Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Welcome to featured list candidates! Here, we determine which lists are of a good enough quality to be featured lists (FLs). Featured lists exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and satisfy the FL criteria.

Before nominating a list, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Peer review. This process is not a substitute for peer review. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FLC process. Ones who are not significant contributors to the list should consult regular editors of the list before nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly.

A list should not be listed at featured list candidates and peer review at the same time. Users should not add a second featured list nomination until the first has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed. Please do not split featured list candidate pages into subsections using header code (if necessary, use bolded headings).

The featured list director, Giants2008, or his delegates—Crisco 1492, SchroCat, and PresN—determine the timing of the process for each nomination; each nomination will last at least days (though most last at least a week longer)—longer where changes are ongoing and it seems useful to continue the process. For a nomination to be promoted to FL status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the directors determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the director who considers a nomination and its reviews:

  • actionable objections have not been resolved; or
  • consensus for promotion has not been reached; or
  • insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met.

It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve critical comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support.

After a reasonable time has passed, the director or delegates will decide when a nomination is ready to be closed. A bot will update the list talk page after the list is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the {{FLC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates or adds the {{ArticleHistory}} template. If a nomination is archived, the nominator should take adequate time to resolve issues before re-nominating.

Purge the cache to refresh this page – Table of Contents – Closing instructions – Checklinks – Dablinks – Check redirects
Shortcut:

Featured content:

Featured list tools:

Nomination procedure

Toolbox
  1. Before nominating a list, ensure that it meets all of the FL criteria and that Peer reviews are closed and archived.
  2. Place {{subst:FLC}} on the talk page of the nominated list.
  3. From the FLC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please post to the FLC talk page for assistance.
  4. Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~ and save the page.
  5. Finally, place {{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/name of nominated list/archiveNumber}} at the top of the list of nominees on this page by first copying the above, clicking "edit" on the top of this page, and then pasting, making sure to add the name of the nominated list. While adding a candidate, mention the name of the list in the edit summary.

Supporting and objecting

Please read a nominated list fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.

  • To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the list nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole FLC page).
  • To support a nomination, write *'''Support''', followed by your reason(s). If you have been a significant contributor to the list before its nomination, please indicate this.
  • To oppose a nomination, write *'''Object''' or *'''Oppose''', followed by the reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, the director may ignore it. References on style and grammar do not always agree; if a contributor cites support for a certain style in a standard reference work or other authoritative source, reviewers should consider accepting it. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed. To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it. Alternately, reviewers may hide lengthy, resolved commentary in a cap template with a signature in the header. This method should be used only when necessary, because it can cause the FLC archives to exceed template limits.
  • If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so after the reviewer's signature rather than striking out or splitting up the reviewer's text. Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, break up, or add graphics to comments from other editors; replies are added below the signature on the reviewer's commentary. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page, with a diff to the reviewer's talk page showing the request to reconsider.
  • Graphics are discouraged (such as {{done}} and {{not done}}), as they slow down the page load time.
  • To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write *'''Comment''' followed by your advice.
Nominations urgently needing reviews

The following lists were nominated more than 20 days ago and have had their review time extended because objections are still being addressed, the nomination has not received enough reviews, or insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met. If you have not yet reviewed them, please take the time to do so:

Contents

Nominations[edit]

List of County-Designated Highways in Michigan[edit]

Nominator(s): Imzadi 1979 → 07:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

I present to you the County-Designated Highways in Michigan, a unique system of county-maintained roads in the state. I feel that this is one of the most comprehensive and best researched lists and histories of this system available online, or in print, and it's at least worthy of review if not promotion here. Imzadi 1979 → 07:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

List of Space Shuttle missions[edit]

Nominator(s): ~ Matthewrbowker Drop me a note 04:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Previous nominations:

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets the standards for a featured list. I previously nominated this list a year ago and declined because I was inactive due to schooling. I have since resumed activity on-wiki and will be around to answer questions. Thank you. ~ Matthewrbowker Drop me a note 04:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

List of roles and awards of Arshad Warsi[edit]

Nominator(s): Skr15081997 (talk) 11:16, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Arshad Warsi has been in the Hindi film industry since 1987 but it was only in 2003 that he won fame for his role in Munna Bhai M.B.B.S.. Since then he has won praise for his work in Lage Raho Munna Bhai, Ishqiya, Jolly LLB, Golmaal series and numerous other comedy films. This list presents all his film credits, awards and nominations. The previous nomination was archived. Skr15081997 (talk) 11:16, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by Yashthepunisher

Done
  • I think only Kaash will suffice in the opening sentence.
Done
  • Are you sure Tere Mere Sapne was a box-office success?
Removed the info about its business.
  • I think circuit was more like a comic sidekick than a gangster.
Changed
  • Remove "he" from the 6th sentence.
Sorry, but I couldn't understand which one?
Did it myself. Yashthepunisher (talk) 14:54, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
  • "..and garnered critical acclaim for portraying a police officer in the crime drama Sehar (2005) earned him critical appreciation." This sentence is awkwardly written.
Corrected
  • There are too many instances in the opening para where the sentence starts with "He". You can replace one of them with "Warsi".
Replaced 1
  • "..reprised his role from Munna Bhai M.B.B.S. in the sequel". You can mention his character name instead of the prequel film.
Done
  • "comedy" should be removed while mentioning Golmaal Returns, as its already mentioned in its first film.
Done
  • Dedh Ishqiya should be mentioned in the lead. It was critically appreciated, despite being a box-office failure.
Mentioned
  • Publisher's name should be linked at there first appearance, and delinked elsewhere.

That's it from me. Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:20, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

@Yashthepunisher: linking them everywhere helps our readers, as they generally don't know on which citation a particular publisher has been linked for the first time. Thanks for your review.--Skr15081997 (talk) 13:49, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Support - I just thought linking them everywhere might border OVERLINK, but i agree with your reason. Overall its a nice list and meets the criteria. Yashthepunisher (talk) 14:58, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review and support, Yash.--Skr15081997 (talk) 09:25, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Mexican National Lightweight Championship[edit]

Nominator(s):  MPJ-US  03:58, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it matches the format and quality content of a number of other professional wrestling championship featured lists that I have maintained over the years and this would be another article towards a potential Featured Topic I have been working on off and on over the years. After each FL review I have gone through I have made sure to apply feedback from those to future FL candidates including this one.  MPJ-US  03:58, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment I'd suggest the lead could use some more explicit sources in the second paragraph, for things like the car accident and such. I know it's more-or-less justified by the list, but I think this is one of those cases where citing the lead would be appropriate. I don't think you need to worry about simple numerical facts about the list, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:34, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Both the wrestling title book (G1) and the article on the Mexican Championship (G2) do both mention the accident and death of the champion but I can can go look for a separate source on his death, since it's such a tragic event I believe I can find an independent source if I just look for it. MPJ-US  11:57, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • I don't think it necessarily needs a separate source, though if you have one, that certainly won't hurt. It's just one of those best practice things. I think this is a strong list. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:20, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • @Adam Cuerden: I gotcha, I pulled the general source up into the main text to cover a couple of items. Please let me know if you see anything else I can address MPJ-US  22:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Quick drive-by comment (will be back with more later) - the article says that Damiancito el Guerrero won the title under that na,e and then changed his name to Virus later, but our article on him says that he was already known as Virus when he won this belt - which is correct? If he was still known as Damiancito then the caption "Pierrothito (In blue), the 48th champion and the first Mini-Estrella to hold the championship." isn't accurate, because if Damiancito won the match under that name then he was technically still a mini..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:52, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
  • You know I never really thought about that one and reading the Virus article it does say he won it as Virus. Looking at all the sources I can find for a quick scan here is what I see. Damiancito starts working against non-Minis at the beginning of 1998. He wins the title as Damiencito and then changes his name during the title reign to Virus. I see notes in places that he definitly won as Damiencito and later had title defenses as Virus. I will have to reread the 1998 year in review magazine i have, it's in Spanish so it takes me a bit longer with Google translate and stuff, so I'll see what if anything it says on the matter. Whatever the source supports I will make sure to adjust either this article or the Virus one so they match. MPJ-US  23:55, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

So here is what my research has found

  • While still billed as "Damiancito" he began wrestling in the regular division in January 1998, no longer considered a mini
  • He won the title as Damiancito (1998 year in review lists the match)
  • He later changed name to Virus (1998 year in review lists Virus as the champion at the end of the year and lists the date he won the title as Damiancito)
  • The list will be updated to list him as Damiancito/Virus. I will work on Virus' article to ensure it matches. He was not considered a Mini-Estrella at that point so the caption etc. remains correct. Does that work?  MPJ-US  03:11, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

List of cricketers who have taken two five-wicket hauls on Test debut[edit]

Nominator(s): User:Joseph2302 (talk), The Rambling Man (talk) 08:25, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

The groundwork on this list was done by Joseph2302, I tweaked and tidied and expanded the prose a little. This is a niche club of bowlers, a handful have achieved this feat and the list should be good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:25, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

List of Local Nature Reserves in Bedfordshire[edit]

Nominator(s): Dudley Miles (talk) 15:00, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

This list follows the format of List of Local Nature Reserves in Hertfordshire, which recently passed FLC, and I hope it will also be found to be of FL quality, Dudley Miles (talk) 15:00, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Review by PresN

Recusing myself in order to review this list.

  • "As of January 2016 there are twenty Local Nature Reserves in Bedfordshire, eight in Bedford, eleven in Central Bedfordshire and one in Luton" - the 8/11/1 are the breakdown of the 20, so the comma after Bedfordshire should be a colon.
  • Cooper's Hill - "This Site of Special Scientific Interest has the best remaining area in the county of heathland" - best? What determines best?
  • Why is it "Galley and Warden Hills SSSI", not just "Galley and Warden Hills"? It's the only SSSI to get that callout in the name
  • This is how it is shown by Natural England. All names are as in the NE listing.
  • Henlow Common - "Plants include marsh marigolds and there are kingfishers and the river bank has otters and water voles." - and...and...
  • Marston Thrift - "Like Kings Wood and Glebe Meadows, this is a Site of Special Scientific Interest which ash and maple woodland on heavy clay." - which "has"?
  • Should Park Wood, Bedford just be Park Wood, since the disambiguator isn't needed in a Bedfordshire list?
  • As Galley and Warden Hills SSSI above. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Putnoe Wood - "Bird species include wood pigeons, blue tits and great tits" - seems consistent to link those three species, since you link other relatively common animals
  • I fixed a citation error that I'm not sure is usually directly visible to editors- line break inside of a citation title
  • Support, looks like you've gotten the pattern for these lists down. --PresN 01:26, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

List of international rugby union tries by Jonah Lomu[edit]

Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk) 22:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC), Mr.Apples2010

I am nominating this for featured list because it meets the criteria, and Lomu is the first superstar rugby player. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

List of Bermuda hurricanes[edit]

Nominator(s): – Juliancolton | Talk 19:30, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

I spent quite a bit of time building this list up from scratch over the past few months, and I believe it now meets the FL criteria. The list roughly follows the model of existing regional hurricane FLs (such as List of Texas hurricanes (1980–present) and List of Delaware hurricanes), and covers an important aspect of Bermuda's history. – Juliancolton | Talk 19:30, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment This looks good, although I wonder if it would be possible to add more images to the list as large bits of this feel barren. I also have done a minor date correction to a caption, so just make sure that things match up on the dates. I would also suggest fixing the one link to Hurricane Humberto, and adding alternate text to the existing images. There are also five dead links to fix, although four of them went dead eight days ago so I can't fault you on that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for taking a look. The file caption actually was correct to start with (the image even has the date on it). As for more images, I'm afraid that anything useful has already been included. High-quality satellite images are pretty hard to come by for storms before, say, 1990, and free-use damage photos are always a scarce commodity. I have found some useful illustrations that could be strong candidates for fair use, but I'd rather avoid that. I suppose I could add more track maps to spruce up the place, but I don't think they add an enormous amount of encyclopedic value. Three of the five deadlinks fixed... I'll need some time to sort out the others. – Juliancolton | Talk 22:58, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by Taylor Swift[edit]

Nominator(s): Frankie talk 18:49, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

I have worked on this article to completely overhauled its lead (and some major changes throughout the article) and make it a better standalone list of all Taylor Swift's songs. I believe it overall meets the featured list criteria. It is likely to have glitches, which I will fix if I notice - by myself or reviewers. Any comment on the list from anyone will be very much appreciated. -- Frankie talk 18:49, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Support good work improving this Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:22, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Support from an IP - Good work Frankie! 1.52.124.206 (talk) 09:30, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
    • I know there was a lot of work that went into this, but do you think it meets the FL criteria? This isn't the first one-line support I've noticed recently from an IP, and this behavior is attracting increased attention in the FL community. If you don't want your supports discounted, I'd suggest making an increased effort to review against the criteria. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:24, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
@Giants2008: Thanks for noting that. Actually I was also initially concerned about the IP's support but this IP also reviewed my previous nomination (not sure whether they are the same), and also made some good points. Given that, I am not sure if we need to be concerned about the IP's support as they might review lists against FL criteria, before giving a one-line support. -- Frankie talk 22:31, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Support meets the criteria. NapHit (talk) 21:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Comments from GagaNutella
  • Support: This list looks amazing. I just came here to give you one suggestion. Change the colors for "#BFFFC0" for the singles, pastel yellow for the promotional singles, and let purple for songs that are written just by Tay. She is great composer and you should highlight it. GagaNutellatalk 18:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
  • PS: Few things to fix according to her discography: the second "Bad Blood" add (Remix Version); "Out of the Woods" is a single; "Crazier" and "Breathe" are not promotional singles; "If This Was a Movie", "Superman", "The Moment I Knew", "Come Back... Be Here", "Girl at Home", "Wonderland", "You Are in Love", and "New Romantics" are promotional singles. GagaNutellatalk 01:39, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Don't know how I missed them. Thank you for your comments and support, much appreciated. -- Frankie talk 17:07, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

List of Rugby World Cup finals[edit]

Nominator(s): NapHit (talk) 16:42, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because after a complete overhaul I now feel this list meets the criteria. I currently have another nomination, but it has two supports and no outstanding comments. As always, comments to be dealt with as expediently as possible. Cheers NapHit (talk) 16:42, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments Support from Parutakupiu

Hi NapHit, I already reviewed the page's prose and made some changes that I feel improved its flow and clarity. Also wikilinked some rugby-specific terms that may not be immediately familiar to readers. Regarding other points, here are my comments:

  • There's a word missing in "Despite constant from the French for the remainder of the final..." that I could not guess which was during my copyediting. I leave this for you to fill.
  • Ref. 7 does not support the 1995 final summary.
  • Renaming suggestions:
    • "Results" (section title) → "Finals"
    • "Key to the list of finals" → "Key to colors and symbols"
    • "List of finals matches, their venues and locations, the finalists and final scores" → "List of final matches, and respective venues, finalists and scores"
  • (Optional) Maybe move the footnotes content to just below the finals table? It's only two of them, seems little to have a section of its own.

— Parutakupiu (talk) 21:12, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments @Parutakupiu:, all been addressed. Regarding the key one, I simply changed it to key, don't think anymore is needed, as it's plainly obvious. NapHit (talk) 23:48, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
One more thing: maybe you could mention the unfortunate (well, not using this adjective) fact of France losing all three finals in which it participated? Parutakupiu (talk) 00:00, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Added @Parutakupiu:. Thanks again. NapHit (talk) 00:19, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Good work, NapHit! Parutakupiu (talk) 00:31, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Really good article, lots of information as well as the list itself. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

  • I found the second paragraph a bit confusing, saying that from 2015 extra time is played when there is a draw after 80 minutes, and then going back to earlier games with extra time. Maybe give the earlier games first and then the 2015 rules.
    • The wording might not be the best, as these have always been the rules. The 'As of 2015' bit is so it is up to date, so to speak, for the reader. Removing this bit might make it a bit clearer and less confusing perhaps. NapHit (talk) 22:32, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
  • "A try by Pierre Berbizier in the final minutes, which was converted by Camberabero, settled New Zealand's victory in the tournament's inaugural final at 29–9." "settled" seems an odd word in this context - maybe "gave a slightly more respectable score of..."
    • Reworded NapHit (talk) 22:32, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
  • A first rate article. These points are minor. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:20, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the comments {[ping|Dudley Miles}}, both comments have been addressed. NapHit (talk) 22:32, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. However, I would remove "As of the 2015 tournament" as it is misleading. If it is needed for the rules, why not elsewhere, such as every sentence in the third paragraph? Dudley Miles (talk) 23:27, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

;Comments from FrB.TG

  • "They also won the most recent final, hosted in London in 2015" – according to WP:PRECISELANG, you should avoid terms such as "recent". I would probably rephrase it as "They also won the 2015 final, hosted in London."
  • "The next Rugby World Cup will be hosted in Japan" – I think you also need to mention the year of final.
  • Ref 1 – "Corporate designations such as "Ltd", "Inc" or "GmbH" are not usually included. Omit where the publisher's name is substantially the same as the name of the work." I think you should get rid of Guardian Media Group.
  • Ref 8 and 16 – ditto: Independent Print Limited and Guardian Media Group, respectively.
  • I think wiki-linking the publishers of references on their first occurrences can help the readers with finding about them. (Sure that's a personal opinion which is why I "thought" it might benefit linking them)
    • I think is more personal choice than anything else. Some editors link the publishers others don't. There isn't a guideline about this, so I'm inclined to leave it the way it is. There's no benefit either way really. NapHit (talk) 23:55, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

-- Frankie talk 22:49, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments @FrB.TG:, I've addressed them all. NapHit (talk) 23:55, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Support – meets FL criteria, good job! -- Frankie talk 14:40, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Older nominations[edit]

List of colleges and universities in Massachusetts[edit]

Nominator(s): Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:37, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I have finally added in all known colleges and universities that have operated in the state, with a recent focus on closed institutions. I don't know why I did not address those issues during the nomination process, but I would like to give this another run, as I feel that it meets the criteria laid on the relevant page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:37, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments Just had time to look at the first 2 paragraphs. Prose needs a bit tightening up. Here are 2 suggestions

*Para 1: second mention of "listed under the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education" can be removed as redundant.

  • Perhaps rephrase to merge those two sentences to be something like "are public excluding the private Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which was originally a public school..."
  • Para 2. Oddly structured first sentence. Maybe something like: Harvard University is Massachusetts' oldest post-secondary institution and was founded in ...

More coming later. Mattximus (talk) 02:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

That is much better... review continuing:

*Para 3. "multiple Judaic", can multiple be changed to the exact number?

  • Para 4. Needs some work. First, I'm not overly sold about the inclusion of college rankings, but I agree that it is important to highlight MIT and Harvard in the lead as they are internationally respected. Is it possible to link a few lists of top universities from several sources and say that they are both recognized as top 10 global universities? Either way, you must change "college" to "university", since you are comparing internationally. Mattximus (talk) 22:33, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm happy with the lead now, good work. Some more changes:

  • last para still needs rewording, for example: "the state is also known for its academic strength"... well it's not literally the state, but the institutions found within the state... So, something like "Massachusetts is home to a number of internationally recognized top 10 universities including MIT and Harvard" or something like that would be a better sentence. I would also remove the "As such" from the next line, as it's not really adding anything but filler.
Have another look at that first sentence, I think it's much worse now.

*I like the first table, but the enrolment should have an obvious year attached since they change so much. I'm not sure how you can do this without messing with the formatting, but can you think of a way? I think that is good for the first section

  • Featured lists no longer begin with the sentence "Below is a list of..." as it was removed some time ago as tautological. So that needs to be reworded. You can just go right into the meat of things.

I will conclude my review next edit. Mattximus (talk) 22:15, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

  • I've gone ahead and condensed the prose in the spirit of what you wrote above, so I hope that helps a bit. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:17, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
  • That should work now, as I reworded the areas in both paragraphs, although I suspect there are only a few lists being used and people are parroting them online. Let me know what you think though, and thanks for the comments! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:48, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Done, as I had a date in there at one point but took it out per a previous review. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:30, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

List of municipalities in New Brunswick[edit]

Nominator(s): Mattximus (talk) 14:29, 22 December 2015 (UTC) and Hwy43 (talk)

We are attempting to bring the list of municipalities for every province and territory of Canada to featured status and eventual featured topic. We have created a standardized format and so far promoted Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia, Yukon, Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories. We have also taken suggestions from the previous 8 nominations into account for this nomination. All suggestions welcome and thanks for your input. Mattximus (talk) 14:29, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Source review – Source reliability looks good, and the links all work according to the link-checker tool (which coughs a little at the sight of XLSX files, from the looks of it). Formattting also looks good for the most part; the only thing I'd change is spelling out the abbreviation in the publisher of ref 2, if it can be spelled out. Yes check.svg Done Giants2008 (Talk) 22:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
    Thanks for your review, User:Giants2008, please let us know if there are any other changes needed to gain your support. Mattximus (talk) 22:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Likewise, thank you! Hwy43 (talk) 08:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Support – Now that the fixes have been made, I'm satisfied that the list meets the standards set by the others in this series. I'll leave the source review out so the potential closers can see that it was done. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

80th Academy Awards[edit]

Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk) 22:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

I am re-nominating the 2008 Oscars for featured list because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. The previous nomination did not result in FL status, because I was unable to keep up with comments due to personal and education issues. I know there is still some concerns, but I will be updating the list within the next two weeks due to my winter break allowing me to make changes before school resumes on January 4. I also followed how the 1929, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 were written. Birdienest81 (talk) 22:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Support – nice work, again! -- Frankie talk 18:01, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Comments from Yashthepunisher
  • Few redirects needs to be fixed.
  • Is Voice Over Times a RS?
  • Fox News shouldn't be italised.
  • I think its a typo at ref 30, Los Angelest Times.

Yashthepunisher (talk) 17:21, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

  • @Yashthepunisher: Done: Fixed everything above. I tried fixing the BBC and Filmsite external links, but they don't change from green/blue to white. However, they both work when you click on the actual link. Anyways, thanks for the comments.
--Birdienest81 (talk) 05:35, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Support – I don't see any green link now, and others are resolved. Good luck! Yashthepunisher (talk) 06:47, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Support meets the criteria. NapHit (talk) 13:22, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Fixed the quotation mark issue myself here, thankfully nothing major. I now support this for FL. Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Katy Perry[edit]

Nominator(s): Frankie talk and Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:25, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

This list was to featured list back in October 2008 but somehow things did not work out and was demoted in June 2009 due to criteria change. I have been working on it on on-and-off-again basis and have finally been able to make it here. I have modeled the list based on recently promoted lists by me -- accolades by Taylor Swift, Adele and Lady Gaga. I believe the list meets the featured list criteria and I would appreciate comments for further improving the list. Thank you. -- Frankie talk 21:25, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

I added myself as co-nom since I'm also a major contributor. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:44, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support from an IP - Good work, but this list have 1 dead link you should fix! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.52.120.50 (talk • contribs) 10:56, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Many thanks, IP. I've fixed the link. Snuggums (talk / edits) 17:06, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
  • 1.52.120.50, why would you support a list when it had a dead link at the time? I understand that a lot of work went into making the article, but it's hard to think the list met the featured list criteria at the time of the review if there was a dead link. One of the nominators thankfully took care of the issue, but try to wait for the article to meet the criteria before supporting next time, or your support may not be given much weight. Giants2008 (Talk) 20:37, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Support: No other pressing issues found.
--Birdienest81 (talk) 05:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support –– Well done, Frankie and Snuggums.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

It's better now, but a lot of these issues were basic and should have been picked up earlier, especially with the list already having numerous supports. Ref 190 is not formatted properly, I'll remain neutral for now, as I want to see what other reviewers have to say. NapHit (talk) 17:24, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Support: Congrats, this list looks great. GagaNutellatalk 16:02, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Comments by Cowlibob
  • I would check the awards description is matched by the reference.
  • Billboard Japan award description has no reference.
  • MTV Video Awards Japan description makes the bold statement that it was created due to the unique musical variety of Japan, which I can't find in the source. It also seems to be straight copied from the main article which is the case for other awards descriptions as well. The danger of this is that many of the descriptions in the other articles are not referenced or a different reference is used in this list. e.g. People's Choice, Premios Juventud.
  • "The Myx Music Awards is an annual awards show in the Philippines that honors the year's both Filipino and International Music". I think this needs to be rephrased.
  • People's Choice Award description is not supported by the reference I think. Should also mention that it is voted on by the public.
  • Not sure her fan following (Katycats) winning an award counts as an award that she received. That blue link for People's Choice for Best Fan Following is also a redirect.
  • Premios Juventud reference doesn't specify that it's for Spanish speaking celebrities.
  • List has got invalid ISSN numbers.
  • The iHeart source doesn't list Katy Perry as being nominated for those awards in 2014. Cowlibob (talk) 16:40, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

List of teams and cyclists in the 2013 Tour de France[edit]

Nominator(s): BaldBoris 21:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

My nomination of the 2012 list was promoted in September. This list is very similar, apart from the obvious. BaldBoris 21:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

What is going on with references 13 and 14? The text only says "ASO 2013", and the link doesn't seem to go anywhere... (This was also in the 2012 list, so it could be just me not understanding how to read references...)--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 15:29, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
It's using the shortened footnote template. If you are not aware what shortened footnotes are, they're an easier way to cite a paged source. In this case it doesn't make much sense because there's only two pages. The reason I haven't added the pages is because it's an extract from a larger book. BaldBoris 17:11, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Aha, that helps. But I think the shortened footnotes are not used properly... In the template page that you linked to, the shortened footnote is "Elk 1972", and the corresponding reference starts with "Elk, Anne (November 16, 1972)", which makes it clear which one is referred to. But in the current FLA, the shortened footnote is "ASO 2013", but the corresponding reference does not even include "ASO" or "2013". (The reference uses the expanded form of "ASO", we should not assume everybody knows what ASO is short for.) A solution could be to put "Amaury Sport Organisation" in the shortened footnote, and include the year 2013 in the long reference, but there might be a better solution.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 08:34, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
I understand your confusion, but I'm following the guidelines correctly. See: Template:Sfn#No author name in citation template. BaldBoris 13:23, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Edit: I've added the appropriate year to the source. BaldBoris 16:13, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
OK! I see that the abbreviation is indeed allowed, so it look good now.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 06:49, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Support. The list has good sources, and it covers all things it should cover.--EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 06:49, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Support meets the criteria, great work. NapHit (talk) 12:29, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

This looks very good to me. I've made a couple of small edits. One outstanding concern: the list of victories in the nationalities table adds up to 20, but you have 21 in the total. This is because of the TTT. Perhaps you could deal with this as in the 2015 Vuelta list? Relentlessly (talk) 10:45, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

NapHit advised me to remove the with (see above), so I'm not sure. Thanks for taking the time give it a look. BaldBoris 18:00, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
I think "with DvP as the youngest rider" makes it sound like he was acting in a play! Whatever the wording of that sentence, I'm happy to support. Relentlessly (talk) 18:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

World Fantasy Award for Life Achievement[edit]

Nominator(s): PresN 19:43, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Hey all, we're closing in on finishing up the World Fantasy Awards with this 9th World Fantasy Award list, #35 overall in our perpetual FLC series of sci-fi/fantasy award lists. This award list is pretty self-explanatory: a "lifetime" achievement award category; notable quirks are that the recipients don't have to be dead/retired (or even close to done with their career), that the winner is announced when the nominees of the other categories are, and that since 2000 it's been traditional to give out two awards per year, generally to an author and a non-author. The WFAs give no reasons for the winners but a list of names is boring, so I've added fantasy works the winner had done prior to winning, a la FLs Hugo Award for Best Professional Editor, John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer. The formatting on this list is functionally identical to the other sci-fi/fantasy award lists, and especially so to the other WFA lists, and comments from prior FLCs have been incorporated here. Thanks all for reviewing! --PresN 19:43, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Support – well done and happy new year. -- Frankie talk 15:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

  • " Individuals are also eligible for the Special Award—Professional and Special Award—Non-professional categories for their work in a given year not tied to a specific achievement." Several issues: 1. This seems out of place. The para is on the life award, here you go away from it and then come back in the next sentence. 2 Why mention these particular awards? Are individuals not eligible for other awards? If so, you should say so. 3. The word "categories" seems superfluous. 4. What does "a given year" mean? The previous year?
  • "before voting on the overall winner." "winners"?
  • "but at the 2015 ceremony it was announced that the award would not be made in future years". Presumably the statuette not the award - they were not ending the award altogether?
  • These points are minor. A first rate list. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Just cut the sentence
  • Specified that its the winner of each category
  • Clarified that its the statuette that's being dropped, not the category
  • Thanks for reviewing Dudley Miles, I believe I've addressed all of your concerns. --PresN 20:24, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments

  • Sounds odd and a little pathetic, but rather than pipelink to "art" I would pipelink to "fantasy art" in the opening sentence. I know it repeats "fantasy" but it's important to distinguish it from simply "art".
  • "The World Fantasy Award for Life Achievement is given each year to individuals for their lifetime achievements in fields related to fantasy." I'm reminded of Basil Fawlty suggesting that Sybil should use "stating the bleeding obvious" as her specialist subject on Mastermind. Can we do anything more creative than this?
  • "retired from their career" any need for "from their career"?
  • "in view of his racism" while not a BLP, it's worth clarifying exactly what this means with copious citations.
  • "18 years have..." per MOS, avoid starting sentences with numerals.
  • " typically two, though 5 " MOSNUM, "2, though 5" or "two, though five"...
  • The See also is already linked, first sentence of the lead, so not needed there.

The Rambling Man (talk) 21:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Done
  • Changed to "for their overall career in fields related to fantasy" (I kind of wanted to use "oeuvre", but that doesn't really include publishing/editing work)
  • Done
  • This is exactly why I didn't want to talk about the not-officially-stated reason why the statuette got dropped in the category lists, and instead leave it up to the whole section at World Fantasy Award, but I let the reviewers sweet-talk me into it a list or two ago. Dropped that sentence; the only way to really do it justice would give it way too weight in the lead.
  • Unscrambled the sentence
  • Done
  • Done
@The Rambling Man: Responded to all points. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 01:30, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

List of RKO Pictures films[edit]

Nominator(s): Onel5969 TT me 18:45, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because after checking the requirements, it appears to meet all the criteria. I would also like to specifically thank WFinch for all their efforts with the images on the page. Look forward to everyone's comments. Onel5969 TT me 18:45, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Comment from Jimknut
  • You need to fix the sorting for both the dates and the film titles. Any title that begins with "A", "An", or "The" should sort under the second word in the title. Jimknut (talk) 01:01, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jimknut - Thanks. Will fix that. When I originally expanded the table I thought I had gotten all of them. But will go back over it tomorrow night. Again, thanks for pointing that out. Onel5969 TT me 04:17, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jimknut - actually going back over the article, I expanded it before I know about the sortname feature. I think I have them all fixed now. Onel5969 TT me 22:56, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments - a triumphant and massive list, well done.

  • Don't start list articles with "This is a list of RKO Pictures films,...."
  • "which was ... which was ..." poor prose.
  • "added Pathé Exchange, to the " no need for the comma.
  • "the U.S.[2]" would prefer to just see "and the United States."
  • "During... during" see above.
  • And then followed by "During this time..." really need to work on this prose to make it engaging.
  • "it was graced with some of the great names of cinema history" sounds like personal opinion.
  • "1931 Academy Award for Best Picture" can be linked.
  • "(1946 - and the studio's only other Academy Award for Best Picture)" spaced hyphen violates WP:DASH, and link to other Academy Awards list.
  • "and what some people consider the greatest film of all time, 1941's Citizen Kane." citations please.
  • "and was eventually" and it was...
  • " to General Tire and Rubber Company in" missing a "the".
  • "which is now under new management" as of when?
  • "As per the guidelines set forth by the WikiProject Film group" when do we allow Wikiproject guidelines cross over so overtly into article space?

That's it for the lead. If we can make some amends here, I will be tempted to review the rest. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:27, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the excellent input, RM. I've incorporated all your suggestions, as well as many some other minor changes to grammar and prose. Yes check.svg Done. Onel5969 TT me 13:17, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Superfly discography[edit]

Nominator(s): Prosperosity (talk) 10:06, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it satisfies the FL criteria. Prosperosity (talk) 10:06, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Comment by an IP

*The discography of Japanese musical act Superfly consists of five studio album → Japanese band Superfly has released...

  • Sales (JPN) → Sale (Japan) (hmmm...I think so!)
  • Ref. → {{Abbr|Ref.|Reference}} * <tt><nowiki>{{Reflist|2}} → {{Reflist|30em}}

That's all! 42.112.232.105 (talk) 07:11, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

'Band' implies multiple members, but Superfly has only a single member at the moment, so I don't know if that's really appropriate! I've made all of the other changes. --Prosperosity (talk) 09:03, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Comments by Cartoon network freak
Lead

*discography of Japanese musical act -> discography of Japanese rock group

Superfly releases music in several genres, and I'd need additional sources for the genre.
  • three compilation albums -> three compilations
  • 'Compilation albums' is the category listed at the side, so it should be consistent!
  • twenty-seven singles -> 27 singles
  • All of the numbers in the prose should be a consistent style (either figures or written in full), and as there are many small figures it's better for these to be written out.
  • Superfly began as a musical unit formed in 2003 by vocalist Shiho Ochi and guitarist Koichi Tabo and signed with Warner Music Japan in 2007. -> Superfly debuted as a musical act in 2003, being formed by Shiho Ochi and guitarist Koichi Tabo. Afterwards, they signed to Warner Music Japan in 2007.
  • Debuted implies a label and a release, which didn't happen for five years later, and I don't think we say "being formed by" when talking about bands, only like geological processes and things like that, but I've made the sentence a little bit shorter.
  • Tabo removed himself from the band's line-up in 2007 during promotional activities for their single "I Spy I Spy", finding it difficult to work as both the band's songwriter and guitarist. -> Tabo leaved the band's line-up in 2007 during the releasing process of their promotional single "I Spy I Spy", finding it difficult to work as both the band's songwriter and guitarist.
I've simplified that part.
  • Tabo remained attached -> However, Tabo remained attached
Done.
  • Superfly, composing -> Superfly, with it composing
Tabo is a man, and "with him composing" doesn't sound right to me.
  • for the unit, until -> for the unit until
Done.
  • sing the theme song for the Misaki Ito-starring drama Edison no Haha, entitled "Ai o Komete Hanataba o". -> sing the theme song for Misaki Ito-starring drama, Edison no Haha, entitled "Ai o Komete Hanataba o".
Already changed above.
  • The track became commercially successful in Japan, with it being eventually certified Million for digital downloads by the RIAJ.
  • The band's debut album Superfly (2008), released three months later, debuted at number one on the Japanese Oricon albums chart. -> The band's debut album, Superfly (2008), was released three months later and debuted at number one on the Japanese Albums Chart.
Done.
  • saw continued success -> saw continuous success
Removed.
  • their releases between 2008 and 2013 -> their subsequent releases
That means all later releases, but White only got to number two.
  • on Oricon's albums chart. -> in Japan
There are two major charts in Japan, Oricon and Billboard, so it needs to be clarified.
  • certified Double Platinum -> certified 2x Platinum
All the numbers in the prose should be consistently written in full or consistently use numbers, so 'Double Platinum' is probably better!
  • Superfly has -> Superfly achieved
Done.
  • song "Wildflower" -> song, "Wildflower"
Done. --Prosperosity (talk) 07:36, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Further comments (@Prosperosity)
  • The headers are not correctly used, nor is the article sorted in an appropriate way, use Hilary Duff discography as an example as to how we use headers in discographies.
  • Done.
  • Remove all appearances of "(JPN)" in the tables, they're unnecessary.
  • Done.
  • RIAJ don't release sales; these sales are sourced from Oricon. But otherwise, done.
  • The release dates of albums (compliation, DVD...) need to be accompanied by an iTunes or JVC link to prove their release (see Inna discography).
  • They are; the Oricon link for albums and singles positions features a detailed list all of the original release dates, meaning additional citations for this data isn't necessary. For all releases not included in the link, I've already included additional citations.
  • The songs need to be accompanied by an iTunes or JVC link toprove their release. (again, see Inna discography as an example).
  • As above; but with additional sources for non-physically released singles.
  • The translations of singles are unnecessary.
  • Not according to WP:MJ's advice on using Japanese script in lists. Can you explain why this is not necessary for an article dealing with a non-English topic?

Charlize Theron filmography[edit]

Nominator(s): Cowlibob (talk) 13:27, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Charlize Theron is a South African-American actress noted for roles such as a serial killer in Monster (2003), a miner fighting sexual harassment in North Country (2005), and more recently as rebel soldier Imperator Furiosa in Mad Max: Fury Road (2015). Here's a hopefully comprehensive rundown of her appearances thus far, as usual look forward to all the helpful comments on how to improve it. Cowlibob (talk) 13:27, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Support meets the criteria. Good work NapHit (talk) 22:59, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Comment

  • "her debut" should you clarify you mean her film debut?
  • Since when did television and music videos form part of a filmography?
  • BCDB is referred to as The Big Cartoon Database.

Not much. Very good. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:38, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Made relevant fixes. Films and television credits are listed per WP:FILMOGRAPHY. I've removed the music video appearance. Cowlibob (talk) 12:22, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Comment
  • I think the 5th ref should be replaced with a better source.
The lead section is very good.--Skr15081997 (talk) 10:45, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
@Skr15081997: I unfortunately couldn't find a different source but in the interview she does specify that she spent time with a therapist to "practice schizophrenia" for the role. Cowlibob (talk) 12:15, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

List of Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club grounds[edit]

Nominator(s): AssociateAffiliate, ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

AssociateAffiliate started this article and created the table, I have added an extensive lead and generally tweaked it a bit, and now feel it meets the FL requirements. It follows the same format as four similar lists which have been recently promoted to FL and one which currently has two supports, and all feedback from those FLCs has been incorporated into this article too..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Support meets the criteria, great work. NapHit (talk) 19:42, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • "Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club is one of the 18 member clubs of the English County Championship - This needs to be sourced
    • Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
      • Added another source since the one which you'd added doesn't quite cover the '18' claim. —Vensatry (Talk) 10:57, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
  • "the current club was established in March or April 1841" - Do we have any other source which clears up the uncertainty?
    • Not that I can find, but on reflection I don't think the specific month is important so I have removed it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:31, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
  • "The Nottinghamshire team have played first class, List A, or Twenty20 matches at eight different grounds. - Is it worth clarifying that Trent Bridge is the only venue to host T20s till date?
  • Although the notes look like being obvious claims, I'd suggest you to source them for the sake of reference completeness.
  • Link Hachette UK, BBC, and BBC News accordingly.

—Vensatry (Talk) 17:01, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Support, meets the standards. —Vensatry (Talk) 10:57, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • You mention matches in the lead before describing what kind of matches.
  • "the current club was established in 1841.[3] The present club has competed in first-class cricket from 1841" repetitive (i.e. current club/present club and "established in 1841"/"from 1841")
  • It seems a little odd to include "cricket" in the List A cricket link but not in the Twenty20 cricket link. I understand that's how our articles are titled but it seems inconsistent.
  • All-England Eleven links to William Clarke's All-England Eleven in the lead but All England Eleven (without hyphen) links to All-England cricket teams which redirects to Non-international England cricket teams. I suggest the format and link inconsistencies are resolved.
  • Minor point, but first para in the lead talks about playing at grounds "within the county" yet Notts (per the third para) have played at a ground in Lincolnshire...
  • Statistics are complete through to the end of the 2014 season. why not make it up to date?
  • Cricket Archive currently says 1567 first-class matches have been played, admittedly not all by Nottingham, and some are future matches, but how did you arrive at your total of 1478?
    • It's the number of matches where Notts were the home team -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:18, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
      • So you hand-counted those which didn't feature Notts? Also, the previous note applies, since the 2015 season has concluded, you'll need a re-count... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:31, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
        • In a nutshell yes, although I did it by exporting the data into Excel and doing some jiggery-pokery there :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:01, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Bearing that in mind, isn't something similar to Note B applicable to the Trent Bridge total?
    • Done (finally - sorry for the delay.....) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:42, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • The other Cricket Archive ground match lists also have different totals and hence their titles in the references are incorrect.
  • Ref 7 is a very peculiar choice to prove that Cleethorpes is in Lincolnshire...

That's it from me. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:31, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Inna discography[edit]

Nominator(s): Cartoon network freak (talk) 04:12, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it is well written and reliable. I also followed the style and structure from Alexandra Stan's discography, which got two supports so far.Cartoon network freak (talk) 04:12, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@TheFame08: All done. Thanks! --Cartoon network freak (talk) 07:26, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Support - Look good now! TheFame08 (talk) 11:11, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
    • Delegates, take this thread into account if you end up making a decision on this FLC. Giants2008 (Talk) 19:22, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Comment

  • Romanian singer Inna has released four studio albums, one of which it was reissued => "Romanian singer Inna has released four studio albums, one of which was reissued"
  • As she is Romanian, that chart should be listed first in each table. Did none of her albums chart at all in Romania? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:36, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Done! Actually, Romania hasn't got an official album charts. However, Inna's first two studio albums got certified Gold in Romania, but as far as I know certifications can't be included without a chart, can they? All the best! --Cartoon network freak (talk) 09:58, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Procedural comment – Actually, I count only one support at the Alexandra Stan discography FLC right now. That's not the "substantial support" for the first FLC needed for a second nomination, per the FLC instructions. This should either be taken off FLC until that nominiation runs its course, or the Stan discography should be archived. Which would you prefer? Giants2008 (Talk) 16:09, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
@Giants2008: Actually, Azealia 911 stroke his oppose on Alexandra Stan's FLC. In reply to your question, I would prefer to archive Stan's discography FLC. Cheers! Cartoon network freak (talk) 17:43, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Okay. I'll remember to close that tomorrow when I get a chance. Giants2008 (Talk) 19:22, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Alright, I'll take a look at this.

Lead

  • The image needs an alt text. This is a requirement for FAs and FLs. It's good to know for the future.
  • Quickly, the track gained worldwide recognition, reaching the top twenty of the charts in most of the countries it peaked. change it to "reaching the top twenty across multiple charts. I'd normally add worldwide at the end, but that's already stated at the beginning of the sentence.
  • "Amazing", one of them, managed to peak at number one on the Romanian Top 100, while "10 Minutes", another one, marked the fourth time in a row that Inna reached the top ten in France. I don't like the "one of them". Instead, try "One of these singles was amazing, which reached the number one position on the Romanian Top 100". After 10 Minutes, the "another one" isn't necessary.
  • Her next studio album, I Am The Club Rocker, was launched in 2011. For this project... I don't think you can launch an album. You launch campaigns. Change launch to released. Also, while project is fine, I think it's better just to simply state what it was, and it's an album.
  • "Tu şi eu", the record's third single, ranked at number five in Romania, while "More Than Friends", a collaboration with Daddy Yankee, peaked at number seven in Spain... Change ranked at number five to peaked at number five.
  • Particularly, the record was released under the name of Body and the Sun in Japan. This entire sentence can be removed and be replaced by footnote D.

Albums

  • This is more of an aesthetic thing, but I like moving the refs for each album to the release date. Not necessary though.

I'll take a look at the refs tonight, but once those issues are cleaned up, I think I can give this a support. Famous Hobo (talk) 17:04, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

@Famous Hobo: All done! Thanks! Cartoon network freak (talk) 15:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments from FrB.TG

  • "singles featured on her debut studio album" → "singles featured from her debut studio album"
  • A redundant comma after "10 Minutes".
  • "Her next studio album" I think you can simply call it her second album.
  • "for streaming four million copies" – four million times.
  • "Inna announced the premiere of her self-titled fourth studio album in 2015" – instead you can say that she "released" her self-titled fourth album.
  • "Early 2015, it was certified Platinum in Spain" – I think you forgot to begin the sentence with the preposition "in".
  • If you are to use rowspan, please don't make tables sortable (talking about ones in § Music videos). -- Frankie talk 09:15, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

@FrB.TG: All done. Happy new year! --Cartoon network freak (talk) 12:29, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for resolving them but please keep in mind that FLC quotes: "Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, break up, or add graphics to comments from other editors". Anyway, now that my comments are addressed, I am ready to give my support . -- Frankie talk 13:19, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you so much! BTW, I have undone the striking of your comments. --Cartoon network freak (talk) 15:25, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support from an IP - Looks good! 1.52.124.206 (talk) 05:21, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Happy new year! Face-smile.svg --Cartoon network freak (talk) 09:07, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
I hate to say it, but this looks like another weak support without much behind it, such as a statement that the article meets FL standards. It's fairly unusual to have two at one FLC, but it looks like the case here. If we could get a couple more reviews from experienced editors, that would be great. Giants2008 (Talk) 15:06, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments

  • "one of which was reissued" not sure this is really essential in the lead, note it in the albums section.
  • "four ... 22 ... " MOSNUM.
  • "certified Gold" link "certified" appropriately, and not sure the Gold needs to be capitalised, etc.
  • "singles featured from her " no need for "featured".
  • "fourth time in a row that Inna reached the top ten in France." well according to the table, "Love" didn't chart in France.
  • "Her next studio album" be specific, perhaps "Her second..."
  • I Am The Club Rocker appears to be called I Am the Club Rocker.
  • "commercially successful throughout Europe" it charted no higher than 36 and only 76 in her native Bulgaria. That doesn't constitute "commercially successful throughout Europe" I'm afraid.
  • Party Never Ends redirects back to the list article so unlink it.
  • "available for purchase" do you mean she "released" it?
  • " "Tu şi eu", the record's third single" in the table this is described in English rather than Bulgarian. It also appears to be the second single, not the third, or is the ordering in the table not chronological?
  • It also suggests it was released in 2012.
  • More Than Friends appears to really be called More than Friends.
  • "for streaming four" -> "for being streamed four"
  • "Following this, Inna released her self-titled fourth studio album in 2015.[A] The album's first single, "Cola Song"" according to the table, the first single from her self-titled album was "Diggy Down".
  • "number eight on the Spanish Singles Chart" you've already mentioned Spain twice prior to linking this chart. Suggest you link it first time.
  • Bel (VI) and Bel (Wal) both link to the same article.
  • Any reason SPA isn't ESP if NLD isn't NDL?
  • "Party Never Ends 2" redirects back to this discography so unlink it.
  • Not seeing 913 in Ref 6.
  • Is it Wow or WOW? Be consistent.
  • I Need You For Christmas seems to be "for" Christmas.
  • "List of music videos as lead artist, with director" should be "director(s)" per the table.
  • Only notes that are complete sentences need a full stop.
  • Non-English-language references should have a language added to them, e.g. 43 is French, 40 is Italian, etc.
  • Look for WP:DASH fails, i.e. spaced hyphens should be en-dashes, e.g. the titles of refs 102 to 105.
  • Is it "WOW Biz" or "Wowbiz" - be consistent.
  • Antena 1 is a dab link.

So, after a quick run through, it's a clear oppose from me based on the sheer volume of issues needed to get this up to a half-decent starting point for a Featured List. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:40, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Ajay Devgan filmography[edit]

Nominator(s): D'SuperHero (talk) 12:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Filmography of actor Ajay Devgan. Here is the complete list of films done in his career. with enough sources and context. D'SuperHero (talk) 12:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

This is the second time you have nominated an article, with just few edits here and there. I believe the major contributor @Skr15081997: should be aware of this FLC. I also feel the lead needs some work. There is just one review supporting the "..appreciated by the critics" claim, and too many instances were the sentence starts with Devgan. Yashthepunisher (talk) 05:22, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Comment : Yashthepunisher Not here and there. Lead was really short and had inadequate information, so have been expanded though. Added just few refs and footnotes. In addition, TV appearances had been added because only 3 shows were there. D'SuperHero (talk) 05:54, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I agree, but Skr was the one who addded sources in the table. You can check the article's history. The guideline says "Ones who are not significant contributors to the list should consult regular editors of the list before nomination." Your contributions are right, but we can't just ignore the one who sourced the table and was planning to take this to FL for a long time. Maybe you can add him as a co-nominator or such. Yashthepunisher (talk) 05:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
  • @SchroCat and PresN: I think it's time to consider this nomination for a procedural close. As the above user has highlighted, nominator is not a main contributor to this FLC. Has not discussed with the main contributor Skr. Their main edit to this article was an expansion of the lead which has been reverted as copyvio in this edit leaving just three sentences as the lead. [[3]]. Cowlibob (talk) 21:03, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Well, for starters, I think that this string of 33 edits is enough to count as a main contributor; I'm not going to get in the business of edit counting to determine who's number 1, preferring to reserve that issue for pure driveby nominations and nominations in bad faith where the list has someone who's been working on it continuously (someone did that to me a couple times, it's not fun). That said...
  • I don't know if the contributions were a copyvio, though as D'SuperHero has not complained I assume that they are. I do know they were simply a prose conversion of the list, so that's no good. Which means at present the list has no real lead, and before the reversion it did not have an acceptable lead. @D'SuperHero: I'm not going to procedural close this nom, but it currently has some pretty substantive issues that you seem to have ignored for nearly 3 weeks after opening this nomination. If I don't see any work on it, I'm going to have to assume this nomination was abandoned and close it. --PresN 01:59, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
PresN No! the contribs weren't a copyvio at all. On another tone, a bit expansion was framed as CopyVio by another user. Foremost edits have been done and no other claims to done to term it as a CopyVio. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 13:43, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Oppose
  • All of the sentences I see start with "Devgan then starred in", "In the same year, Devgan", "In xxx year, Devgan portrayed" or "His release of the year xxx were". The prose looks like presenting a list of bulleted-points in a passage form. IMO, it is very very very dull, partially incorrect (grammatically) and repetitive.
  • "In 1992, Devgan then starred in Martial arts based film Jigar opposite" – there is no need of "then" and why is "M" of martial arts is capitalized? Also, the Jigar needs to be in italics since it's a film.
  • "Devgan portrayed the role of a kickboxer" – where?
  • "The same year Devgn starred in successful films Suhaag (1994), Dilwale" – why is the year of the Suhaag given and not Dilwale's? Also, in what terms were the films successful, and, according to the source, Suhaag was "above average" at the box office and that does not exactly mean successful.
  • "Devgan's other releases in late 1990s including Itihaas, Ishq, Pyaar To Hona Hi Tha performed average at the box-office" – you need definite article before "late 1990s" and "performed average" is not grammatically correct.
  • Can't you just combine the last two sentences of the first para?
  • "In 2003, Devgan starred in Ram Gopal Verma's horror film Bhoot, opposite Urmila Matondkar" – Matondkar linked twice in the lead.
  • "Devgan played Othello in critically acclaimed film Omkara (2006)" – for "critically acclaimed", you need a source which explicitly states that it was "critically acclaimed".
  • "In 2007, Devgan starred in two films, director Anubhav Sinha-directed Cash and Ram Gopal Varma Ki Aag" – what does "director Anubhav Sinha-directed" mean? Also, were both films directed by Sinha?
  • "Devgan starred in Rohit Shetty's comedy Golmaal Returns, a sequel to the 2006 film Golmaal: Fun Unlimited" – it's the third time where you are wikilinking Shetty and second time for Golmaal. Also, here you refer to the 2006 film as "Golmaal: Fun Unlimited" but back in the third last line of the second para it's titled "Golmaal".
  • "Devgan produced his third film, All the Best, directed by Rohit Shetty" – what is it with mentioning Rohit Shetty all the time?
  • "Devgn then starred in numerous films in 2010s" – you need "the" before the decade.
  • "Child Artist, as Master Chotu" – isn't "Master Chotu" supposed to be under "Role"? And why is "A" of "Artist" in uppercase letter?

I haven't looked at the references and table, and it was just for the prose part, which is not concise and needs a fair amount of work. -- Frankie talk 18:15, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Comment: FrB.TG fixed some of the issues including "added films in italics", "cited some of the details", "removed redundant wikilinkings", "removed Child Artist junk" and etc. Plus above and foremost work is on to edit and shape the article fine. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 08:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
And, the issues which had been rectified as per now has been striked up. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 11:08, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

List of number-one Billboard Rock Songs[edit]

Nominator(s): Famous Hobo (talk) 20:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Each time the Rock Songs chart is mentioned in an article, it's always linked to this page. Given how heavily linked this article is, I figured it should look nice. This was originally meant to be just a quick cleanup, but I figured might as well go all the way with this list.

This is my first FLC, and first Featured nominee on Wikipedia. Hopefully I didn't miss out on anything necessary for FL's, but if I did, I'll gladly input it into the list. BTW, this list was HEAVILY reliant on the List of number-one Billboard Christian Songs of the 2000s article. Like, seriously reliant, just look at the two articles. If this is a problem, I'll try and work to make them different. Finally, since this is a list that will most likely go on forever, I do plan on maintaining this list for as long as I'm on Wikipedia. Thanks for taking your time to look at this list! Famous Hobo (talk) 20:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

  • There doesn't seem to be any independent sources that discuss the topic of number-one songs on this chart in any detail, just Billboard itself. The only third-party source referenced gives some background on what the chart is but otherwise only mentions a songs that made this chart but did not go to number one. So in that sense, it doesn't seem to meet the requirements for stand-alone lists, thus failing 3b of the featured list criteria. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 20:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
That is true. But what about List of number-one Billboard Christian Songs of the 2000s or List of Billboard Hot 100 number-one singles of 2006? They rely solely on Billboard for references. Technically, since this is about a specific type of chart, I don't see why using that same source as a reference. I guess I could find individual sources from other websites for each week, but that seems a little absurd since they'll say the same thing. Don't get me wrong, if I need to do that, I'll do it (it'll just take forever). Famous Hobo (talk) 20:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
I would agree that the Christian Songs list falls under ths same parameters and probably should not be a featured list (at least as is), but Hot 100 charting is covered in different books and reaching number one is often noted and referred to in other publications as well. I'm not saying you need to use 3rd party references to cite each number one but to be a featured list, the topic of reaching number one or what's number one on the chart should be discussed elsewhere besides the main source. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 03:45, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Valid point. Honestly, I didn't spend too much time with this list (just a bit of cleanup, all the refs were there to begin with), so if it does fail the criteria, then I won't be too disappointed. I would like to get other peoples opinions though.
Comments from Wrestlinglover
  • Lead
    • Inconsistency on number usage. Some are spelled out, some are just written out. Use a format and stick to it.
  • List of number-one songs
    • Looks fine to me.
  • Statistics
    • Looks fine to me.
  • By artist
    • Looks fine to me
  • Songs by total number of weeks at number one
    • Looks fine to me
  • Notes
    • Looks fine to me
  • References
    • May want to move the templates to an external links section and include some website links, like Billboard.--WillC 09:56, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Wrestlinglover Both issues have been addressed. I stuck with fully written out numbers as they look more professional in my opinion. For the external links section, the only website I could think of linking was Billboard, since they run the chart. BTW, would you mind chipping into the discussion of whether this list fits the criteria of stand-alone lists that Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars and I were talking about? Famous Hobo (talk) 19:06, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Honestly, I never questioned whether it could be a stand alone list. It seems notable and fine with me. It could use some third party references to help curve the notability issue though.--WillC 20:11, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

List of power stations in Sri Lanka[edit]

Nominator(s): Rehman 01:21, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

The page shows the most comprehensive list of power stations in Sri Lanka, something that is [oddly] not found on a single source anywhere on the internet or offline. The list is rich with content, referencing, pictures, and a map. I believe this should pass FL. Rehman 01:21, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

It's so quiet in here... Rehman 12:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley[edit]

  • "while the renewable energy sector consists of mostly of privately-run plants" Repetition of "of"
  • Fixed. Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • "2,115MW (53.8%) was from thermal" In my view, the fuel used - gas or coal etc - is more significant than the technology.
  • There is only one coal source in the country. And thermal is the most common (and only) term used locally. Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Fossil fuel section - no figures for the percentage and MW for different fuels and no columns in the table for this.
  • Sorry, I don't understand this point... Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Coal is 900+500=1,1400MW, which is 35.6% of the total of 3932MW. Oil is 2115-1400=715MW, which is 18.2%. Gas currently zero, although you say there are plans to introduce it. I think these figures should be stated. Personally, I would have separate tables for coal and oil, but this is of course up to you. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:19, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I have added the figures to the lead section. The tables were separate when this list was created a long time ago. It was changed for two reasons, one because there will only be two entries in the coal table, and two because the local energy industry always collectively identifies all fossil-fuel plants as thermal power stations. You cannot find separated list anywhere on local publications. Hence the table was merged to reflect a more locally recognizable style. Rehman 09:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I strongly disagree with merging oil and coal. The fact that local sources make it more difficult to find the information which is most important for international readers is no reason for Wikipedia to do so. You have a separate table for solar, which has two power stations and insignificant capacity, and not for coal which is over a third of capacity. I would also suggest you have a separate table giving the MW for each power source and its percentage share of the whole. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:18, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
  • By "You cannot find separated list anywhere on local publications", I meant that they are always collectively identified, not that info about them are hard to find. Rehman 00:11, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
  • "Hydroelectricity played a very significant role in the national installed power capacity since it was rapidly introduced in the 1950s–1990s." It is unclear whether this refers to the current situation - if it does, then I think you need "Hydroelectricity has played"
  • Fixed. Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • On my computer the list of hydroelectric stations is pushed below the images, created a large blank space.
  • I will try to see if this can be fixed... It may be one of those cases where the table wont be perfect on all resolutions... Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • What does nameplate capacity mean?
  • I have linked it. Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • What does the 'segment' column in hydroelectric refer to?
  • I have added a brief explanation. Basically, they are three regions which the government has created for hydropower development. Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I think it would be better to change the heading from "segment" to "region" as your explanation refers to regions. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:19, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Changed to "Region". Rehman 09:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
  • No geolocation for hydroelectric stations under construction, and none for any of the dams.
  • The physical locations of the power stations are not yet disclosed. Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • But you have a column for the location of power stations. Should this be location of water source? If so, the missing locations of the ones under construction are given in the separate articles about them. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:19, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
  • No, the water source and power station are not always the same. They could be located large distances (dozens of kilometres) apart. The sub articles states the coordinates for the water source/dam, not the power plant. Rehman 09:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
  • You seem to be missing my point. You say above "The physical locations of the power stations are not yet disclosed." yet you have a column headed "Geo-location of power station" Dudley Miles (talk) 22:18, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm referring to the two plants under construction. The power plant details of those are still not disclosed, but the water body is known. Hence those two fields under "Geo-location of power station" are blank. Rehman 00:11, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Why is the commissioning date given for hydroelectric and not for other types?
  • Commission dates (for non hydro) are very hard to find, and the published dates are often conflicting with other sources. I was considering if to remove the hydro dates (to be in line with others)... What do you think? Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I would personally remove them, but other editors may disagree.Dudley Miles (talk) 18:19, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Hmm... I personally feel that it would be a bad move to remove information for the sake of decoration, but lets see if anyone else feel this should be removed... Rehman 09:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
  • "after numerous wrongdoings and hidden political dealings surfaced" "wrongdoings" is colloquial and vague.
  • I chose that word from the referenced news linked. I have changed it to "misconducts". Hope that's better. Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Done. Rehman 09:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
  • "The last privately owned first-come, first-served style wind farm projects, the Pollupalai and Vallimunai Wind Farms, were completed in late 2014, by when operations in the industry was ceased by presidential order.[" What are "first-come, first-served style wind farm projects"? Also "by when" is ungrammatical - and you say the industry was closed down and then give a list of operational stations.
  • I'm trying to say that the Pollupalai and Vallimunai Wind Farms are the newest/last wind farms that were commissioned. I did some changes to the wordings, but I'm unsure if it gives out the correct meaning. Also, industry was closed down for new projects. Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • "when operations in the industry was ceased until further notice" This implies that the whole industry has been closed down. Maybe "when the construction of new wind farms was suspended further notice" Does the closure affect the Mannar Island proposal? This should be made clear. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:19, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Agreed. I've added as "when the construction of new privately-owned wind farms were suspended until further notice", as that only applied to the private sector (the Mannar project was/is not affected). Thanks! Rehman 09:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
  • "The last privately owned first-come, first-served style wind farm projects" You still have not explained what "first-come, first-served style" means. If there are no new private projects being approved why not delete it and just say "The last private sector wind farm projects"? Dudley Miles (talk) 22:18, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
  • In first-come-first-serve, if a particular developer submits an application for a particular patch of land, the gov assigns that land to that developer. Another developer cannot develop on the same patch of land. I will add an explanation to this later today or tomo (it's 06:35 now, need to head to work soon). If you wish to add yourself, please feel free. Also, they are not the last projects. Wind projects will be back online (the stopping of projects is only temporary). Rehman 00:11, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I think more work is needed on this list. The information is limited compared with - for example - List of power stations in England, and inconsistent between different categories. For example, you give nearest city for thermal but not for other types. The type of fuel for thermal stations is crucial information which needs to be given. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:12, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Nearest city is included for thermal power stations because, locally, most of these thermal stations are also commonly called by the names of their closest city. This is not the case for other types. Also, the list is maintained in a summarized type to avoid being stretched too far causing multiple devises to not display properly (such as the white space you mentioned earlier). I'm using a 1920px wide display, and it is already almost the widest it can comfortably be. For fuel, I have added a sentence explaining that all thermal plants run on fuel oil, except for Lakviyaja and Sampur.
  • Thanks for the feedback Dudley Miles. I have responded to each point above with an indent. Rehman 14:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I think most points are covered now. However, a column for geolocation of hydro water sources would be helpful. Separate tables for coal and oil are, in my view, crucial. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:14, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments by Giants2008[edit]

Oppose – Welcome to FLC, Rehman. The list you have worked on is certainly unique, and there is a lot of potential here. However, there are several issues remaining, which need to be addressed if this is to have a chance at promotion.

  • The start of the lead is a variant of the "This is a list of XXX"-type openings, which have been discouraged at FLC for years. The lead doesn't have anything on how many power stations there are, so that's one option for leading off the article.
Working on it... Will update here again. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm, I'm kind of lost on this. If you have any ideas before me, please feel free to make the change, and I shall join in. Else, will try my best to do it within the next couple of days. Rehman 14:34, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
As I said above, I don't see anything in the lead about how many power stations are in Sri Lanka, which feels like a good topic for a summary sentence that could start a list like this. A relevant statistic or definition is usually a good way to begin a list article, if one is having trouble thinking of an opening. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:04, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Working on it... Rehman 23:43, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
  • The bold link in the introduction should be removed, per the Manual of Style.
Unbolded. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • The hyphen in "privately-run" should be removed.
Removed. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Working on it... Will update here again. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
@Giants2008, I have updated the first table (fossil fuel) to experiment. All seems good, except for the background colour in the row headers. Do you know how to override that? Rehman 02:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't know of a way to override the darkening of the rows off the top of my head, but it hasn't been called a problem in other FLCs. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
No worries, it doesn't seem to be a big issue anyway. Rehman 14:34, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Accessibility guidelines also state that colored items in tables should have matching symbols. In this case, I think it would be better to remove the colors altogether, since they appear to duplicate the purpose of the Status columns. If you want to keep them, please at least consider removing the colors from some of the columns that are not directly related to the status; you could probably just have that column and the first one, rather than adding symbols to everything.
Working on it... Will update here again. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
I get your point on the colours and what MOS:DTT says. The reason I added the colours to the whole row is because it makes it much easier to identify operational/decommissioned power stations when sorting by Ownership, Name, City, or Capacity. The user does not need to look left-and-right each time. I think this is quite helpful, but if it negatively impacts passing FL, then we can take it off altogether. Waiting for your reply. Rehman 02:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, that really needs to be changed. We can't be making too many exceptions to the access guidelines because of inconveniences that they cause, or we may invite everyone to make edits that are not generally recommended. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Alright. I went ahead and updated all the tables. I think it should be okay now. Rehman 14:34, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Fossil-fuel: "after the completion of the Sampur Power Station in late 2017, which is being...". Since the last bit is meant to refer to the station and not the year, some rearranging is in order. Try making a change to "after the late 2017 completion", which requires the least work elsewhere.
Changed. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Another removable hyphen in "privately-owned". Also, there's one in the next section, along with one in Wind power.
Removed all. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • "except Lakvijaya and Sampur, which runs on coal." "runs" → "run", since there are two of them.
Done. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Add "to" in "the government has decided not renew...".
Done. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Hydroelectric: "when further thermal power stations was introduced in 2010." "was" → "were".
Done. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • "Further information of each power station...". "of" should probably be "about" or "on".
Done. Changed to "on". Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Are geo-locations possible for the two entries without them?
Unfortunately not. They are not disclosed yet, as explained to Dudley above. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Solar power: I'm not sure if "constructions" should be plural here.
Changed to singular. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Wind power: "are Windforce and Senok, which currently owns 7 and 3 separate wind farms respectively". "owns" should be singular here.
Done. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • "The other companies in the market includes...". Same issue with "includes" here.
Changed to singular. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • All references from printed publications such as newspapers should have their publishers italicized, which can be done be changed the publisher= parameter in the cite templates to work=. I count references 11, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, and 25 as needing such fixes, and there may be more that I missed.
Updated. Some of the news references does not do printed publications. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Reference 18 needs a publisher listed.
Done. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I like to offer support for topics that are different from what FLC normally sees, but there are simply too many prose and table issues right now. If you can fix them and satisfy Dudley, though, I would likely strike my oppose. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Giants2008. Thanks for the input. I have responded to each point above. Rehman 13:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

List of Padma Vibhushan award recipients[edit]

Nominator(s): - Vivvt (Talk) 17:06, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

This is a list of India's second-highest civilian award recipients. I believe its written with the neutrality mentioning the refusals and returns of the coveted award. Looking forward to constructive criticism. - Vivvt (Talk) 17:06, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments by Dharmadhyaksha
  • DODs of posthumous wins should be mentioned. Maybe in footnotes like how they are done at Bharat Ratna.
    • Done
  • Also, instead of using the Template:Dagger, can you insert the symbol "†"? The purpose of having a symbol along with colour coding is that it should help colour-blind people. But the template doesn't allow you to copy the dagger symbol and Ctrl+F it. This direct use of symbol will allow Ctrl+Fing for lazy guys like me. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 06:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
    • Done Let me know if you have more. - Vivvt (Talk) 04:38, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments by Yashthepunisher

  • Prime Minister of India is linked twice in the lead.
    • Removed
  • Is is necessary to write "..Republic Day of India"? As the opening sentence mentions that its an "Indian" award. You can remove India from it.
    • Removed
  • Wiki-link "Ministry of Home Affairs" in ref 1.
    • I wish not to wiki-link anything in references. This was also asked earlier in one of my previous FLCs and was bought to my attention by Crisco as per the discussion here.
  • Wiki-link Daily Mail and The Gazette of India at ref 3 and 4 respectively.
    • Same as above.
  • Wiki-link The Hindu, The Times of India, Business Standard, Mumbai Mirror, Outlook magazine and Rediff.com as well, when they first appear in the ref. Yashthepunisher (talk) 05:56, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
    • Same as above.
      • Fair enough.
    • @Yashthepunisher: Let me know if you have more comments. - Vivvt (Talk) 06:49, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
  • There are few instances where the sentence is pointing to "India". Like: "Prime Minister of India", "Constitution of India.", "Supreme Court of India". They are repetitve and quite redundant. Try to trim some of them.
    • Done

That's it from me. Yashthepunisher (talk) 07:00, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

  • I don't see any other issue with this article. Solve the last comment and it has my Support. Yashthepunisher (talk) 16:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks much for the comments and support. - Vivvt (Talk) 04:27, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Comment

  • Why is Rambhadracharya listed as Giridhar Mishra? It is neither the name used in the official list nor his common name?
  • Instead of using flags, using the name of the country in State column (renamed as State/Domicile as done in the official list) is better. A foreign national can be colour-coded in a different colour like the posthumous one.Redtigerxyz Talk 06:10, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
  • I thought of that earlier but recipient like Aga Khan is a citizen for two countries. So dropped the idea for the easier maintenance to address WP:ACCESS
  • Image review:
    • Nominated Sumati Morarjee image for deletion. Replace with another female recipient, if possible.--Redtigerxyz Talk 14:54, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
  • @Redtigerxyz: The deletion request is declined at Commons. Should I still replace the image? - Vivvt (Talk) 12:10, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments

  • I'm not sure why you split the tables by decade, it dramatically reduces the usability of the sorting, i.e. you can only find all those involved in Social Work (for example) in a decade, and not overall. I would merge the tables.
  • Wouldn't it be a inconvenience for the navigation? Earlier, it was a huge long table. I chopped it off per decade considering its future expansion.
  • Do the flag symbols used in the table meet WP:ACCESS?
  • Not sure. How do you want me handle Aga Khan who is a citizen for two countries? Should I just represent all the all the non-Indian in same colour and mention the respective countries in the footnote? Redtigerxyz also asked the same Q above.
  • I don't know how best to do it, I just asked you if the symbols were accessible to screen-reading software, for example. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  • All tables, including the key, should use row and col scopes.
  • Is there a reason for the over-capitalisation in the table, e.g. Why isn't "Public Affairs" just "Public affairs"?
  • Capitalisation is used in the referential data. Let me know if that should be changed.
  • "only Five-star rank officer" - caps again, just "five-star" is fine.
  • Done
  • Really should be using page references for that 193-page PDF which is being used to source the winners from 1954 to 2014.
  • In-Progress
  • Basanti Devi redirects to Basanti Devi College. Who was the recipient? And if it was Basanti Devi herself, would it have been posthumous? Or was she 93 at the time?
  • Basanti Devi herself was the recipient. I didnt get your 93-year-old concern. Could you please elaborate? - Vivvt (Talk) 11:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  • It was because the link appeared to give the award to the college, not the individual. When I looked into the individual, it appears she would either have been deceased, or very old (93) at the time of the award. I just wanted to confirm to whom it was awarded (because the list isn't clear on that with the redirect to the college) and whether it was posthumous. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Basanti Devi is now a separate article. She died a year later and was 93 when she received the award. Btw, just observing that non of the Padma awards have ever been given to institutes, but only to people, DOA. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Very good list indeed. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:57, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Tropical cyclone naming[edit]

Nominator(s): Jason Rees, Typhoon2013

So me and Jason were recently just talking about bringing the article: Tropical cyclone naming to the FLC and I agreed. It sure does meet the criteria. Well, this is a list of names for tropical cyclones in each different basins and I believe it is important, especially for meteorologists. Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:50, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Just to reiterate here I feel that Tropical Cyclone Naming meets the criteria for a Featured List as all names are sourced and the sections have an appropriate summary that is sourced. I asked Typhoon2013 to co-nominate it with me as he has had almost as many edits to the article as me.Jason Rees (talk) 15:36, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments strange to me that you've had to wait almost two months for any comments, hopefully mine will get the ball rolling.

    • Its one of those topics which can seem rather boring and trivial to most people, but hopefully we will now get a stream of comments.Jason Rees (talk) 00:39, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Lists of tropical cyclone names is linked in the lead, but that just self-redirects so unlink it.
  • I would split the lead into two paragraphs.
  • Split.Jason Rees (talk) 00:39, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Tables need to include row and col scopes and preferably captions to comply with WP:ACCESS.
    • Not sure how to deal with this comment - as a result I will defer to CB on this one.Jason Rees (talk) 00:39, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • WMO uses a z, not a s in its "organization".
  • What is " ₱1"?
  • " of 120W in " be consistent with the inclusion of degree symbols.
    • Should be consistent now.Jason Rees (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • "A — Z" should be an unspaced en-dash rather than a spaced em-dash.
  • " 5°N - 25°N" should be an en-dash per WP:DASH.
  • ESCAP/WMO Typhoon Committee just redirects back to the WMO, is there a subsection link that would be more specific?
    • Fraid not - Have unlinked it for now.Jason Rees (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Contributing Nations -> Contributing nations.
  • Fixed.Jason Rees (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Typhoon Hanna (Soudelor) is an odd image choice as it links to Typhoon Soudelour, a name which isn't on the list.
    • Soudelor and Hanna are the same storm, we just put more emphasis on the usage of Soudelor for it since that's the international name. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 00:22, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • "2015-16" en-dash required.
  • "The next named storm to be used within the area is Corentin." cite, and WP:ASOF. Check other instances of this kind of thing.
    • I am not a fan of having the next name to be used in the area stuff, because it is unciteable for most of the lists especially at the height of summer for the typhoon list. As a result I have removed them and I hope that my co-nominator @Typhoon2013: does not add them back in again unless he can source them all.Jason Rees (talk) 00:46, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
  • You don't need to keep relinking the WMO, but please spell it consistently.
    • I think they are now all consistant.Jason Rees (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • 90°E - 141°E - en-dash please.
  • Equator - 10°S ditto.
  • Please fix all other such instances.
    • I ran the dash checker which seemed to fix the dashes - if there are still problems let me know and I will fix them.Jason Rees (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Isobel [nb 6] remove the space before the note. Check all other notes.

That's in on a quick trawl through. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:58, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: seeing if I can help out with the table formatting...are the changes to the North Atlantic one appropriate? Style is a bit different than what I'm used to so just want to make sure before I move on with the rest of the list. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 00:22, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Yup, I think that works. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:44, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Ok we have applied this to the rest of the tables.Jason Rees (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the Review :) @The Rambling Man:

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Shakib Al Hasan[edit]

Nominator(s):Aftabuzzaman, —Vensatry (Talk) 18:24, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

My first fifers-list (of a player's) in a long time. Aftabuzzaman created the basic article. I expanded the lead and tidied up the table a bit. —Vensatry (Talk) 18:24, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Support Great work. NapHit (talk) 14:27, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • "With 15 five-wicket hauls across all formats of the game" => "With 15 five-wicket hauls across all formats of international cricket", as currently it implies that these are the only fifers he's ever taken in any cricket match at all
  • "He ended the year with three more five-wicket hauls—coming in consecutive innings—against South Africa and Sri Lanka." => "He ended the year with three more five-wicket hauls, which came in consecutive innings against South Africa and Sri Lanka."
  • "ODI" is introduced in the final paragraph of the lead but it has not been mentioned before and the abbreviation is not explained or linked. It should probably be written out in full here, although obviously it is OK to then use the abbreviation in the next sentence.
  • "He took five wickets for 47 runs in the match which his team won by 145 runs" => "He took five wickets for 47 runs in the match, which his team won by 145 runs" - a bit picky but there you go ;-)
  • That's all I can spot -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Fixed all, thanks for the comments. As for the last comment, I have problems with comma splice :). —Vensatry (Talk) 08:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Support - all looks good now == ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:45, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

WCW International World Heavyweight Championship[edit]

Nominator(s): GRAPPLE X 02:01, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

This is a short list but a complete one, on a topic I found particularly intriguing. I feel it meets the standalone criteria as it's niche enough that giving it a full treatment in any conceivable parent article would be unduly focussed. The list is based on other FLs within the subject area, and the text has been copyedited by Baffle gab1978, though any criticism on either is welcome. GRAPPLE X 02:01, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude
  • "Over the title's history, eight championship reigns have been shared between four wrestlers" => "Over the title's history, eight championship reigns were shared between four wrestlers"
  • "Rick Rude held the championship the most often, with three title reignsis reigns" - something seems to have gone a bit haywire at the end there......
  • "the shortest reign of eight days; while Rude" - either lose the word "while", or change the semi-colon to a comma. Either is correct, but what is currently there is not
  • Fixed all three of these. GRAPPLE X 22:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • "Lex Luger was chosen as the successor to Flair's WCW World Heavyweight Championship......Masahiro Chono was appointed to hold his NWA championship" - Flair did not own either championship, also it doesn't read quite right to say that Chono was appointed champion, because that makes it sound like he was simply awarded it (I realise that in non-kayfabe terms he was technically awarded it, but hopefully you see what I'm getting at). I would re-word this whole bit as "Lex Luger was chosen as the next WCW World Heavyweight Champion. This championship would remain active throughout WCW's existence until the company merged with WWF;[3] Masahiro Chono was chosen to win a tournament designed to crown the next holder of the NWA championship"
  • Amended. I found it tricky trying to remain as non-kayfabe as possible without being explanatory to the point of condescension but I think the suggested change works well. GRAPPLE X 22:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • It's better now, but "Lex Luger was chosen as the next WCW World Heavyweight Champion, which would eventually be carried throughout WCW's existence until the company merged with WWF" kinda makes it sound like Luger held it for the whole of that time. How about "Lex Luger was chosen as the next holder of the WCW World Heavyweight Championship, which would remain the promotion's primary title throughout WCW's existence until the company merged with WWF"? BTW sorry for taking so long to reply, I forgot I'd commented here. My bad :-( -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:12, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
  • No problem, it's a volunteer effort after all. I made the suggested fix. GRAPPLE X 09:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
  • "The latter championship became the WCW International World Heavyweight Championship, and was renamed when WCW withdrew its membership of the NWA in September 1993" - I think this vastly over-simplifies the situation, also it sounds like one day the NWA title simply became the International title, for reasons unspecified, and after that WCW withdrew from the NWA. I think you need to say a lot more about how WCW had "control" of the NWA title but got into conflict with the NWA board over who would challenge for it, resulting in WCW withdrawing. You then also need to say that because WCW physically retained the Big Gold Belt they needed to come up with a title for it to represent, so dreamed up the International World title.
  • How does "As a result of WCW withdrawing its membership of the NWA in September 1993, Flair's NWA World Heavyweight Championship no longer carried the NWA name, but WCW retained the physical belt they had used to represent the title. This belt became the WCW International Heavyweight Championship." sound? GRAPPLE X 22:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • "Ric Flair was the first WCW International World Heavyweight Champion; he already held the title when it was renamed." - the title was not renamed, the two titles are separate. I would re-word this whole bit to "Ric Flair was the first WCW International World Heavyweight Champion; he had defeated Barry Windham for the NWA World Heavyweight Championship in July 1993 and held it at the point when WCW withdrew from the NWA two months later."
  • The physical title itself was renamed, was the intention there--as in, the big gold belt now carried a new name, which is why I've referred throughout to a "renaming". Flair didn't win something new, but the strap he carried was now being referred to as a newly-named championship, and although it's seen as having its own lineage the way this was accomplished was simply by the company calling it something new. GRAPPLE X 22:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • "For a brief time, the championship was not officially named" => "For a brief time following WCW's withdrawal, the championship which Flair held was not officially named"
  • Reworded. GRAPPLE X 22:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • When sorting by no., the vacated "reign" jumps to the top. It needs to appear in the appropriate place
  • Fixed. Now sorts as though it's #7. GRAPPLE X 22:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • In the table you again refer to the NWA title as being renamed, which didn't happen. The note against the first reign should be changed to "Flair was the reigning NWA World Heavyweight Champion and became the first holder of the new title when WCW withdrew from the NWA"
  • As above, this simply refers to the point when the "big gold belt" started being called by the new name. I reworded it to stress that the strap itself was the thing that was renamed though. GRAPPLE X 22:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Three refs from Wrestlings-Titles.com - I don't think this is the correct title for the site
  • Fixed. GRAPPLE X 22:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Hope this helps -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:49, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment - sorry, but I just spotted one more thing. "Masahiro Chono was chosen to win a tournament designed to crown the next holder of the NWA championship.[4] As a result of WCW withdrawing its membership of the NWA in September 1993, Flair's NWA World Heavyweight Championship no longer carried the NWA name...." - I think you need an extra sentence here to clarify that Flair returned to WCW and won the NWA title once again, because you talk about Chono winning it in the tourney but then jump to Flair holding it in 1993 and it's doubly confusing for the uninformed given that you previously talked about him holding it in 1991........... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
    Reworded to show he had won it again by then. GRAPPLE X 11:51, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - all seems good now -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:44, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

List of accolades received by Lost in Translation (film)[edit]

Nominator(s): Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 03:44, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because after extensive revamping and extending the article's scope, references, lead, infobox, and the like, I believe it meets the featured list criteria. Lost in Translation is the second feature film from Sofia Coppola, a comedy-drama about the one-week-long relationship between an aging, lonely movie star (Bill Murray) and an intelligent recent college graduate in an unhappy marriage (Scarlett Johansson) in a Tokyo hotel. It won 67 awards and was nominated for 109 total (including the wins). Thanks to any willing reviewers in advance! :) Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 03:44, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Support It looks great now. Congrats! GagaNutellatalk 14:46, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support –nice work. -- Frankie talk 09:15, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Support NapHit (talk) 12:40, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • Is there a reason we don't have an article for Fumihiro Hayashi since he "features" in this highly decorated movie?
  • I decided to remove his name. I added it only because he was in the starring section of the main article infobox. However, because the actor doesn't have an article it's not actually a very big role, I thought it would be better to remove instead. Johanna(talk to me!) 00:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • "September 12, 2003 before" should be a comma after that 2003 I think.
  • Done
  • Is there a reason to pipe Deutscher Filmpreis to German Film Awards when we don't pipe Nastro d'Argento to Silver Ribbon?
  • K. K. Barrett has a space between his K.s.
  • Done
  • "Australian Film Institute Awards" are just "Australian Film Institute" in the infobox, there seems to be a few instances of inconsistencies between the table and the infobox in this regard.
  • I couldn't find any other inconsistencies, but I fixed that one. Johanna(talk to me!) 00:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm not so sure that coming second or third in something constitutes "winning" it.
  • I would take this one up with someone else besides me, as the consensus in these film accolades lists is that because they are a specific achievement and not simply a nomination, they should be counted as wins for simplicity. Johanna(talk to me!) 00:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Could you show me where that consensus was agreed please? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:22, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
  • @The Rambling Man: It's more of an WP:EDITCONSENSUS because I have received this feedback in both of my previous FLCs and looking at the page, many accolades FLs and nearly all with 2nd and 3rd place finishes have this system. Johanna(talk to me!) 02:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
  • I'd like to see a proper consensus for that. After all, 3rd place isn't actually "winning" something, is it? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  • @The Rambling Man: Okay, I changed it. Let me know how it looks now. The one remaining question I would have is what template you would prefer me to use for the "2nd place" or "3rd place" text. Currently, I changed it to the {{nom}} template, but I have also seen it done (in non-FLs, granted) using the {{draw}} template. Would you have me keep this or change? Johanna(talk to me!) 03:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Otherwise a very good list. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:49, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Thanks for the review! I responded to all your comments above. Johanna(talk to me!) 00:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
@The Rambling Man: In regards to the second and third being counted as wins. I think it was based on placing being a distinction different from simply being nominated. I've opened up a discussion over at WikiProject Film as it'll affect many lists of this nature. Cowlibob (talk) 12:51, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

List of Georgetown University alumni[edit]

Nominator(s): Ergo Sum 23:03, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it is quite comprehensive of the Georgetown University alumni that are notable and/or have Wikipedia articles about them. Additionally, the alumni are sorted into sections by field and each section is alphabetized. Each section's table is sortable by name, school, and class year. Each alumnus/alumna has his or her own corresponding citation to a reliable source. The lead section introduces and explains the list and gives a succinct description of Georgetown alumni as a whole. There is an identifying image in the lead section that is salient to the list with an appropriate caption. There is a legend that explains the sorting and listing of individuals. The See Also section links to other related Wikipedia articles. For these reasons (and in comparing the list to other featured college alumni lists, such as List of Dartmouth College alumni), I believe the list meets the FL criteria. Thanks in advance to all reviewers. Ergo Sum 23:03, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Support Disclosure, I am close to the general topic, but my edits to this article have been limited. My only recent concern here was some dead links, but they seem to have been fixed. It is intentionally on par with other college alumni articles that are FLs, so it seems this deserves the recognition too.-- Patrick, oѺ∞ 16:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

List of teams and cyclists in the 2015 Giro d'Italia[edit]

Nominator(s): Relentlessly (talk) 15:28, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

This is the final Grand Tour teams and cyclists list of the 2015 season. I have already nominated List of teams and cyclists in the 2015 Vuelta a España and List of teams and cyclists in the 2015 Tour de France for FL and both have passed; I've also recently taken the main race article to GA-status. This list is closely modelled after the other two lists, although the sourcing for the Giro is a bit harder! Relentlessly (talk) 15:28, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Support Fantastic work. Kudos on improving all the Grand Tour related lists for this year! NapHit (talk) 19:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Support I can't find anything that I'd change with the list. Good work again. Disc Wheel (T + C) 18:42, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

The "by team" tables seem to be a bit redundant. Nergaal (talk) 20:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Nergaal, I do know what you mean. They are, however, present in all the other equivalent lists, e.g. the two linked above. I see it as reflecting the difficult thing in cycling where riders are both riding for themselves and as part of teams. Relentlessly (talk) 20:31, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
    • Sure, but it doesn't seem to add much beyond what is in the big table. Nergaal (talk) 20:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
      • I know what you mean: there is a level of redundancy. It is a well established convention, however, and I think it is informative. Do you have any other comments, Nergaal? Relentlessly (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. Made a final copyedit run through the lead to improve prose flow. Please check if it's up to your liking. Cheers. Parutakupiu (talk) 01:51, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks again, Parutakupiu for your comments, and many thanks NapHit for stepping in and doing some editing while I haven't been. I've made a couple of small changes in the lead for flow. I have changed it back to "were obliged" as "The teams obliged to enter" would make some sense and it is how I naturally read it without the additional "were". Finally, I disagree that the riders don't represent their countries (they do, for example win points in the World Tour rankings for their countries), but I'm content with the edit. Relentlessly (talk) 22:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi The Rambling Man. You've marked your comments as resolved – can I check if that's a "support"?! Thanks. Relentlessly (talk) 21:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

João Sousa career statistics[edit]

Nominator(s): SOAD KoRn (talk) 15:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it presents a comprehensive list of João Sousa's statistical achievements during his career. Sousa is widely regarded as the greatest Portuguese tennis player ever. The list's development was influenced by other similar pages, including a featured one. I thank you in advance for your feedback. SOAD KoRn (talk) 15:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Parutakupiu:

Disclaimer: I've contributed to this page with 11 edits prior to this nomination (out of 17 edits in total), mostly copyedit-related chages.
  • Section headers should not be wikilinked.
  • Section "Top 10 wins" should be renamed to "Wins over top 10 players" for clarity. Similarly, "Singles Grand Slam seedings" should be "Grand Slam singles seedings".
  • In the Davis Cup results table, the wikilinks should be on the tournament round instead of the date.
  • Ref. 14 is not a dead url but the news article no longer exists.

Minor issues that you can easily address, SOAD KoRn. Parutakupiu (talk) 21:06, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments, Parutakupiu. All issues were addressed. SOAD KoRn (talk) 01:49, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Just one more: is the {{Performance key}} template under "Performance timeline" necessary, when you have the abbreviations table in the beginning of the page? The only thing in that template that is not repeated is the note saying "To avoid confusion and double counting, these charts are updated either at the conclusion of a tournament, or when the player's participation in the tournament has ended.", which you could add by yourself to the section. Parutakupiu (talk) 02:11, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
I never thought about that, to be honest. It's a template used in nearly every tennis player articles, but you're right, it's duplicated in this case. It doesn't make sense to keep it. I only kept the last phrase. SOAD KoRn (talk) 02:21, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. The few issues I spotted have been addressed and this list seems fit for promotion. Parutakupiu (talk) 02:29, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment I removed some key bloat and moved a key to the proper location. I also standardized it more in line with Tennis project guidelines. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:07, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the edits, Fyunck(click). I also noticed that a couple of links are dead, due to recent changes in their host website. I will try to find the correct links for the news articles. SOAD KoRn (talk) 11:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • Maybe it's just me but I find the reduced-font-size table at the top of the article somewhat odd, I'd prefer to see the photo there and table below it. Particularly as most of the table is redundant.
  • I also note that you have no mention of any doubles titles yet in the lead " Sousa has also competed in doubles..."
  • Wouldn't it be better to list his titles (ATP Challenger, ITF etc) rather than list a load of stuff he hasn't even reached the finals in?
  • Not sure you need the ranking in the lead, particularly as this will go out of date rapidly.
  • Ref 17 currently tagged as dead.
  • In sortable tables we typically link every linkable item every time as there's no guarantee that the linked item will remain as the first instance after a sort.
  • Where are his winnings referenced?
  • Finals Reached -> Finals reached. Year-End Ranking -> Year-end ranking. etc etc.
  • Sousa Rk? Why not just Sousa ranking?
  • Head-to-head vs. Top 20 ... -> Head-to-head against top 20 ...
  • Active players in boldface? Violates MOS:BOLD.
  • I think win % should be all to the same number of d.p.

That's all on a quick fly through. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:53, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

The Rambling Man, thank you for yours comments.
  • I changed the photo/table order, as proposed.
  • Wikilinks corrected. Titles and tables c/e as proposed. Active players in boldface removed.
  • Win % now have zero (0) d.p.
  • Regarding the dead refs, I tried to contact the website admin a couple of weeks but so far I received no answer back or new links. Therefore, I will change the sources for ref 13 and 17 as soon as I find reliable alternatives.
  • Titles in minor circuits (Challenger, ITF, etc) are not as relevant as major circuit achievements. This a career statistics article, not just a assemble of titles and finals. I tried to present in the introductory section the main reasons why Sousa stands out, his ATP singles career being the most relevant.
  • I did not include any doubles title for the reason stated above. He has no doubles title or finals presence at the ATP World Tour level.
  • In References section, the "General sources" present all data used to reference his winnings. Each season's winnings refer to the sum obtained from singles and doubles activities - it is the same methodology adopted by the ATP. Do you think I should add this information?
If you disagree with any of my points, I will be happy to discuss them with you. If you find any other issue, I will do my best to try and fix it. Regards, SOAD KoRn (talk) 17:39, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
I'd like to thanks Parutakupiu for fixing ref 17. I will try to find a solution for ref 13 now. SOAD KoRn (talk) 17:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Finally found new link for ref 13. Dead links issue is solved. SOAD KoRn (talk) 17:58, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
I kind of agree with TRM on the career finals table in the lead, as Sousa has not yet that many top-tier titles. Instead of a table with just the row filled with numbers other than zero, it's better for now to list his other junior and low-tier professional achievements. Even if not that relevant, they are titles nonetheless and contributed to his career development. When Sousa wins more World Tour titles, I agree that the Challenger and other low-tier titles can be removed from the table. Parutakupiu (talk) 18:10, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that the table is more informative now and could be modified, depending on how Sousa fares in his ATP World Tour career. Also, I added the following edits to "Career finals" section, per Parutakupiu's suggestions:
  • Edited the key table titles and removed those key entries that were never used in João's career (except those for ATP World Tour);
  • Removed links from Category and Surface columns in the tables, as they are already in the key;
  • Brought the font size to 100% in the last tables, but introduced a code to prevent player names and scores to wrap inside the cell;
After all these edits, I hope I did not forget to address any of The Rambling Man's comments. SOAD KoRn (talk) 18:35, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Nominations for removal[edit]

List of ICC World ODI XI cricketers[edit]

Notified: Jpeeling, WikiProject Cricket

I am nominating this for featured list removal because it no longer meets FL criteria. Being a 2005 nominee, it certainly fails to meet criteria needed to be a FL. Major updating and more reliable sources would be needed for this to meet FL criteria.Will211 (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Can you clarify? Apparently the World XI haven't played since 2005 so what needs updating? What more reliable sources do you need above ESPNcricinfo? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Alicia Keys[edit]

Notified: Explicit, WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, WikiProject Awards and prizes

I am nominating this for featured list removal because it is substantially different from the December 2008 edition that was promoted and hasn't been well-maintained since. It overall has deteriorated in quality and fails to meet current FL standards. The lead is outdated, only going up to 2008. Some of the awards are missing descriptions. There are also many dead links, incorrect uses (as well as absence of) italics within citations, and dubious references such as Gigwise, "Anti Music", and "BlackCelebrityGiving". Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:58, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by 50 Cent[edit]

Notified: Wikien2009

I don't think I need to specify reasons. It's pretty clear that List of awards and nominations received by 50 Cent does not meet FL criteria anymore. The list was promoted back in 2007. It has a large number of dead links and unsourced content. The lead needs work and expansion to satisfy the FL criterion#1. The number of awards are miscounted in infobox. The tables also do not meet MOS:DTAB. -- Frankie talk 21:28, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Delist dead links galore, and lead is outdated Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:39, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Delist Use of non-RS like "Rock on the net", "Billboard Events" and "Chiff.com". Lead is too short and doesn't summarizes the list, every single link is dead except for one. The overall list is not comprehensive enough and needs update. Yashthepunisher (talk) 07:52, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Delist - Due to severe concerns with references and lead. Spiderone 11:41, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Delist per above. With a little love, this list could maintain its status, but not in its current form. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:06, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Nine Inch Nails[edit]

Notified: Drewcifer3000, WikiProject Music

I am nominating this for featured list removal because it's another 2008 list that doesn't meet current standards. Major issues with sourcing as many of the awards and nominations lack references. Main image needs ALT text. 4 dead links. Ref 2 and the Rolling Stone references are redirects. Cowlibob (talk) 21:27, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Delist too many unsourced entries, and none of the descriptions even are cited Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Ne-Yo[edit]

Notified: Gary, WikiProject Music

I am nominating this for featured list removal because it is another list from 2008 which doesn't meet current standards. The lead is not comprehensive and seems to stop in 2008. Using "Recently..." is not encyclopaedic. Much of the awards are sourced to Rock on the Net which is an unreliable source per WikiProject Music. The MTV Video Music Awards Japan, World Music Awards, and Grammy Awards are all unsourced. The World Music Awards are still pending despite being in 2014. Reference 9 is dead. Ref 6 and 8 are redirects. Cowlibob (talk) 18:51, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

There are far too many passive sentences in the lead as well, making it a difficult read. These would have to be fixed. Mattximus (talk) 16:35, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Delist very underreferenced and outdated Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:13, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

List of wealthiest charitable foundations[edit]

Notified: Gary, WikiProject Business

I am nominating this for featured list removal because of a number of concerns. I feel it's another list promoted in 2008 that doesn't meet current standards. The lead is far too short and does not give a sufficient engaging summary of the list. It also begins with "This is a list of ...", a format we no longer use. The list does not seem to be up to date in terms of figures and there could potentially be organisations that aren't present on the list due to the lack of updates which are both mentioned on the talkpage. The table lacks rowscopes and colscopes so it is not accessible. References show 4 dead links and 1 redirect to main page of the site. Cowlibob (talk) 13:55, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I can see many of these issues. I cleaned up the table a bit, adding proper wikilinks etc. It seems weird that only american cities are also given states, but no other nation. This is inconsistent as well. Headquarters column really should just include the city. Mattximus (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Delist as outdated, and lead is indeed quite poor Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:14, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates&oldid=699710014"