Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Women's 400 metres hurdles world record progression/archive1

Women's 400 metres hurdles world record progression

Featured list candidates/Women's 400 metres hurdles world record progression/archive1

Nominator(s): Editør (talk) 01:40, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because after rewriting the lead and cleaning up the table, I believe it passes the FL criteria. – Editør (talk) 01:40, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See also the new 100 metres candidate. – Editør (talk) 22:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by ChrisTheDude

The lead seems rather thin at just 104 words. Given that the article is about the progression of the record, could you add some content about some of the changes between the first and last?
Adding some images would improve the article
It looks weird to have a key containing three items which aren't used anywhere in the list, and a "status" column which is completely blank. I would suggest removing both the key and that first column. If you feel the article needs to state that all records have been ratified, write that as a sentence above the table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:35, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comments. I've added some statistics and a photo and I've removed the Status column and legend. – Editør (talk) 10:09, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The status and legend are standard elements on all of these world record progression tables. They may not be relevant to a specific article at any particular point in time, but are a general standardized feature so any initial reader of any of these will find the same information, rather than having it missing on some. It's removal here because of the above comment upsets that system. Trackinfo (talk) 08:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ChrisTheDude, with the new world record of 30 June 2024, I have added the letter P as standard athletics abbreviation for 'pending ratification' after the time instead of the previously removed explanation. – Editør (talk) 20:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by MPGuy2824

Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | 1987 becomes !scope=row | 1987 (on its own line). The primary column needs to be unique across rows, so either the time or the date works for this table.
Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:37, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given the nature of this table where each element in a row is variable, I don't think it should have row headers with scopes, and therefore I don't think they should be added. – Editør (talk) 07:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review and comments from 48JCL

[1] Page needed
[2] I'm sure this supports the content, but surely there is a newer source that supports this claim? By the way, I am talking about the first use. For all the other uses, the location is not supported by the page number.
[3] Good
[4] Good
[5] Good
[6] Good
[7] Good
[8] Doesn't directly state "pending ratification" but it says ratification which is good enough.

Don't sources need archives? This can do it for you.

This list would benefit from an explanation on why Sydney McLaughlin's name changes to Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone.
Should the "time" section be sortable?
The caption "World records of the women's 400 metres hurdles" could be made screen reader only. This is my personal preference though.
McLaughlin-Levrone set five world records in this event, more than any other athlete. => McLaughlin-Levrone also set five world records in this event, more than any other athlete.
Add ! scope="row" before each date.

That's all I've got. 48 JCL 21:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]