Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/FIP World Heavyweight Championship/archive1

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 23:23, 11 May 2010 [1].

FIP World Heavyweight Championship

Nominator(s): --WillC 12:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Featured list candidates/FIP World Heavyweight Championship/archive1

I am nominating this for featured list because... I worked on it about a year ago. Decided to try and raise it to FL status since it is long enough now. I completely re-did the article and I'm still looking for extra refs to add. I'm apart of the wikicup. Also, if anyone would like a list reviewed, just bring it up here or on my talk page and I'll find time to review it.--WillC 12:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was once nominated before, but when it was in list form as List of FIP World Heavyweight Champions. It is long enough now that the problems from it are no longer problems. See Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of FIP World Heavyweight Champions/archive1 for more info.--WillC 15:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

~~Should be a hyphen in "ROH promoted", I believe.~~
- Done--WillC 06:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~"A new champion is to be determined on April 17, 2010 at FIP's Southern Stampede event." It's now April 19. Surely an update of some kind is required?~~
- Yeah, I just recently updated the article. FIP had yet to update their site and no site has reviewed the event yet since it hasn't been released on DVD at this time. New champion has been added.--WillC 06:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Footnote 1: Remove apostrophe from second "wrestler's".~~ Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Done--WillC 06:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Emergence: Part Two - worth putting this in quotes I think because the sentence reads a bit strangely.
- Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"then–champion" hyphen, not en-dash.
- Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Again Fifth Year Festival: Liverpool could use quotes.
- Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"It has changed hands..." reiterate "The title has..." because you've talked about something different in the meantime.
- Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"in the finals of a two-night tournament on September 25, 2004 " two nights but one date?
- Fixed--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"has the least amount of total days" - "fewest total days"
- Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
" Masaaki Mochizuki's only reign, Moxley's only reign, and Richards's second reign are tied for the least successful defenses, with zero." not good either.
- Re-worded slightly.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Mochizuki and Moxley have the least combined defenses of all reigns, with zero." ditto. Perhaps "Neither Mochizuki nor Moxley have successfully defended their titles" or similar.
- Re-worded slightly.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"He defeated Roderick Strong .." why suddenly start repeating his first name?
- To idenify this as the same Strong as eariler.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Wrestlers" col heading should be just "Wrestler"
- Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would expect the vacated row to sort by # in chronological order i.e. between 11 and 12.
Ref col should be Ref(s).
- Done--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"With 26 successful defenses, Strong's first reign had the most during a single reign" not good at all. repeat of reign, and "had the most" what?
- I'm blank on what to change it too. Reads fine to me as is. Any ideas?--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - How about "Strong made 26 successful defences during his first reign, the most in a single reign"? Still repetitive but clears up my issue with the ambiguity of what "the most" means. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done--WillC 07:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What makes solie.org a WP:RS?

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Gets its information from wrestling corporations and books. Been regraded as reliable in other FLs plus GAs and FAs.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Can you show me where it says this? I'm sure it is used in other FAs, GAs etc, but I'm not trying to be deliberately difficult but I can't easily see how it meets WP:RS. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Their main page explains people and promotions that it gets its information from plus talks about the wrestling titles book that it also gets its information from.--WillC 07:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Being a professional wrestling championship, the title is won as a result of a predetermined outcome of a wrestling match. " do you have a ref for this?
- Pretty much common sense in wrestling, but placed in since it is significant to the title. I could find a ref if needed, but it has never really been a problem before with any other article with explanations of this sort.--WillC 06:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Common sense to you I agree. It's not like any other "professional ... championship" though, is it? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well it is like all other pro wrestling titles, but sports titles that would be a no. I'll start looking for a reference. Though the majority seem to know pro wrestling is scripted, so I would think it would be obvious.--WillC 07:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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