Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Mexican National Light Heavyweight Championship/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 SchroCat via FACBot (talk) 00:34, 12 April 2016 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Mexican National Light Heavyweight Championship

[edit]

Mexican National Light Heavyweight Championship (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s):  MPJ-US  00:04, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it follows the format and level of quality of several other Mexican wrestling championship lists that I have brought through the FLC process. This version benefitted from ever single piece of feedback I have receieved so far, ensuring that it is consistent with previous submissions and deal with certain issues up front. ...  MPJ-US  00:04, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Review by PresN

Doffing my delegate hat to review.

  • "From its creation in 1943 it was not promoted by one specific promotion but shared between many Mexican promotions among others Empressa Mexicana de Lucha Libre..." -> "Since its creation in 1943 it has not been promoted by one specific promotion but shared between many Mexican promotions. Among others, these include Empressa Mexicana de Lucha Libre..."
  • Fixed
  • "Being a professional wrestling championship, it is not won legitimately" -> "As it is a professional wrestling championship, it is not won legitimately"
  • Fixed
  • "Over the following years the title was promoted by various Mexican promotions, primarily Empressa Mexicana de Lucha Libre but they did not assert an exclusive claim to the championship." -> "Over the following years the title was promoted by various Mexican promotions, primarily Empressa Mexicana de Lucha Libre, though they did not assert an exclusive claim to the championship."
  • Fixed
  • "La Parka / L.A. Park and Pierroth Jr. are tied for most title reigns, with four reigns, Pierroth Jr. has the shortest reign with no more than 11 days." -> "La Parka / L.A. Park and Pierroth Jr. are tied for most title reigns, with four reigns; Pierroth Jr. has the shortest reign at no more than 11 days."
  • Fixed
  • Note 6 says that the date when the championship was "vacated" is not known, but is that the right word? Wasn't it won by Guzman from Anaya? Vacated to me implies that there was a champion, then there wasn't.
  • Fixed, quite a few of the notes were apparently copied and just had the dates updated, but some bonehead (that would be me) forgot to adjust the text. I believe I have made each not more specific to the champion it is associated with.
  • Notes 7 and 8 have the same problem, except more so- 7 is about a reign that ended on an ambiguous date, while 8 is about one that started on an ambiguous date; they can't both be "vacated". This goes on for the next few notes- please come up with standardized wording.
  • Fixed. As above
  • In the Reigns by combined length table, reusing the same notes doesn't make sense because now the context is lacking as to which reign you're talking about out of several.
  • I will take a look at the approach to notes for combined reigns, see if I can come up with a good solution to this.
  • The 1951 vacation has a hyphen in the reign number column, instead of a dash like the others
  • Fixed
  • @PresN: - Thank you for your feedback, I will get to your list once I figure out the best way to tackle the notes for the combined reigns list. I appreciate your input and help to make this a better article.
  • I think I got it figured out, simply list the figures used whenever there is a question of how long the reign really was.  MPJ-US  22:00, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Cowlibob (talk) 14:04, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I know little to nothing about wrestling so please help to clarify some of my comments.
  • "singles professional wrestling championship controlled by Com..." perhaps organised would be a better word than controlled?
  • How about "sanctioned"?
  • "Since its creation in 1943 it has not promoted by one specific promotion..." think there is a missing word in this sentence.
  • Reworded, is that clearer?
  • "Among others, these include Empressa Mexicana de Lucha Libre (EMLL), Asistencia Asesoría y Administración (AAA) and in recent years in the ENSEMA promotion and the Independent circuit until December 2007 where Consejo Mundial de Lucha Libre (CMLL) gained control of the championship". I think recent years is too vague. Perhaps say the something like EMLL, AAA, ENSEMA, Independent circuit have organised it in the past but since December 2007 it has been organised by CMLL.
  • I reworded that. I think it's clearer.
  • The line about it all being scripted probably needs a reference.
  • Done
  • The text is when it says 1942, it was created in 42.
  • "among others..." perhaps "including" would be better phrasing.
  • Done
  • "From AAA's creation until 2002 the title was exclusively defended in AAA" What does this sentence mean?
  • Reworded "From AAA's creation in 1992 until 2002 AAA had exclusive control of the championship." better?
  • Also at a loss about what this sentence means "In 2002 El Dandy won the title and used it as one of the focal points of the ENSEMA promotion that operated from 2002 until 2004".
  • Reworded, hopefully that's better?
  • References G1, G2 maybe general references but they information related to them should be linked to specific pages of the source for easier verification. You can use the Template:Efn for it.
  • For G1 it's one page in the book, it has the list through 2000. G2 is a magazine, it covers the championship over a couple of pages - the list and notes on various bits of history. So while I can break it down to each of the three pages I am not sure what it would add? I did notice that I forgot to put the page numbers on G2, rectified.
  • What is Lucha 2000? Why is its date format different from the sources?
  • It is a Mexican wrestling magazine, the date format was a mistake on my part, I fixed it so they're all consistent.

That's it from a quick run-through. Cowlibob (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Cowlibob: - Thank you for your feedback, I appreciate your input and I think it's especially important that I get the non-wrestling fan point of view. I have tried to address all concerns, it may not be 100% right yet so if you could give me your take on the updates that would be appreciated.  MPJ-US  00:17, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "From AAA's creation in 1992 until 2002 they had exclusive control of the championship. In 2002 El Dandy won the title, which marked the end of AAA's control of the championship, transitioning control of the championship to the ENSEMA promotion" I think these two sentences can be combined into one and you wouldn't need to repeat the losing control bit.
  • Reworded.
  • Not sure if HowStuffWorks is a reliable source. Is there a better one like from a book on professional wrestling? There's probably lots which describe its nature of being scripted.
  • I have quite a few books, I am sure I can find one that covers it.
  • Found a book, it mentiones that Lucha Libre is scripted just like all other pro wrestling.
  • Need reference for the fights being decided by best two-out-of-three falls rules.
  • Found and added.

Cowlibob (talk) 21:38, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Good list on a lesser known topic. One minor point, the PDF refs should have a page number listed where the information is found. Also that I have not performed a source check as the majority of the sources are in Spanish so I couldn't be confident that it would be valid but I accept them in good faith. Cowlibob (talk) 14:04, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Frankie talk
Comments by FrB.TG
  • "Since its creation in 1942 the championship" - comma needed right after 1942.
  • Fixed
  • "Among others, these include Empressa Mexicana de " - I am not so sure if you need "among these" when you have "include".
  • Fixed
  • I don't know why are the numbers in the table in bold. Any specific reason for that?
  • That is the standard for pro wrestling championship tables, not sure of the exact reason but I am following the styleguide.
  • You do not need to wiki-link the entries under "Location" as they all border on WP:OVERLINKING.
  • I did notice the note in that article on linking to "united states", you're probably right that they all could go. I will unlink them.
  • Ref(s). → Ref(s)
  • Fixed
  • I am not going to comment on the references as I am not aware of any of them.

I have seen your QPQ requests at FLC (reminded me of myself). Anyway, I know very little about wrestling so that's all I could find. -- Frankie talk 10:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Miyagawa
  • There's a bit of repetition between the first and second paragraphs in that you explain that the title is shared across promotions including Empressa Mexicana de Lucha Libre. Would it be possible to rephrase the lines in the second paragraph simply to state that Empressa Mexicana de Lucha Libre was the main promotion using the title during the first few years, although not exclusively. I don't think you need to reiterate the shared nature so quickly after doing it the first time.
  • Image licences appear to be good. There's one which is own use rather than grabbed from Flickr, but it's such a close crop that I'm inclined to believe it.
  • No issues with the table, all appears to be good. Miyagawa (talk) 21:27, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Godot13
  • Initial comments (more to follow)
    • Table sort functionality looks good.
    • When you refer to promotion, do you mean the match promoters/organizers?
    • For the Days held column, would it make sense to put the actual range in the column (along with the note), but keeping the sort parameter the same as it is now?
      • I have never thought of doing that, the version used is the general format used for wrestling championships. I believe the choice was to use a note because the date ranges are so uncertain and not to lead credence to a specific number. This is the version used for all the 15 FLs I have produced and I'd hate to be inconsistent between them.  MPJ-US  04:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • In location, both Mexico and Mexico City are used. Do you have the city or state location for those listed only as Mexico?--Godot13 (talk) 03:59, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Unfortunately the entries that just list "Mexico" do not have a mores specific location listed in the sources, primarily due to limited documentation of title change itself - often newspapers would report "Luchador I defeated Luchador II on January 1, 1901" when the champion would come to town to defend the title.  MPJ-US  04:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Godot13: - I hope I have answered your concerns.  MPJ-US  04:31, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source review: no issues as far as I could see, so:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Mexican_National_Light_Heavyweight_Championship/archive1&oldid=1138488145"