Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/New Orleans Mint

New Orleans Mint

Previous FA nominations can be found here:

Self-nomination. This article has been peer-reviewed multiple times, and I think that it's fairly comprehensive. There is a long list of coinage statistics as part of the article (which I think is necessary), but I think the text about the Mint speaks for itself fairly well. I've tried to make sure the article properly uses citations and attend to any comments fellow users have made regarding improving the article, and I think it meets the FA criteria pretty well. It's been rated an A-class article for numismatics, and is pretty stable; recent changes have been fairly minor. Absecon 59 18:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is <pre> tags the best way to present the data? Would using tables be better? And on my computer, the images covered some of the data.WP 09:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ~~Object~~. ~~The giant poorly formatted list is a problem. Move the list to a sub article.~~ --Maitch 09:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, you have fixed this problem. If you will decapitalize the headings as described in Wp:mos#Headings, use {{cite web}} for web references and convert external links within the article to references, then I will support. --Maitch 15:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that these problems have now been fixed, but please let me know if I've missed anything. Absecon 59 16:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I have changed my vote to support. --Maitch 21:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Agree, the list should be moved to a sub article as suggested by Maitch. If you find that as a result of the move, you have too many images then using a gallery format may solve the problem. Pending the above modifications, I would extend my support.--Riurik ^(discuss) 19:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These are excellent suggestions. I've taken the stats for coinage and made them into a sub-page and linked that from the article. The "Coinage Produced" section has been reorganized into a table that I think displays relevant data nicely with images of the coinage. (Please comment if this table does not display properly on your computer). The article is, I think, slightly shorter now, as well. Absecon 59 14:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like this now, espcially the tables the coins are in. Rlevse 14:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but I would love if the image could be organized some other way. —Jared Hunt September 9, 2006, 04:02 (UTC)
Support Great article and I believe it fits criteria for featured articles Hello32020 15:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Object The article is quite good. However, the "coinage produced" section is way too large for this article, and seems irrelevant. That section is not about the mint so much as it is about the coinage. If that section were completely removed, I would support this article for FA. At the least it needs to be drastically reduced, with at most one or two somewhat historically noteworthy examples. Also, how about some creativity with layout? All the photos are on the right side and all the same size--DaveOinSF 00:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]