major games, look at Liverpool F.C. in European football for instance. And note that's a featured article, not list. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per The Rambling Man. Article is in need of expanding. And, if enough information can be added, it may work better as an FAC. Also create a talk page for this. TBrandley 20:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments Thank you for your attention. Some information has been added. Example FL: Rosenborg BK in European football. --►Safir yüzüklü Ceklimesaj 07:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- Why is the title repeated in bold before the first paragraph?
- Much of the lead is written in quite poor English, the second half should read as follows:
“ | Neftchi Baku PFC's biggest win in Europe is a 3–0 victory over FC Zestafoni in the 2012–13 UEFA Champions League.
In 2012, Neftchi Baku became the first Azerbaijani team to advance to the group stage of a European competition. The club has an excellent European cup record, having not lost at home since the 1999–2000 season. Neftchi Baku's home games are usually played at the Tofiq Bahramov Stadium in Baku. The stadium was built by German prisoners of war in 1951 and constructed in the shape of the letter C to honour Stalin (Cyrillic: Cтaлин), however it was renamed after famous football referee Tofiq Bahramov in 1993 after his death. The stadium also serves as the home ground of the Azerbaijan national football team and holds 30,000 spectators making it the largest stadium in the country. In 2011, Neftchi's domestic games moved to the Ismat Gayibov Stadium. |
” |
- Also, there are three paragraphs in the lead which are each a single sentence
- And what's with the ticks and crosses in the table?
Hope this helps -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:21, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for your help. --►Safir yüzüklü Ceklimesaj 08:08, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment – On a brief glance, I see stubby paragraphs in the lead, MoS violations (refs before punctuation), a usage of check marks in the table that I haven't seen before, and many references missing information (publishers and access dates). This still needs a lot of work, and if that work isn't done I'd be inclined to close this FLC. Giants2008 (Talk) 19:11, 11 September 2012 (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 Giants2008 16:18, 8 September 2012 [2].
- Nominator(s): Kürbis (✔) 19:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A short article about a short story prize. Regards. Kürbis (✔) 19:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Hooray, literary award lists! I'm a fan, for some unknowable reason. Anyway!
- "The annually prize was founded"
- Fixed
- The first two paragraphs are two sentences each- why?
- Reorganized
- "His wife's work, One for the Chosen, [...] is still flowing into the award funds." - what? How is a book flowing into the funds?
- Reworded
- "The prize money for the winner was increased from..." It's technically fine but feels abrupt- why not say that it's 10k for the winning work, and was 5k prior to 2004? Or that it was 5k when the work was created, but was increased to 10k in 2004? Describing the change prior to either of the two states feels strange.
- I reworded
- "The year's shortlist is certain in May..." certain? You mean chosen/decided? And chosen by who- the writer's union?
- Done
- "...and publishers, for example [blah] in 2011" - "...publisher, for example, [blah] were judges in 2011". It needs to be an independent clause, it feels all weird like it is, and needs a comma after 'example'.
- Done
- Fun, a one-sentence paragraph at the end!
- Merged with first para
- Maybe before you describe the differences between this award and some other award, you should describe what the other prize is? As in, "there is another Candadian short story award, the x award, which is given by so-and-so for best short story debut".
- Done
- Also, define what you mean by publisher-independent.
- It is independent to any publisher, ie indie works
- Do you have any information on why this award matters? Like, sources saying it is an important award, or barring that sources just talking about the award- I mean, I would assume an award by the Canadian Writer's Union is pretty legit, but I shouldn't have to assume, you should tell me how prestigious it is.
- There are not much information, I am afraid.
- My eyes! Why is the list header bright red?
- Blame the Canadian flag >:)!
- Only two of the years have references? I'd expect them all to, and those refs to be in a seperate "ref." column
- I added an external links section with all the winners and nominees.
- That's a whole lot of whitespace- consider making the list wider, maybe centering it in the page.
- Do we have any information on the other nominees for each year? Seems like we do, at the writersunion site. They also mention the publisher of each work- why is that not here?
- Basically, while I'm obviously biased, I would expect the list table to look more like Hugo Award for Best Short Story or Nebula Award for Best Short Story - showing the other nominees (especially as it looks like the Writer's Union notes the runners-up) and the publishers/publications.
- Good suggestion. I reformatted the table. I will do the publisher column.--Kürbis (✔) 14:35, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done
- You don't have a publisher listed for the globe-and-mail cite.
- Consider archiving your online references so your citations aren't wiped out if the specific pages you're referencing are removed/changed.
- Thanks for your review. I will reorganize the table first, then working on the prose, MOS and references. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 15:03, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I replied to the remaining comments. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 17:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Why do you call out the "other nominees" with green and dagger symbols, but leave the runners-up with nothing? Shouldn't it be the other way around, since the runners-up did better than the other nominees? (Runner up means second place, after the winner). Also, publishers/ publications should be linked, if they have an article, and you still have some of the publishers italicized- Bloomsbury USA isn't a book, its a company, and neither is Little, Brown, and Co., or most of the things you have italicized. --PresN 15:01, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, different people tell me different things, but ok I will do this. Regarding your first question: because I feel that the second place is the golden medium. This system may be compared with a podium. But I may change it anytime. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 15:37, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I deitalicized all. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 10:04, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Oppose
The Rambling Man (talk) 09:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
|
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.