Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nominating featured lists in Wikipedia

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 must satisfy the featured list 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 featured list candidate (FLC) process. Those 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 another review process at the same time. Nominators who have previously successfully nominated a list may have two concurrent featured list nominations only if the first active nomination has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed.

The featured list director, Giants2008, or his delegates, PresN and Hey man im josh, determine the timing of the process for each nomination. Each nomination will typically last at least twenty days, but may last longer if changes are ongoing or insufficient discussion or analysis has occurred. For a nomination to be promoted to FL status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. 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 in a timely manner; or
  • consensus for promotion has not been reached after significant time; or
  • reviewers are unable to judge whether the criteria have been met.

It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the process focuses on finding and resolving problems in relation to the criteria, rather than asserting the positives. Declarations of support are not as important as finding and resolving issues, and the process is not simply vote-counting.

Once the director or a delegate has decided to close a nomination, they will do so on the nominations page. A bot will update the list talk page after the list is promoted or the nomination archived, typically within the day, and the {{FLC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates or adds the {{Article history}} 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

Shortcut

Featured content:

Featured list tools:

Nominations urgently needing reviews

The following lists were nominated almost 2 months 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:

Source reviews needed

The following lists were nominated for removal more than 14 days ago:

Nominations

[edit]

List of tallest buildings in Cedar Rapids

[edit]
Nominator(s): Wobbanight (talk) 01:22, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a well put together list with a decent amount of info on the subject. Wobbanight (talk) 01:22, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (1/12/26)

[edit]
Lead
  • No need to wikilink U.S. or Iowa.
  • 2nd-largest-city --> second largest city
  • Wikilink Alliant Tower in its first appearance.
  • I'm not sure "high-rises" is a hyphenated word?
  • Source needed for statement about a building boom in the 1920s.
  • "The city would experience a decline..." --> "The city experienced a decline..." as it is not hypothetical.
  • "the city would experience a second building boom..." --> "the city experienced a second building boom..." Ditto.
  • This statement also needs a source.
  • This sentence – "The city would experience a decline in the number of high-rises being built from the 1930s to the 1960s; however from the 1970s to the 1980s, the city would experience a second building boom, leading to the construction of the 285 ft (87 m) tall Alliant Tower, which surpassed the Quaker Oats Plant and became the tallest building in the city and the tallest building in Iowa outside of Des Moines." – is very long with multiple clauses. Recommend breaking it up into at least two sentences.
  • No need for the header entitled Cityscape. The photo is sufficient on its own.
Tallest buildings table
  • If the statement in the Notes field is not a full sentence, then a period is not required at the end. (Most of those are not sentences.)
  • You could wikilink City Hall.
  • No need for the section entitled Tallest under construction since the list is empty.
Timeline of tallest buildings
  • Be sure to use en-dashes (–) for the timespans.
  • Remove the Notes column if there is nothing there.
  • These will need references, even if they were referenced on the table above. I recommend a column for references: {{Abbr|Ref.|References}}

User:Wobbanight: Please let me know once you've had a chance to go through my comments, and let me know if you have any questions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:24, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with delinking Iowa, the relevant policy would be MOS:OVERLINK. The page says "major examples of the following categories should generally not be linked". However, I wouldn't consider Iowa major as it's a second level subdivision and not particularly well known outside of the US. My general rule of thumb is anything not listed at Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/4/Geography#United States is not major. Olliefant (she/her) 18:26, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Olliefant

[edit]
  • Link Ceder Rapid in the lead
  • In the lead, could you state when the Alliant Tower became the tallest/how long its held the record
  • "Quaker Oats Plant" and "Iowa" are linked twice in the lead
  • Infobox says "Skyline of Cedar Rapids", list the year
  • I don't think the last line in the lead should be its own paragraph. I think it fits with the second paragraph well enough
  • Per MOS:DTAB The tables are missing row and column scopes
  • I worry "year" is a little unclear in the table, could you clarify
  • Optionally, I know the information in "Timeline of tallest buildings" is sourced elsewhere, but could it be cited here anyway?
  • Can you incorporate the see also links into the lead?
That's what I found, ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 18:38, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility

[edit]
Other notes
[edit]
  • Empty section should be removed or put into a hidden comment, mention there are no buildings under construction that are tall in the lead.
  • Is a separate section for the city skyline necessary? You can just add the TOC magic word before the image and it'll look good/have no whitespace.
  • The lead is very short. Looking at other featured lists of tallest buildings, they have more than two long paragraphs which detail the skyline and the early, late, and present histories of the tallest buildings.
  • Sources should have more too it, not just the link, name, and website. It needs an access date and you should add it to the IA bot archive queue for archive dates (or add them yourselves).

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 07:11, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

German Figure Skating Championships

[edit]
Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:03, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Another list of national figure skating champions for your consideration. I am especially proud of this one because I am a German teacher, so I enjoyed going through the German sources. Also, due to Germany's, uh, complex history, there is more background information than some of my other skating articles. I have personally verified all of the results, the sources should be properly formatted, the tables should be properly formatted, and there are plenty of images. I look forward to any constructive comments or suggestions, and thank you in advance. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:03, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "the Federal Republic of Germany (German: Bundesrepublik Deutschland), also known as West Germany; and the German Democratic Republic (German: Deutsche Demokratische Republik), also known as East Germany" - semi-colon should be a comma  Done
  • "due to lockdown restrictions in place in Hamburg. The competition was held under strict COVID-19 safety protocols, with the skaters isolated from the public during competition" - link COVID and maybe lockdown if there's a specific enough link  Done
  • How come there's a ref only against the "gold" column? There is a secondary source which identifies only the gold medalists.
  • Don't think those place names in the notes should be in bold  Done
  • The records section looks a little odd (IMO) with a very wide gallery and the table crammed into a tiny space at the right. Could you re-organise the gallery or maybe have the images arranged vertically to the right of the table.....? Someone uploaded a new picture of Werner Rittberger since I did this section, so since there are now six good pictures, I stacked them down the right.
  • That's all I got - great work as ever! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:31, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:ChrisTheDude: Let me know if you need anything else! Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:10, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:ChrisTheDude: Thank you so much! I also have Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Norwegian Figure Skating Championships/archive1 if you have a free minute. 😃 Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:08, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Olliefant

[edit]
  • Can the EFNs include citations?  Done
  • Why is ref 7 in the table headings and not the column? Source no. 7 is a listing of only the gold medalists, so it only confirms what is in that column.
Not seeing any major problems Olliefant (she/her) 18:45, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Olliefant: Thank you for your feedback! I have added citations to the notes. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:07, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Olliefant (she/her) 01:06, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of international kart racing champions

[edit]
Nominator(s): MB2437 03:14, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list as it documents over 700 champions in international kart racing since 2007. The lead section clearly outlines the scope and its limitations, with clear and concise explanations of each concept covered. MB2437 03:14, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

[edit]

List of Maldivian presidential candidates

[edit]
Nominator(s): UnilandofmaTalk 17:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is another list of mine that I nomianted to be considered for FL status. This list details every person who had submiited their candidacy as the President of the Maldives from the First Republic to the Second Republic. There are some elections which I couldn't find the number of people voted on and they're marked as "Unknown". UnilandofmaTalk 17:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

TheNuggeteer

[edit]

Will do a spotcheck. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 11:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed! UnilandofmaTalk 12:26, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Presidential elections in the Maldives have taken place in both the First and Second Republic." Kindly source this.
  • "The only contender" the source does not state this.
  • "second-most competitively contested" you could change this to "second-most contested"

Drive-by comment

[edit]

Mb2437

[edit]

Timeline of the 1996 Pacific hurricane season

[edit]
Nominator(s): FrizzBTalk 15:43, 9 January 2026 (UTC) Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 19:53, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because this list includes all formations of tropical cyclones as well as the strengthening, weakening, landfalls, extratropical transitions, and dissipations during the 1996 Pacific hurricane season FrizzBTalk 15:43, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm co-signing this, having been invited to do so by the nominator and having contributed a substantial amount to the timeline being nominated. The 1996 season was marked by a contradiction: activity was near record-low, but of the systems that did form, an unusually large portion affected land. Five of the season's nine nameable storms made landfall in Mexico, one of which, Hurricane Alma, killed 20 people. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 19:53, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this was a failure of due diligence on both our parts. File:1996 Pacific hurricane season summary.jpg is missing the entire Central Pacific, and with it the tracks of both One-C and Seventeen-W. I am going to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones for assistance in rectifying this. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 22:17, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Grade II* listed buildings in Greater Manchester

[edit]
Nominator(s): Mmberney

I am nominating this for a featured list because it documents all 241 Grade II* listed buildings in Greater Manchester using up‑to‑date information from Historic England and other reliable sources. The lead section clearly explains the significance of the Grade II* designation and situates the list within the wider context of heritage protection in England and the history of the metropolitan county. The tables for each borough are organised, consistently formatted, and accessible, with article links for every entry, specific locations, important dates, and coordinates. The list is fully referenced, stable, and benefits from high‑quality images for practically all entries (some have no images available on Commons or Geograph yet, however). It is felt it reflects thorough research and careful editorial attention.

Comments

[edit]
  • "The Grade II* buildings in each borough are listed separately." - don't think that's needed, as it's self-evident from the TOC
  • "Bury has the fewest, with only 10." => "Bury has the fewest, with 10."
  • "It is uncertain which Grade II* listed structure in Greater Manchester is the oldest. However, three of the 241 buildings date from the 13th century." => "Three of the 241 buildings date from the 13th century, although it is uncertain which is the oldest".
  • Never seen that "upload photo" icon before, and (IMO) it looks a bit odd
  • Sorting on "completed" column doesn't work correctly. In the first table it sorts as follows: values from 16th century to 1928, then c.1700, then late 17th century, then pre-1470
  • Names starting with "The" should sort based on the next word
  • Names of architects should sort based on the surname, not the forename
  • That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:26, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi ChrisTheDude, thanks for the feedback. I've actioned the first three comments and amended the dates in the tables so they now sort chronologically. Regarding the "Upload Photo" icon, that was already present when I first started editing the list, and I can't see anything in the template that would remove it. I'm also unsure how to adjust the template so that names beginning with "The" sort by the next word, or so that architects sort by surname (what is the procedure when there are two or more architects?). I've tried adding 'data-sort-value=' and 'name_sort', but without success. Could this be an issue with the English Heritage listed building module itself? Appreciate any advice. Thanks. Mmberney (talk) 21:18, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • For the architect names, use the sortname template, so instead of just writing [[Edmund Sharpe]] write {{sortname|Edmund|Sharpe}}. This will display the same output but make it sort under S rather than E. For names starting with The, use the sort template, so write {{sort|Portico|[[The Portico Library and the Bank Public House]]}} -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      Those have now both been sorted (pardon the pun). Many thanks. Mmberney (talk) 10:46, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:59, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shwabb1

[edit]
  • I believe "Greater Manchester" in the first sentence cannot be wikilinked per MOS:BOLDLINK. Move the link to the next instance of the phrase instead.
  • Each table needs a screen reader only caption for accessibility. In this case, that would be done by adding a "caption" parameter to each Template:English Heritage listed building header. I don't see this done in some other listed buildings FLs but I'm fairly certain that the captions are required.
  • Use Template:Circa instead of c. 
  • For Church of St Wilfrid (1200834), add a comma after "15th century". At the moment, the two datings don't seem separated, especially considering that "1873–1876 (rebuild)" takes up two lines (on my display at least). Also, here and in other similar cases, I feel like "rebuilt" may be a better word than "rebuild".
  • For Victoria University of Manchester including Christie Library, Whitworth Hall (1271428), fix disambiguation link at "Alfred Waterhouse".
  • For Southern Railway Viaduct and Colonnade (1386162), it's probably better to replace the ampersand in the type column with "and", unless that's the original official wording.
  • The last table of buildings by borough needs proper formatting for accessibility per MOS:DTAB (table caption and ! scope="col" / "row").
  • It would be useful if all sources were archived, though this is not a strict requirement as far as I know.
  • Template:GradeIListedbuilding should probably be removed as it is out of scope.
  • That's all. Interesting list and great job. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 12:45, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Shwabb1, thanks for the comments and helpful links — I'll keep those in mind for any future table creation. I've actioned everything except the archiving of sources, as it would be a particularly lengthy task. May I ask whether that can be automated by one of the myriad Wiki bots, or would it have to be done manually? Mmberney (talk) 17:15, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. Archiving the sources can be done with the Internet Archive Bot. Also, you can add the plainrowheaders class to the table of buildings by borough if you don't want every row header to be bold (I assume that's the case since you specifically made "Total" bold but not the other row headers). Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 17:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Unless I've done something incorrectly, it appears that IABot is unable to archive Historic England/NHLE links reliably. The pages are script‑generated, so the bot interprets them as fully functional and reports "nothing to fix" even when no archive URLs exist. This seems to be a known limitation and affects many UK heritage lists. Converting the citations to the newer List Entry URL format might help, but that would go against how a lot of pages (at least the ones I've seen) have been set up. Any thoughts on how best to proceed? Mmberney (talk) 18:16, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If IABot can't do the job, then you probably have to add the archive info manually, or alternatively not add it at all. As I've said, this is not as strict requirement for FL status as I understand from other reviews and nominations. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 18:46, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If you want I can archive the sources, it would not be a problem for me. And if you have free time, I'd really appreciate a review of my FLC of Geographical indications in Ukraine, which has been open for two months by now but has only received two reviews, though it's fine if you don't have time. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 19:09, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder for Comments bySupport from KJP1

[edit]

Shall review/comment asap. KJP1 (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2026 (UTC) First off, congratulations on putting this together. I know the effort it takes to hunt down the sources for the last remaining redlinks for some 200+ entries, and you've done a grand job. It's a long list, and I'll need to do the comments in batches. First batch of comments/suggestions below:[reply]

Lead - Criteria 1/2
  • It's a strong lead, which articles like this often lack. I think this covers Criteria 1/2.
Comprehensive - Criterion 3
  • You've got cited entries for entry item on the list with no redlinks, giving you a complete set. The absence of notes (Annotations 3(a)) is compensated for by the completeness of the entries, enabling readers to easily access further information on each item. So, that's Criterion 3 met [but see below for a few 3(b) queries under individual entries].
Criterion 3(b) - Sourcing
A few sourcing/accuracy queries on individual entries:
  • Church of St Mary, Bolton - can we have a source for the Completed date. I can't see "pre-1470" used in the NHLE record, although the church article does give this. You might also want to follow the approach at Church of St Wilfred, Manchester, where you give the original dates and the dates of the Victorian reconstruction.
  • Amended "pre 1470" to state "15th century, 1884–85 (rebuilt)" and added a citation.
  • Links added (Hill's article didn't include the link to Woodhouse, so have edited that as well (I need to stop getting so easily distracted!)
  • 15 Firwood Fold, Bolton - this is 16th century in origin, with 19th century remodelling.
  • Amended.
  • Heaton Park Colonnade, Manchester - you need this bluelink, not the Bishop of Llandaff.
  • Amended. May have been a case of a typo coupled with the coincidence of it also having an article :)
  • Mrs Gaskell's House, Manchester - I think we need a cite for Richard Lane as probable architect, as NHLE doesn't give it. The Independent cite in the main article does.
  • Suggested citation added.
  • 103 Princess Street, Mechanics Institute, Manchester - you can bluelink John Edgar Gregan.
  • Former Queen Elizabeth Old Grammar School and schoolmaster's house Rochdale - while the house is Victorian, the school is 1586, which probably means you need to rejig its placing in the Rochdale list.
  • Amended.
  • Holdsworth School and wall, Stockport; Church of St ELizabeth, rectory and walls - I wonder if we could have a little grouping here, subject to the dates permitting. Can we group the school and its wall next to each other (same dates); and the church, its rectory, and the rectory wall (same dates), and why is the church wall nearly a decade later? But it could still follow the others.
  • Moved the school's wall entry so that it follows the school and added "sort_date =" to all the 1874 entries. As for the rectory and its walls, the NHLE entry for the rectory gives the date as "1874", and the entry for the wall to the west describes it as "contemporary with the Rectory", so both can probably be treated as the same date? The entry for the wall to the west and south of the church states "Contemporary with the church", and the church's NHLE listing gives the date as "1882–3, by Alfred Waterhouse". The church's article notes that "Local mill-owner Sir William Houldsworth commissioned Alfred Waterhouse in the 1870s", so it is likely that the rectory and its associated wall were completed before the church itself?

[Batch 1 as far as Tameside]

  • Dunham Massey sawmill - two things here. The 1616 date should probably be caveated, as the NHLE record does. "Possibly 1616, certainly 17th century", or some such. And the bluelink to Dunham Massey isn't the strongest. The sawmill only gets one mention - I guess you added it? - and the heading was inaccurate. I've tweaked this to make it more accurate. Could you also do the link directly to the relevant section, i.e. [[Dunham Massey#Grades II* and II listed buildings|Dunham Massey sawmill]]?
  • Date amended to "1616 (possible), 17th century", and the link tweaked for the time being. A small number of entries still don't have their own articles— for example, Foxdenton Hall— so I'll no doubt get around to creating dedicated pages for those soon.
  • Church of St Martin, Trafford - If you want the architect's full name it's William Hayward Brakspear, [1]. Sorry, this has now sent me back up the list. I was looking for other instances where we've got the architect's initials but no bluelink to help readers wanting clarification. The only four I can spot are Brakspear again, two up at St Mary the Virgin; W. Haley for the entry immediately above that one, Church of St Margaret, Altrincham - which is problematic, as it could be William Hayley, [2], or his son William Henry Hayley, [3], so is probably best left; T. de Courcy Meade for the Victoria Baths, Manchester, he's Thomas, [4] (incidentally, you've a double space after the T. here); and W. T. Foxlee (another double space after the T.) for the Deansgate Goods Station, Manchester. This last one's a puzzle. Do you know where it comes from? It's not in NHLE, as far as I can see, or in the main article. Foxlee doesn't appear in the Manchester Architects database, and nor does he get a mention in Brodie's RIBA Directory of British Architects. Where he does appear is in Clare Hartwell's Manchester Pevsner City Guide. But here, he's described as "consulting engineer" and credit for the design is given to "A. Ross", architect to the Great Northern Railway. He's not in Brodie or the Manchester database either, but I'm quite sure it's this guy Alexander Ross (engineer). He's probably not appearing as his profession was engineer, rather than architect. Sorry, this all became rather a rabbit hole but I think my suggestion is - use the full name where available / credit the Deansgate Goods station to Ross and Foxlee, cited to Hartwell, 2002, p=210.
  • Full names and citation added as suggested; doublespacing fixed (didn't realise   next to a "|" would create such an issue).
  • Barton Bridge, Trafford - firmly stuck in my names wormhole, Leader Williams is Sir Edward Leader Williams to you! But you could skip the "Sir" as you've not so dignified Barry, or Lutyens.
  • Have been wondering whether there's a preferred approach to adding bestowed titles to links, given the articles themselves typically use only the person's given name (the exception here being Sir John Fowler, 1st Baronet). Do you think Barry, Lutyens, etc. should also have 'Sir' added?
Personally I wouldn't. Debates about honorifics are a huge time-sink on Wikipedia, some seeing them as absolutely essential, others as a ridiculous Anglo-centric affectation. But I think the general consensus is they aren't part of the name, e.g. Edwin Lutyens. If people want to know his many honours, they can pick them up from the infobox/opening sentence of the lead in the main article. KJP1 (talk) 15:29, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

[Batch 2 as far as Wigan]

  • Bispham Hall, Wigan - not quite sure what's happened, here, in the main article, or on Commons, but I will bet my lunch that this image is not a large Elizabethan hall house. It looks like the 19th century brick factory it is. They share part of their names, and it's in the Bispham Hall Cat on Commons, but they ain't the same building, [5]. Unfortunately, that creates another blank in the image column, as neither Commons nor Geograph have anything.
  • Haigh Hall, Wigan - For Architect, NHLE says "For and possibly by 24th Earl of Crawford and Balcarres". Richard Pollard, in the revised Pevsner Lancashire: Liverpool and the South West, goes further, "built by the 7th Earl of Balcarres, almost certainly to his own designs". (Pollard|Pevsner|2006|p=183) I think he warrants a mention.
You'll be pleased to know that concludes the 3(b) quibbles! KJP1 (talk) 15:57, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Structure - Criterion 4
  • List ordering - I know there's been debate about this and I think your approach, by age, makes sense.
  • Type - I would personally go for a bit more standardisation. As a reader, I use Type to group, e.g. "show me all the Grade II* listed chapels". This is hindered if there's too much specialisation. So, if we take "Church/Chapel" - we have: "Church" / "Parish church" / "Anglican church" / "Roman Catholic church" / "Congregational chapel" / "Methodist chapel" / "Presbyterian chapel" / "Unitarian chapel". I would just have all of these as "Church" or "Chapel".
The same issue appears with "House", where we've got: "House" / "Farmhouse" (although I think I'd leave that one as a useful distinction) / "Open hall house" / "Jettied house" / "Cruck house" / "Box-framed house" / "Timber-framed house" / "Hunting lodge" / "Country house" / "Manor house" / "Town house" / "Villa". I would again simplify, perhaps to "House" and "Farmhouse". Lastly, you could probably do something with the factories, mills, where we've got: "Fireproof factory" / "Cotton mill" / "Textile mill" / "Textile warehouse" / "Warehouse" / "Carding mill" / "Spinning mill" / and one, "Leigh Mill, Wigan" as a "Boiler house" which I'm not sure is accurate. It's a cotton mill, with boiler house attached.
If you do keep the "Farmhouse" distinction, then "Dearden Fold Farmhouse, Bury" should be listed as such. Conversely, Hyde Hall, Tameside looks a bit grand for a farmhouse. Was it one? The NHLE entry says it was at the time of listing, but I think it had higher status when built. And the article says its now a derelict wreck!
  • Very good points about the types - I've standardised as suggested, so reduced the various sub-types to "Church", "Chapel", or "House" and amended to "Farmhouse" in a few cases. As for the more industrial buildings, "Textile mill" and "Warehouse" seem to be the most appropriate options throughout.
My other thought about type is do you use the function for which they were built, or the present function. We currently have a bit of a mix. So, as examples:
  • Church of St George, Bolton - this is listed as a craft centre, but the article says it has not been used as such for 20 years, and the latest possibility is reversion to a church.
  • Hey House, Bury is not now a hunting lodge;
  • Former Refuge Assurance building, Manchester - this is now a hotel;
  • Tootal, Broadhurst and Lee building, Manchester - this is offices, including those of the Manchester mayor;
  • Lancaster House, Manchester - is now apartments but wasn't built as such. Ditto Asia and India Houses on the same street;
  • Wythenshawe Bus Station, Manchester is now a storage warehouse;
Personally, I think I would use their original functions, for simplicity and because attempting present function will require constant updating, but I can see the counter argument. But presently we have a mixture, which I think needs to be resolved.
  • Yes agreed, original function would be the most straightforward and avoids having to keep the list updated following change of use, so have amended where necessary. Many thanks for the comments so far; hopefully I haven't overlooked any of them.
Style: Visual appeal Criterion 5(a)
  • Looks good and no red-linking. MoS not my forte, but think it works.
Style: Media files Criterion 5(b)
  • Church of St Lawrence, Tameside - [6] possible alternative image that shows the little turret?
  • Hyde Hall, Tameside - [7] clearer image of the building, although the red van makes it less "pretty"?
  • Have changed both. The one for the church looks better; as for the hall, although the van being in the shot isn't ideal, it's still a clearer view of the building than the previous image.

Style: Accessibility Criterion 5(c)

  • Here you might need advice from the FL coordinators. I'm not certain if alt text for images is now an absolute requirement. It is also quite a skill (which I lack) to write suitable alt text for buildings. It can become very repetitive; "a church with tower / a two-storey house". And how do you succinctly describe, say, the Manchester Cenotaph image, without writing the essay that Harry has done in the Design section of the main article? That said, the accessibility issue is completely valid and understandable, I'm just not sure it's applicable here. I am sure that writing useful alt text for every one of the 240-odd images used would be no small task. I would suggest asking the question of the coordinators; I've raised queries with User:PresN before now - usually technical, as that's an even lesser strength than MoS understanding - and they've always been extremely helpful.
Alt text is required, yes; if you don't have it, screen reader software tries to use the filename as the alt text, which is bad/useless. It does not have to be an essay, and in fact should not be at all- many people mistakenly think that alt text needs to describe what the subject looks like, when in fact it needs to describe what the subject is. Note that the very first example near the top of WP:ALTTEXT is just "Painting of Napoleon Bonaparte", with no attempt to describe the painting. Additionally, the alt text doesn't exist in a vacuum, but goes along with the context the image is in, such as captions or what row it's in- you don't need to re-specify what building you're talking about or where it is, the whole rest of the row already does that. All that is to say, the alt text for, say, 3 and 4 Walsh Fold, can be as short as "gray stone farmhouse" or "stone farmhouse". The Manchester Cenotaph can just be "gray stone monument". I know that it's still a lot with 240 rows, and yes it's repetitive, but it's not as undoable as is first appears; I just did the same thing on my current overlong list (lot of "brown rat", lol). --PresN 19:23, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
PresN - comprehensive and very helpful, as ever. Many thanks. I’ll let the nominator respond as to how they would like to proceed, but if I can help with the workload, I’m very happy to pick up writing half of them, on the lines you suggest. Given that it’s Lancashire, there is going to be a lot of “gray stone”! But as it’s an FL requirement, I’m sure it will be met. KJP1 (talk) 21:01, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks both, I'd actually made a start on the alt text for the Bolton to Manchester images, but it seems I've lost my work due to an edit conflict and my clumsy fingers — my own fault for not adding "under construction" to the top of the article. I'll restart tomorrow, but yes, as KJP1 mentions, we do have a lot of grey stone and red brick buildings here! Mmberney (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry! Hope the edit conflict wasn’t me experimenting! If you want me to start from Wigan upwards, just shout. Very happy to do that. KJP1 (talk) 22:12, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, KJP1. All entries that have an image now include suggested alt text. If you wouldn't mind, I'd appreciate you looking them over to check that they're comprehensive enough without being too descriptive, as PresN advised. For some of them, there wasn't a lot to describe! Many thanks.
Great work, and very quick. I've looked at a sample across the boroughs and they certainly seem to meet the brief. KJP1 (talk) 07:38, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Stability: Criterion 6

  • It's stable.
  • Sincerely, thank you for such a thorough review, KJP1 — it just goes to show how easy it is to develop a bit of cognitive bias when you've spent a long time working on something. Do let me know if you happen to spot anything else that needs fixing. Best regards.
Equally sincerely, my absolute pleasure. I'd always wanted to see the Manchester Grade II*s complete and with a star and you've done a great job. Have a look at the last few comments, get some guidance on alt text, and then I'll be very pleased to add my endorsement. KJP1 (talk) 16:46, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

All of the issues I flagged have been promptly addressed. I think it is a comprehensive and interesting list that meets the FL criteria, and am pleased to Support its promotion. KJP1 (talk) 07:38, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Seattle Sounders (1994–2008) seasons

[edit]
Nominator(s): SounderBruce 05:15, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To complete a hat-trick of Sounders season FLs, I present the middle era between the original 1974–1983 stint and current Sounders. The 1994 to 2008 era was spent in the lower divisions, which had shifting rules and formats, and just passable sourcing. This list is formatted similarly to the 1974–1983 list and blends elements from soccer lists as well as American sports season lists due to the nature of American soccer at the time, which was a bit more exotic. SounderBruce 05:15, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - I couldn't find anything to pick up on, awesome work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:38, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Formatting on the table seems good. Couldn't find any prose mistakes. The image (File:View from the Space Needle 0152 (cropped).jpg) is correctly licensed and appropriate.
I checked a random set of citations (5, 14, 20, 39, 41) and they all seem to check out. Citations are consistently formatted. Support on all regards. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 02:33, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Chaplain Corps Medal of Honor recipients

[edit]
Nominator(s): ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 17:42, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this as my first featured list because:

  • I believe this list to meet the criteria, namely: having good prose, a complete and engaging lead, comprehensive and well-sourced coverage, and good structure and style.
  • It seems that it is more appropriate to nominate it for Featured List than Good Article.

Thank you. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 17:42, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "As of February 2025, there have been 3,536 Medals of Honor awarded" - Feb 25 was nearly a year ago, do we have any more up to date numbers?
  • "among the recipients are nine chaplains of the Army and Navy Chaplain Corps." - if these are separate, should the Navy one not also be mentioned at the start along with the Army one?
  • "All five chaplains awarded the honor since the Civil War have been Catholic priests;" - this sentence seems to end with a semi-colon
  • In some cases in the table, the battle is linked in both the place of action column and the notes but in others it is only linked in the former. Apply linking consistently
  • The notes against Haney and Whitehead do not need full stops per MOS:CAPFRAG
  • No need for the "see also" as it was already covered in the lead
  • That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Updated to May 2025. No Medals of Honor have been awarded since then that I can tell.
    • The initial sentence is more about establishing the chaplain corps in general than the specific branch corps; I'm open to reworking it, thought.
    • I am guilty of loving semi-colons. Changed.
    • Changed.
    • Fixed.
    • Removed.
    • Thank you! ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 18:29, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:11, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cowboygilbert
[edit]

Not a review but I have been teaching people that {{Legend table}} exists for a more eye-appealing option for using a key on articles. It's not required but it does help it being its own spot instead of it just being a template and plain text. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:05, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]


Review

[edit]
Image Review
[edit]
  • All images are public domain.
  • All images need alt text.
Table Review
[edit]
  • Please use table captions.
  • Please use row scopes per MOS:HEADERS.
  • Please use column scopes per MOS:HEADERS.
  • Please add Chaplain assistants' religons.
Prose
[edit]
  • "Bugler to E company of the 14th Infantry Regiment." -> "Bugler to E Company of the 14th Infantry Regiment." Company should be capitalized.
  • Why is it "Union army" but "United States Army" and "United States Navy"?
Other
[edit]

Source review (HurricaneZeta)

[edit]

As of this revision:

  • 1 -  Pass. My suggestion is to add the exact page number, which is 106, to make it easier to find within the book.
  • 2 -  Pass, it's an acceptable usage of a primary source.
  • 3 -  Pass
  • 4 -  Pass, confirms what is stated in the article within the first sentence and is dated to the same "as of" date in the article.
  • 5:
    • 5a -  Pass, as it clearly states that 9 chaplains have been awarded it and lists them. However, I'd like to see something more leaning towards or emphasizing the fact that these are the only chaplains to be awarded this, since it isn't immediately clear when I'm reading it. Feel free to ignore this though, this is really just a nitpick.
    • 5b - This doesn't actually explicitly say "Salem Church". However source 15 does, and it can be replaced here with that.
    • 5c -  Pass
    • 5d -  Pass. However, the sentence right before the ref is missing a period at the end.
    • 5e -  Pass
    • 5f -  Pass. Same thing as 5d, it's missing a period at the end.
  • 6 -  Pass
  • 7:
    • 7a -  Pass
    • 7b -  Pass
    • 7c - Typo, the article says April 11, 2023, (when Obama wasn't president) when the source says April 11, 2013. The source doesn't specifically mention Obama, so the phrasing could be changed a bit to remove the mention of him.
  • 8 -  Pass
  • 9 -  Pass
  • 10 -  Pass
  • 11:
    • 11a -  Pass
    • 11b -  Pass
  • 12 -  Pass
  • 13 -  Pass
  • 14 -  Pass
  • 15 -  Pass and my suggestion to replace 5b.
  • 16 -  Pass, also works to replace 5b.
  • 17 -  Pass
  • 18 -  Pass
  • 19 -  Pass
  • 20 -  Pass
  • 21 -  Pass
  • 22 -  Pass
  • 23 -  Pass
  • 24 -  Pass
  • 25 -  Pass
  • 26 -  Pass
  • 27 -  Pass
Overall, most sources are reliable and affirm what is in the sources. The notes and the prose were engaging and an image review has been done above. I'll support when the few concerns are addressed here Darth Stabro. HurricaneZetaC 23:30, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneZeta: All suggestions taken, except: ChrisTheDude recommended to me that those sentences not have periods at the end per MOS:CAPFRAG: Most captions are not complete sentences, but merely sentence fragments, which should not end with a period or full stop, though I could see that only applying to standalone image captions and not table image captions; please advise. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 16:20, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, that's fine, I'm not too familiar with MOS:CAPTION. Support gladly! HurricaneZetaC 16:25, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Aurel

[edit]
  • Military chaplaincy in the United States traces its origins back to the American Revolutionary War, being formally established on July 29, 1775, just two weeks after the formal establishment of the Continental Army. – If possible, I'd try to avoid repeating the phrase "formal/formally established/establishment".
  • July 29, 1775, just two weeks after the formal establishment of the Continental Army. – I'm not sure "just" adds anything here.
  • and is awarded to recognize American military servicemembers – The OED appears to give this as two separate words: "service members". Cf. also these Ngrams.
  • Created during the American Civil War, the Medal of Honor is the United States Armed Forces' highest military decoration – I'd consider adding some dates to "American Civil War". It's common knowledge in the US I imagine, and in most other English-speaking countries, but might not be for readers from further abroad.
  • the United States Armed Forces' highest military decoration and is awarded to recognize American military servicemembers who have distinguished themselves in combat situations by acts of valor. – I think this could be tightened just a little: how about something like "highest military decoration, awarded to service members ..."? I think "American" and "military" are already implied, and I think "recognition" is part and parcel of being an award.
  • As of May 2025, there have been 3,536 Medals of Honor awarded; – It might be possible to avoid repeating "Medals of Honor" here. Perhaps "As of May 2025, it has been awarded 3,536 times"?
  • This mightn't be an issue, but have any been awarded since May 2025? I only ask because 3536 is a fairly large number, and would seem to imply that a dozen or so are handed out each year.
  • among the recipients are nine chaplains of the Army and Navy Chaplain Corps. – Pretty minor, but I assume all members of the Army and Navy Chaplain Corps are chaplains, and there's a lot of "chaplain"ing happening here. Perhaps something like "nine recipients are members of the ...".
  • One Army chaplain assistant has also received the award. – As this sentence is fairly short, I'd try combining it with the previous one.
  • Francis B. Hall of the 16th New York Volunteer Infantry Regiment was the first chaplain to be awarded the Medal of Honor, – "to receive"?
  • for actions at the Battle of Salem Church. – I would give some dates, and perhaps a very brief explanation. I'm assuming this was part of the American Civil War?
  • Four of the chaplains served in the Union army during the American Civil War, – As this is a new paragraph, I would specify "the chaplains who received the award" (technically "the chaplains" isn't referring back to anything here).
  • during the American Civil War, – Linked above
  • one served in the US Navy during World War II, – Similarly to above, I don't think "US" needs specifying here.
  • Four of the chaplains served in the Union army during the American Civil War, one served in the US Navy during World War II, one served in the Army in the Korean War, and the remaining three served in the Vietnam War; – Other than the first one, I think we can get away with omitting all instances of "served" here.
  • three served in the Vietnam War; two for the Army, and one for the Navy. – A semicolon should be followed by a full sentence; I think a regular colon would work here. I'd also write "two in the ...", as I think that's a bit more idiomatic.
  • All five chaplains awarded the honor since the Civil War have been Catholic priests. Two, Emil Kapaun and Vincent Capodanno, are in the process of canonization as saints. – As these are two closely related and fairly short sentences, I'd try combining them.
  • One chaplain, Charles Liteky, returned his Medal of Honor eighteen years after being awarded it, – As above: "receiving it"? Better still: unless the period of eighteen years is particularly important, it might be ideal to say "returned his Medal of Honor, leaving it at the ...", as I don't think anyone's ever returned an award before receiving it.
  • the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in an enveloped addressed to Ronald Reagan. – Typo
  • Liteky is believed to be the only recipient of the award to renounce it for political reasons. – Perhaps "the only recipient to renounce the award ..."?
  • The Four Chaplains' Medal, sometimes called the "Chaplain's Medal of Honor", was created – I'd say when.
  • sometimes called the "Chaplain's Medal of Honor", – You'll have to excuse my Australian-English-speaking self if I'm wrong here, but doesn't the punctuation go inside the quotation marks in American English?
  • was created for chaplains George L. Fox, Alexander D. Goode, John P. Washington, and Clark V. Poling, – A bit picky, but "chaplain" is used three times in this sentence. I would remove it before the four names, as I think their status as chaplains is probably implied.
  • who were nominated for the Medal of Honor but ineligible as they had not made contact with the enemy. – I think "were" is probably needed before "ineligible".
  • A lavender color along with the † symbol indicates that the Medal of Honor was awarded posthumously – This seems to be a full sentence, so I'd add a full stop.
  • Hmm. What's the order of the entries in the table? It seems to be mostly chronological by date of action, but not quite.
  • What are the sources for the information in the first six columns? For example, if I want to find a source that describes Hall as Presbyterian, where would I look?
  • This one's optional, but I'd consider adding links for the entries in the "Religion" column other than Catholicism, for those of us who can't remember our Presbyterianisms from our Methodisms.
  • Carried wounded men to the rear under heavy enemy fire – As I don't think it's likely to have been his allies who were firing at him, I'd omit "enemy".
  • Refused pay during his time of service. – I think it's fine for the first part in these entries to be a sentence fragment, but I'd probably switch to full sentences after that. (This applies below as well.) Then again, I'm not a regular at FLC, so let me know if this is standard practice in this sort of article.
  • There's nothing wrong with the description of Haney, but it does feel quite short. Do you think it'd be possible to add a little more?
  • American chaplains were formally not forbidden from carrying weapons until 1989. (in the note): "not formally forbidden"?
  • Only became the regimental chaplain after his award. – I'd write "after receiving his award"
  • Carried soldiers from the front lines to safety in the rear several times throughout the Battle of Stones River – Regarding "throughout": we list the "date of action" as the 31st of December, 1862, but the article on the battle seems to suggest it went on until the 2nd of January.
  • Served aboard the USS Franklin (CV-13) when attacked by Japanese aircraft. – I'd write "when it was attacked by"
  • As someone without any knowledge of ships or guns, "flooded the magazine" confused me at first. (It sounded as though we were about to say he "flooded the magazine with stories of his heroism" or something of the sort!) I'd link Magazine (artillery), and possibly include a brief explanation of what this is.
  • The Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA – Comma after "USA"
  • Pope Francis declared him "Venerable" in 2025. – Maybe "gave him the title ..."?
  • Served with the Marine Corps. – As I don't think it's been mentioned above, you could link United States Marine Corps.
  • attempting to minister to a corpsman approximately 15 yards from an enemy machine gun. – I'd include some form of conversion here.
  • during the Battle of Dak To, ministering to soldiers and rescuing soldiers – I'd omit the first "soldiers"
  • Awarded the Medal of Honor for rescuing 23 wounded men without protective gear during an ambush in 1967. – As I think all of the cells in this column are describing the actions that led to them receiving the award, I'd remove "Awarded the Medal of Honor for".
  • Renounced his Medal of Honor in 1986 as an act of protest against American foreign policy – In the lead, we mention Reagan. Unless there's a reason not to, I'd do so here as well and perhaps give a bit of explanation of what in particular he was protesting.
  • Bugler to E Company of the 14th Infantry Regiment. – What does "E" mean here? Is it the name of a particular company?
  • Provided music for religious services in the unit, and became – I'd remove the comma here.
  • Scaled a wall along the eastern side of Peking to lay down suppressing fire on the enemy above. – Hmm. I'm having trouble picturing this: he scaled a wall to "lay down" fire on an enemy who was above him?
  • Became an official chaplain assistant in the year they were introduced. – Maybe "in the year the position was introduced"?
  • On my screen, the first table is being pushed down a bit by the sidebar, which creates a gap between the "Chaplains" section heading and the table. There might not be anything you can do about that, though.
  • The section heading is repeated at the top of each of the tables. I think the table captions can be hidden using "|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}".

This was a pleasant read, and most of these are fairly minor prose points. Looking forward to your responses. – Michael Aurel (talk) 07:29, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of vice presidents of the Maldives

[edit]
Nominator(s): UnilandofmaTalk 19:22, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the second list that I had planned to nominate to FL to promote articles relating to the Maldives on Wikipedia. I believe this list also meets the criteria. UnilandofmaTalk 19:22, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ES

[edit]

Good work, my comments are only nitpicks

  • 1st footnote needs a ref, 2nd is fine u can just count
  • "the republic did not last long when the regime of Mohamed Amin Didi was overthrown by the people of Malé"→"the republic did not last long, with the regime of Mohamed Amin Didi being overthrown by the people of Malé" "when" implies that it was a discrete moment in time and a comma is needed.
  • "the president's absence or incapacity"→"presidential absence or incapacity" presidential implies more that it is generally any president"
  • "in writing and"→"in writing, and" sequence of events
  • "assume the duties" the not needed
  • "monarchy following"→"monarchy, following"
  • "changed the country back to a republic"→"made the country a republic again" i think its more formal
  • "Presidents;"→"Presidents:" since you're listing examples, you should use a colon
  • I think MOS:EASTEREGG applies when you link "ruling party" to Progressive Party of Maldives. If it is in the source, then you can just make it "ruling party, Progressive Party of Maldives."
  • Mostly you use the Oxford comma but you do not when listing "[...] Ali Maniku and Hassan Zareer". Ideally use of the oxford comma should be standardized
  • "term and"→"term, and"
  • In this article, and the article about the vice president's post in the maldives, vice president is written with capitals. this is how it should be in the title too then, and
    • "vice president" appears 10 times in the articles, including quotes, the title and categories. "Vice President" appears 40 times. It should be standardized
  • Technically all titles for the sources should be in either title or sentence case, regardless of how it appears in the source. there is a gadget which converts ref titles, but I am not sure what it is called. You should run it on this article

User:Easternsahara 23:57, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Easternsahara: I've added your comments into the article. I also changed it from "Vice President of the Maldives" to "vice president of the Maldives" since I think it follows MOS:CAPS. UnilandofmaTalk 06:32, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Unilandofma: It's a formal title; I believe it should be capitalized, including the title of the article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:38, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed it! UnilandofmaTalk 17:49, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to remember reviewing your list of presidents; I'll come back and take a closer look at this one tomorrow! Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:08, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you have! UnilandofmaTalk 07:07, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Passing image review. Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 14:01, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (1/2/26)

[edit]
Lead
  • Is the Vice President elected on the same ticket with the President, or is he elected separately?
  • "The office of the Vice President has been pivotal in maintaining governmental continuity..." The office doesn't step in; the Vice President does. Recommend removing "The office of" from the beginning of the sentence.
  • "If the office of the President becomes vacant due to death, resignation, or removal from office, the vice president will succeed to the presidency." Either both "president" and "vice president" need to the be capitalized or both lower-case. I recommend both capitalized. Also, change "will succeed" to "succeeds" as it is describing a hypothetical.
  • Again, instances of "vice president" and "president" being lower-cased when they should be capitalized.
  • "Cabinet" should be capitalized.
  • I'm going to guess "First Republic" should also be capitalized, and I'd also bet there is a target wikilink (somewhere in History of the Maldives?)
  • 6 should be spelled out.
  • "...that made the country a republic again" sounds awkward. Recommend slightly rephrasing (perhaps something like "restored the Maldives as a Republic).
  • I would bet any [insert Maldive currency here] that "Republic" should be capitalized in all instances here.
  • Second Republic
  • "2008 Constitution" should be capitalized per the wiki article.
  • "Mohamed Waheed assumed office of president" Recommend slightly rephrasing, "assumed the presidency".
  • While "incumbent" might technically be correct, it sounds awkward, and I would recommend simply using "current" instead.
Notes
  • Note B needs a period.

User:Unilandofma: A very interesting article, especially since I didn't know much about the Maldives prior to examing this one and the list of presidents. Please let me know when you've had a chance to examine my notes above, and let me know if you have any questions. I will return later to do your source review unless someone else beats me to it. I have also made some very minor copy edits while reviewing; I hope you don't mind! Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:39, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bgsu98, I've added your comments into the article. UnilandofmaTalk 06:14, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It looks good! Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:32, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review

[edit]

TheNuggeteer

[edit]

Will perform a source review sometime later. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 02:25, 5 January 2026 (UTC) Spotcheck and source review[reply]

  • "The Vice President has been pivotal in maintaining governmental continuity" the source does not say the vice president was "pivotal", only lists the duties of the vice president. This is an assumption and should be removed.
  • This has not been done.
  • "If the office of the President becomes vacant due to death, resignation, or removal from office, the Vice President succeeds to the presidency" isn't this redundant with " stepping in during presidential absence or incapacity"? I believe they should be merged. The source also does not mention "death, resignation, or removal from office", this should be omitted.
  • Please provide a page number for source 3, probably page 39-40.
  • Worldstatesmen.org is a deprecated source per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Self-published peerage websites
  • I am unsure of the reliability of sudd.ch.
  • "and appointed Mohamed Waheed Deen as his Vice President" I do not see this in the source.
  • "in accordance with the constitution" I believe this was assumed and needs to be omitted since it is not explicitly in the source.
  • "office by a no-confidence vote from the People's Majlis" it is not explicitly stated as a no-confidence vote. Maybe you could change this to "unopposed".
  • "from the People's Majlis" I do not see "People's Maijis" in the sources, it is only included in "all chambers of parliament".
  • This has not been addressed.
  • Please add another source, presumably from the end of Abdulla Jihad's term, to confirm that Jihab made it to the end (with a source).
  • Source 18 looks like an unreliable, user made source. Can you explain why this is reliable?
  • Source 19 does not say his party, the date he took office and left office.
  • 17 November 2018 is supposed to be 16.
  • Source 28 does not state Abdulla Jihad's party.
  • Source 29 does not state Faisal Naseem's party, president, and birth date.
  • Source 30 does not state Hussain Mohamed Latheef's president, party, and birth date.

Will continue the source review sometime later. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 02:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the sentences and also source 3 already does have a page number on it. I've seen sudd.ch being used as a reference on the referendum articles so I'm pretty sure it is reliable. UnilandofmaTalk 06:05, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for not returning to this! I will continue the review. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:37, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer: I've added some references to support the points. I'd like to also point out that political parties weren't legalised in the Maldives until 2005 (see this), so I put Ibrahim Nasir's five vice presidents as Independent. I believe that source 18 is reliable as it is by a news outlet, if you don't believe it is reliable I also added another source that essentially says the same thing. I also removed the birth date for Hussain Mohamed Latheef since I couldn't find a source on it. UnilandofmaTalk 17:00, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thank you! There are only two issues unaddressed. Great job! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 04:36, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer: I've removed the first part. As for the second part, I think it's better to keep "from the People's Majlis", the parliament in question is the Majlis. "All chambers of parliament" means the Majlis as a whole so I feel as if the current wording is better kept. UnilandofmaTalk 06:22, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good job! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 08:19, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of works by Gu Yanwu

[edit]
Nominator(s): Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 13:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My first FLC in a while! Gu Yanwu was a scholar during the last days of the Ming dynasty. Upset at the very violent Qing conquest, he wandered around China for most of his life, compiling and commentating on historical works. He had a very negative perspective on essentially all Chinese philosophy since the time of the Confucian classics, but ended up laying the groundwork for future generations of scholars, leading to the concept of Hanxue - Han studies.

The list here draws from Ian Johnston's listing of his bibliography, which itself is based off lists by Jean-François Vergnaud and Jan Hagman. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 13:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "Gu Yanwu (Chinese: 顧炎武, art name Tinglin) was a Chinese scholar active during the transition from the Ming to Qing dynasty" => "Gu Yanwu (Chinese: 顧炎武, art name Tinglin) was a Chinese scholar active during the transition from the Ming dynasty to the Qing dynasty"
    • Done.-G
  • Also, can you give some indication of when that was, as presently there's nothing in the lead to indicate whether he lived 200 or 2000 years ago
    • Done.-G
  • "published them for the first time in the collect Tinglin yishu" => "published them for the first time in the collection Tinglin yishu"
    • Done.-G
  • "a unit roughly equivalent to chapters" => "a unit roughly equivalent to a chapter"
  • Descriptions which consist only of one sentence fragment (e.g. "A collection of Gu's essays and writings, including his political treatises written after the fall of Ming.") should not have a full stop
  • Done.-G
  • "the Confucian classics" - appropriate link? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:42, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added.-G
@ChrisTheDude: Thank you very much! Added. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:02, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of World Heritage Sites in Jordan

[edit]
Nominator(s): Tone 10:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan has 7 WHS, including Petra, and 14 tentative sites. Standard style. The list for Libya is already seeing support so I am adding a new nomination. Tone 10:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ES

[edit]

If you have any questions, feel free to ask away. It might seem like a lot of changes, but most are really minor (like adding a comma, "the", "a" or "and). Other changes are also pretty minor, like changing tense. Good work, as always.

  • Um er-Rasas is spelled "Umm ar-Rasas" on the map, please fix the spelling
    • It also has 2 sites, can you add this to the map?
      • I am going with the Unesco source here, but I made sure that the piped link is correct. And yes, two sites, but very close together so the markers would overlap. Maybe better a single one in this resolution.
  • "Umm Al-Jimāl is spelled "Umm el-Jimal" on the map, please fix it
    • Same here. Awkward, though.
  • "as far as to"→"as far as"
  • "of Roman Empire"→"of the of Roman Empire"
  • "system that"→"system, which"
  • " Al-Khazneh, or the treasury, is pictured." move this after the citation, it is not covered by that citation and it doesn't need to be, it is a fairly conservative application of WP:SKYBLUE
    • "or the treasury"→"transliterated the treasury" or something similar. "or" is used in these cases but it is confusing+weird in this one
  • "monks The"→"monks. The"
  • "illustrating several"→"similar to several"
    • I don't think that's what the source says.
  • "landforms including"→"landforms, including"
  • "different languages of the region"→"various local languages"
  • "region and reached"→"region, and reached"
  • "communities who"→"communities, who"
  • "Merchants and craftsmen from the region settled in As-Salt" specify which region
  • "creating a distinct city built with yellow limestone that had European Art Nouveau and Neo-Colonial styles combined with local traditions"→"creating a distinct city, built with yellow limestone, that incorporated European Art Nouveau and Neo-Colonial styles with local traditions"
  • "site of Roman"→"site of a Roman"
  • "It represents a typical settlement of the agricultural communities of the Hauran region of the period."→"It is a typical settlement of the Hauran region's agricultural communities of that period." If the sources say which period it is (ie. Byzantine, Greek, Later Roman) then you can specify what "that period" is
  • "Numerous inscriptions in different languages found on site demonstrate the changing "→"Numerous inscriptions, located on the site, in different languages demonstrate changing"
  • "Al Qastal is one of the oldest Umayyad settlements in the region" specifying what "the region" allows the reader to better understand the significance of this statement
  • "during the Abbasid period, abandoned, and resettled"→"under Abbasid rule until being abandoned, and was later resettled" period appears 13 times in this article but rules does not appear at all. changing it here varies the prose.
    • However, the exact wording depends on what the sources says. if it means that it was both abandoned and later resettled under the Mamluks then you can rephrase it as "under Abbasid rule, until being both abandoned, and resettled". However, if it means it was abandoned after abbasid rule, then the mamluks came in to resttle it, then you can use the first rephrasing
  • "bathhouse, and water reservoirs and cisterns"→"bathhouse, cisterns, and water reservoirs" there is no need to use two "and"s in this case
  • "Early Islamic tombstones found and remains of mosaics found"←"Early Islamic tombstones and remains of mosaics found" you don't need to repeat "found"
  • "church dating from"→"church, dating from"
  • "Byzantine Greek inscription" link "Byzantine Greek" and should inscription be plural? It usually is, but not always which is why I am asking
  • "1115 to strengthen the control of the land and to control the desert road."→"1115, to strengthen the control of the land and desert road." which desert road, should specify
  • "by Saladin until"→"by Saladin, until"
  • "periods, the"→"periods. The"
  • "fortresses of the region"→fortresses in the region"
  • "square plan with a side of 56 m (184 ft), with towers at the corners"→"square plan, with sides of 56 m (184 ft) and towers at the corners"
  • "horses and was"→"horses as it was"
  • "settlements and findings"→"settlements, and findings"
  • "The remains of a Byzantine basilica are pictured." move citation before this
  • "the largest and the most ambitious"→"the largest and most ambitious"
  • "representing an important period of early Islamic art" should this be important period or important feature?
  • "carvings were sent"→carvings were given away"
  • "Wilhelm II and are"→Wilhelm II, and are"
  • "of Decapolis"→"of the Decapolis" all 3 instances
  • "building that has been at one point converted into a Christian basilica"→"building that was converted into a Christian basilica" the current wording implies that it later became something else later, specify what it became if that was the original meaning
  • "century and the ruins were rediscovered in 1806. The UNESCO nomination documentation provides no description.[21][22]"→"century, and the ruins were rediscovered in 1806.[22] The UNESCO nomination documentation provides no description.[21]" the unesco citation should go only after the part where it says the unesco nomination doesn't provide any documentation, with the Britannica entry before the last sentence.
  • "mountains and wadis and"→"mountains and wadis, and"
  • "sempervirens while"→"sempervirens, while"
  • "migratory and resident birds" link resident bird and migratory bird
    • They both link to the same article. Maybe this is an overkill to link.
  • "endemic fist Aphaniops sirhani" what does "fist" mean in this context?
  • "has essentially dried out by 1993 but then an internationally backed project managed to restore a significant portion of the wetland"→"essentially dried out by 1993, but an internationally backed project restored a significant portion of the wetland"
  • "wadis and parts of"→"wadis; parts of"
  • "Jordan Rift Valley and"→"Jordan Rift Valley, and"
  • "species recorded "→"recorded species"
  • "vulture. Mammal"→"vulture; mammal" flows better with a semicolon since they're very related
  • "CE which"→"CE, which"
  • "The area around Jawa is pictured." move citation before this

User:Easternsahara 01:47, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review (HurricaneZeta)

[edit]

As of this revision:

  • 1 -  Pass
  • 2 -  Pass
  • 3:
    • 3a -  Pass
    • 3b - This source can be removed since 3c supports the entire paragraph, making this redundant.
    • 3c - The Tentative List in the source says that there are 15 on the list, not 14. This needs to be updated. Whoops, I was looking at the archive cited in the ref, the more recent capture shows 14. I suggest updating the archive to the most recent capture to avoid confusion.  Pass
    • 3d - Same as above.  Pass
  • 4 -  Pass
  • 5 -  Pass
  • 6 -  Pass
  • 7 -  Pass
  • 8 -  Pass
  • 9 -  Pass
  • 10 -  Pass
  • 11 -  Pass
  • 12 -  Pass
  • 13 -  Pass
  • 14 -  Pass
  • 15 -  Pass. Minor grammar correction, in in 1115, to strengthen the comma is not needed.
  • 16 -  Pass
  • 17 -  Pass
  • 18 -  Pass. most ambitious is in the source, but I think it could be replaced with something more neutral here.
  • 19 -  Pass
  • 20 -  Pass
  • 21 - Swap this around with 22, then  Pass, but is it really needed to say it provides no information?
  • 22 - Swap this around with 21, then  Pass
  • 23 -  Pass
  • 24 -  Pass
  • 25 -  Pass
  • 26 -  Pass
  • 27 -  Pass

Image review (HurricaneZeta)

[edit]
FoP rules are pretty much irrelevant since these were created so long ago and are in the public domain.
  • 1 -  Pass. Derivative work of a free file that is considered valued on Commons.
  • 2 -  Pass
  • 3 -  Pass. Licensed for CC BY-SA 2.0 on Flickr.
  • 4 -  Pass
  • 5 -  Pass
  • 6 -  Pass
  • 7 -  Pass
  • 8 -  Pass
  • 9 -  Pass
  • 10 -  Pass really like this one
  • 11 -  Pass
  • 12 -  Pass
  • 13 -  Pass
  • 14 -  Pass
  • 15 -  Pass
  • 16 -  Pass also like this one
  • 17 -  Pass
  • 18 -  Pass
  • 19 -  Pass nice!

Image review is all good, just the minor stuff in the source review. Support since the concerns are pretty minor, but pinging Tone. HurricaneZetaC 02:01, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneZeta: Done, thanks! Is there an easy way to update the archive without doing it manually by deleting the archived version and running the script again? But even then sometimes not up-to-date version may get archived, I think.
Tone 08:35, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Tone I think you can just manually replace the archive-url= parameter with [8] and change the archive-date= to 17 December 2025 and access-date= to today. HurricaneZetaC 16:17, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "The remains of a water management system that enabled life in a desert setting, have been preserved as well" - no reason for a comma in the middle of that sentence
  • "The desert castle of Quseir Amra was built in the early 8th century, and had served both as a fortress" => "The desert castle of Quseir Amra was built in the early 8th century and served both as a fortress"
  • "secular scenes inspired by the Byzantine art," => "secular scenes inspired by Byzantine art,"
  • "A nearby Tell Al-Kharrar" - this reads like we are expected to know what a Tell Al-Kharrar is, but personally I have no idea. Is there an appropriate link?
  • "The city Abila was a member" => "The city of Abila was a member"
  • "Gadara was one of the leading members of Decapolis" - in the previous entry it was the Decapolis
  • "Jerash was a member of Decapolis" - same here
  • That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Batwoman episodes

[edit]
Nominator(s): Olliefant (she/her) 03:43, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I made this page a while back, I got it to what I think is FL quality recently. It was pretty fun to write. Olliefant (she/her) 03:43, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't checked, but please make sure that:
  • All links are correct
    • Arrowverse links instead of general DC links
    • |website= are linked (if not linked) and links lead to the correct link (sometimes they use an incorrect spelling link)
  • Citations are all using a template
  • Writers and directors are linked once per season
  • Verify anything that should be in italics (IGN is often missed) should be in italics
  • Use User:Alex 21/Episode list to standardize and reformat spacing
  • I'd personally also use ProveIt to standardize citations to keep later diff changes minimal
  • Use a script like User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates to verify all dates use mdy (based on the template used on the page). The page says it was last update on June 2023
  • Verify that you have one template per line (the above mdy template is on the same line as another one)
  • Use a script like User:GorillaWarfare/script/curlies to verify that only straight quotes are used (I can see some are currently curly)
  • The last paragraph of the lead should also mention how many episodes per season. So "season n ran from x to y and had z episodes" (in better phrasing ofc).
--Gonnym (talk) 17:15, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: all done Olliefant (she/her) 06:47, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delegate note: not transcluded to WP:FLC until January 5. --PresN 12:50, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I totally forgot Olliefant (she/her) 16:41, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

Crystal Drawers

[edit]

Hello! Always a pleasure! I'll leave comments here later in the day, but one thing I noticed while going through the sources is that some have Cite Error issues (particularly 21, 42, and 61). Not a big deal, it just looks like a cite name was defined multiple times, but this should be addressed. Crystal Drawers 🍌 (wanna talk?) 12:00, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the ref issues and I look forward to your comments Olliefant (she/her) 01:47, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A third season was ordered in February. Season three ran from October 13 through March 2, 2022." — This is very similar to the previous part about season two; to avoid repetition, I'd combine them into something like "A third season was ordered in February, which ran from October 13 through March 2, 2022." Crystal Drawers 🍌 (wanna talk?) 02:08, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, very nice work, just a few minor changes needed. Crystal Drawers 🍌 (wanna talk?) 02:08, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Crystal Drawers: done Olliefant (she/her) 16:29, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Crystal Drawers 🍌 (wanna talk?) 17:36, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Cavan121012

[edit]

Looks to be a very solid list. Some very minor suggestions:

  • The Nicole Kang article has recently been created so she can be linked in the lead.
  • The character of Renee Montoya can also be linked.

That's all from me -- Cavan121012 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cavan121012: done Olliefant (she/her) 01:18, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Also if you had a chance to take a look at my nomination it would be greatly appreciated -- Cavan121012 (talk) 08:49, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of bathyergids

[edit]
Nominator(s): PresN 03:11, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey y'all, mammal list #67 in our perpetual series and rodent list #12: Bathyergidae. This is our second and final list in the Phiomorpha parvorder, a group of odd African rodents, and these guys are the mole-rats. They're down underground in the southern half of Africa, eating roots and insects underground. There's 21 species of these guys, all looking pretty similar at different sizes with big teeth. As always, the list reflects the scientific consensus as well as the results of prior FLCs. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 03:11, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reconrabbit

[edit]

I had some pause at the description of these species being found in southern Africa when several are extant in Somalia. It could be worthwhile noting the vulnerable status of F. kafuensis in the lead too, if not the status of every species. I'm also not convinced of the individual notability of the Matabeleland mole-rat, which could be redirected to the species and removed from the subspecies list as a link. Regarding this - where is the list of subspecies coming from? I am not finding it on the IUCN site, nimrodi is listed by MSW3 as a synonym of C. darlingi, this 2024 paper describes at least 4 subspecies (excluding nimrodi), and ASM very recently describes it as a distinct species. I find nothing else in the text that looks off. I'll provide an image review in a little bit. -- Reconrabbit 16:20, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I consulted with my mammal handbook (2016) and found two things: a decent descriptor for the family's range would be "sub-Saharan", and in 2016 Don E. Wilson et al. accepted four subspecies: hottentotus, natalensis, nimrodi, and pretoriae. (page 368) -- Reconrabbit 00:41, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Reconrabbit: Corrected to Sub-Saharan, and removed all subspecies- I skipped a step with this list, which is validating that the IUCN reports the subspecies (the subspecies lists as given come from MSW3), and the IUCN doesn't list subspecies for any of these species. --PresN 20:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review below. Potential problems marked in bold:

  • File:Georychus capensis 2023.jpg: CC BY SA 4.0, own work from regular Commons contributor.
  • File:Bathyergus suillus Flipphi 1.jpg: CC BY SA 4.0, own work from regular Commons contributor. Interestingly enough there are other high quality photos of this species on iNaturalist, including even a CC-BY SA video.
  • File:Bathyergus janetta - Smit.jpg: listed as public domain, but no date is given in the description. Also needs a US public domain template
  • File:Cryptomys hottentotus Whatmore 1.jpg: iNaturalist import, CC0
  • File:Fukomys anselli.jpg: Public domain, own work from regular Commons contributor
  • File:Fukomys damarensis 175806182.jpg: iNaturalist import, CC BY
  • File:Holotype Fukomys hanangensis Faulkes 2017.jpg: The PeerJ site states that "public user content licensed CC BY 4.0", but does that apply to this article?
  • File:Fukomys darlingi Rudloff.jpg: CC BY SA 4.0 confirmed by VRT ticket.
  • File:Cryptomys mechowi Plzen zoo 02.2011.jpg: CC BY SA 3.0, own work from regular Commons contributor
  • File:Georychus capensis Rebelo 2.jpg: iNaturalist import, CC BY SA
  • File:Silvery mole-rat.png: "Creative Commons license" that the article this was taken from is unspecific but presumably extends to the figures.

That's all. -- Reconrabbit 17:57, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Reconrabbit: Thanks for the image review! Date and template added to the first image; Everything published on PeerJ is CC-BY 4.0 unless specified, which this is not: [9]. --PresN 01:46, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I've struck those concerns. This image review is passed. Regarding the subspecies it makes sense to omit them altogether given the confusion in current times. Coming back to the start - is it worthwhile to make note of the other species with a less-than-LC IUCN assessment, and also the potential species status of C. nimrodi? Or are those more suited for the main Bathyergidae article? Those are the only potential additions I would make. -- Reconrabbit 14:43, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review (1/4/26)

[edit]

Spot-check of sources:

  • No. 5 – ✅
  • No. 8 – ✅ This source calls this species an African mole-rat; same scientific name; Wikipedia article uses both names
  • No. 14 – This source calls this species a Zambian mole rat; same scientific name; Wikipedia article shows no use of "Zambian mole rat"
  • No. 15 – ✅
  • No. 18 – ✅
  • No. 20 – ✅
  • No. 23 – ✅
  • No. 27 – ✅

User:PresN: Just the one discrepancy as to the name of the Ansell's mole-rat. If both names are commonly used, then "Zambian mole rat" should, at the very least, be listed at the Ansell's mole-rat wikipage. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:09, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: Added Zambian mole rat as an alternate common name to the article and linked omnivore. --PresN 01:48, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support & Source review passed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:52, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Chinua Achebe bibliography

[edit]
Nominator(s): Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:59, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I have worked on it and I believe it deserves to be a FL. Achebe was a proficient Nigerian writer and his works has been studied by scholars and academics. This is a also a good read for people who want to read his works. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:59, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ES

[edit]

Good work as always, so my comments are only nitpicks

  • Please put dmy dates and nigerian english tags
  • could there be more citations for "father of modern African literature", i agree with the statement but it seems like a big title to give someone. I would say 2 more high quality sources are okay
  • I am not very experienced with writing the lead of articles but i think the second paragraph would work better as a embedded list. Not sure if this is allowed in the lead
  • Either redlink "Oxford Research Encyclopedia of African History" or link to Oxford Research Encyclopedias
  • James Currey should be linked on mention as a publisher in the references
  • link Weaver Press, Mkuki na Nyota, Ohio University Press, Wits University Press (only a redirect currently)

Pass image review, there is only 1 (the covers of the books wouldn't qualify for fair use), the alt is good, licensing is good, used appropriately. User:Easternsahara 07:28, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TheNuggeteer

[edit]
  • Why is this list format different from other featured bibliographies (like most here)? I believe it should be a table.
    It is not a must to have them as table since they are going to be short. In fact, I chose this format and it is acceptable here.
  • In my opinion, instead of having an entire section for just one work, you can list it in a Miscellaneous section.
    I am afraid it will "sort of" confuse readers since it's listed singly in the lede, hence having it under a certain section, lets say "Non fiction", then the lede needs to be rewritten, and it won't follow the source (which didn't say nonfiction).
  • Another suggestion, but I think, instead of listing the sources grouped up, you should place them after the specific works instead.
    That's a great suggestion but I prefer the former since it wouldn't waste anyone's time. It'sore convenient for me.SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 09:02, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The one I suggested does not waste anyone's time since you can easily check and access the source at the end of the specific book instead of grouping them. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 10:25, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Prose review
[edit]
  • "One of the major influence" -> "One of the major influences"
  • "and has been used in school curricula" what are you referring to? His debut novel, or his works entirely?
  • If it is his debut novel: "The novel has been used in school curricula"
  • If it is his works: "His works have been used in school curricula"
  • "been regarded as" -> "been regarded as the"
    done all
Source review
[edit]
  • "Achebe's works have been extensively studied by academics and scholars, and won him several awards. His legacy is celebrated annually during the Chinua Achebe Literary Festival." This is neither neutral nor cited, please cite this and try to make this sentence less biased.
  • White 2017 is okay, but there are some issues:
  • "Nigerian author Chinua Achebe (1930–2013) wrote fiction, nonfiction, short stories, essays and poems" is not said in the source
  • The source does not say Things Fall Apart was published in 1958.
  • Fredrick 2013 is okay.
  • Parkes 2009 is okay.
  • Showalter 2009 is okay.
  • I sadly can't access the rest of the books, but I will accept them in good faith.

Due to many issues and some that are hard to tackle, I will oppose this for now. If you fix or reply to these issues, I might shift to support this for promotion. Regards, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 03:27, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheNuggeteer I have removed the uncited paragraphs as well as removed "published in 1958. If the sources are okay, I think I have answered all your comments then. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 09:03, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have one current problem. Thank you for resolving all! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 10:27, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know you as a troublesome person, @TheNuggeteer. You know that's way "sort of" stressful for me now. No problem, I will do as you said. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 16:11, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
done. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 17:49, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm really sorry if you see me as troublesome. I will support this nomination now. Sorry if I was stressing you. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:14, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Older nominations

[edit]

Kim Seon-ho filmography

[edit]
Nominator(s): Preferwiki (talk) 03:14, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Second attempt of me nominating a list for FL! I check all the criteria for Feature List by incorporating feedback from previous one I submitted too. So I hope this one is qualified too.Preferwiki (talk) 03:14, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

Accessibility review

[edit]
  • Change the !scope=row to the name of the films/TV shows, not to the year. The scope of the article is to the films/TV shows not the year.
  • Add an alt to the image under § Television show
  • Not accessibility related but sources 3, 8, and 9 are duplicated. Merge them together.

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:21, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowboygilbert All done. Thanks for the feedback. Preferwiki (talk) 02:51, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2017 NHL expansion draft

[edit]
Nominator(s): The Kip (contribs) 07:33, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was originally targeting GA for this, but realized thanks to the nom for 2021 NHL expansion draft that FL would be a more appropriate target. I've spent the last few days overhauling the article, significantly improving the refs. I've also turned the long list of concession trades into a table, and prose-ified the "Post-draft" section. I've also made various updates to bring it in line with the 2021 article, currently under FL consideration as well. The Kip (contribs) 07:33, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment

[edit]

On the table, italics cannot be the only means of conveying information per MOS:ACCESS. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:11, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done and sorted. The Kip (contribs) 08:24, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "After Las Vegas' expansion bid was approved in June 2016, one year beforehand, " - last three words are redundant
  • "Vegas selected 30 players from each of the league's franchises" - if they had selected 30 players from each of the franchises, that would have been a total of 900 players. They actually selected one player from each of the franchises
  • "The Vegas bid was the first "Big Four" major professional sports league to place a franchise in Las Vegas" => "The Vegas bid would make the NHL the first of the "Big Four" major professional sports league to place a franchise in Las Vegas"
  • "but the NHL previously had" => "although the NHL had previously had"
  • "was named Las Vegas' first-ever general manager " => "was named Las Vegas' first general manager "
  • "Five days after formally entering the league on March 1, 2017,[10] the Golden Knights signed Canadian center Reid Duke to a three-year, entry-level contract on March 6" - if it was five days after March 1 then obviously it was March 6, no need to state both
  • "making him the franchise's first-ever player." => "making him the franchise's first player."
  • "The initial proposal of the rules for the draft were decided upon" => "The initial proposal of the rules for the draft was decided upon" (the subject of the sentence is "proposal", which is singular
  • "or, one goaltender and eight skaters regardless of position" => "or one goaltender and eight skaters regardless of position"
  • "Because the NHL wanted to ensure the competitive viability of any new teams" => "Because the NHL wanted to ensure the competitive viability of the new team"
  • "would lose one top-four defencemen" => "would lose one top-four defenceman"
  • "and had to still be contracted for the 2017–18 season." => "and were still be contracted for the 2017–18 season."
  • "or became a restricted free agent in 2017" => "or have become a restricted free agent in 2017"
  • "RFA or UFA, one per team" - what do these initialisms mean?
  • "as third lowest finishing team" = "as the third-lowest finishing team"
  • " they were subject to same draft lottery rules" => " they were subject to the same draft lottery rules"
  • "The NHL's deputy commissioner, Bill Daly, said that teams that do not follow the expansion draft rules" => "The NHL's deputy commissioner, Bill Daly, said that teams that did not follow the expansion draft rules"
  • Draft results table should sort based on surname, not forename
  • "Center Jonathan Marchessault would go on to win the Conn Smythe Trophy with Vegas in 2023" - complete sentence so needs a full stop
  • ....and the same for all the other photo captions in that section and the next one
  • "until was his contract was traded" - there's a stray extra "was" in there
  • "First-overall-pick Calvin Pickard" - no reason for those hyphens
  • That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:21, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude Sorry for the delay - all taken care of. The Kip (contribs) 07:37, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:12, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review

[edit]
  • Section links aren't allowed in section headers per MOS:NOSECTIONLINKS
  • Why does 2017 NHL expansion draft#Trades not have any columns? To the average reader (like myself), this makes no sense.
  • In the same section, colors need a key or need to be removed if they do not convey information.
  • Scopes are needed in the Draft results section for both the columns and rows. Put the row scopes on the players name, not the number.
  • For the keys, if you want that is (I won't hold it against you), you could create a key table that some articles use.
  • Image accessibility is good.

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:28, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowboygilbert My bad, somehow got tripped up and thought your comments were the user below. Everything on the list has been taken care of. The Kip (contribs) 05:06, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98

[edit]

There is also a situation with the table under Trades. You cannot use <br> to simulate another row within the same cell. For example, you have Buffalo Sabres concession and 6th-round pick in 2017 (#161 overall) within the same cell with a pseudo line dividing them. That whole table is very difficult to follow. Perhaps you should have three columns ("Other team", Concession, and Vegas selection) plus the column for References. This is just a rough mock-up:

"Other team" Concession Vegas selection Ref.
Buffalo Sabres 6th-round pick in 2017 (#161 overall) William Carrier [Insert reference here]

Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:17, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98 The table format is pulled from the trade tables we use at transaction pages (ex. 2025–26 NHL transactions#Trades) - I disagree that there's an issue with the colors (there to visually differentiate each row) or <hr> lines. Never heard of there being problems with using <br> in tables, either. I can add column headers, however, and I'll take care of the rest of the concerns as well. The Kip (contribs) 06:13, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
User:The Kip: I apologize; that was from an earlier draft of my comment. I was having trouble following this table, and the pseudo lines in each cell made it appear as if the information on the top of one cell corresponded to the information in the top half of the adjacent cell. There is nothing wrong with using <br> as long as it's not used to simulate artificial rows across cells. I still maintain that the current layout is poor and I still encourage you to reformat it. For example, there is no reason to have "Vegas selection" repeated over and over. As for the use of gray, that wasn't my comment, and as long as it is not conveying information, which it's not, it shouldn't be a problem. I don't think it's necessary, but that is purely a personal opinion and not grounded in any policy. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgsu98 I've opted to reformat based on the table you suggested. Please take a look and let me know if it's up to par. Borrowed the row scopes from another of my FLs at List of Vegas Golden Knights draft picks so they still look normal rather than like headers. The Kip (contribs) 08:37, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
User:The Kip: That is such a good improvement! However, you will still need rowscopes. You can use the code ! scope="row" style="text-align:left;font-weight:normal" so the text doesn't appear in bold if that's what you want. Stylistically, it's up to you. All of the tables will need rowscopes; it looks like some of them already do. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:49, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgsu98 I believe it was just the concessions one lacking it, which I've taken care of - the protection lists seem to already have it. The Kip (contribs) 22:16, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I would replace the # on the one table with something like {{Abbr|No.|Number}}. If I have a chance tomorrow, I will do a full review of your article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:47, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's been done. The Kip (contribs) 04:59, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • The standard is to not have any citations in the lead. Anything stated in the lead should theoretically be restated elsewhere in the article. So you have two citations (sources no. 1 and 2) that should be brought down into the main body of the text, and if that information is not there, it should be added. I wouldn't copy word-for-word; I would slightly rephrase it.
Background
  • "The Vegas bid would make the NHL the first "Big Four" major professional sports league to place a franchise in Las Vegas, though the league previously had a limited presence in the city with annual pre-season games, beginning with an outdoor game in 1991 and the Frozen Fury series held each year since 1997." Is this sourced anywhere?
  • What is currently source no. 5 requires a subscription or an account; it should reflect that in the citation.
  • "the Golden Knights signed Canadian center Reid Duke to a three-year, entry-level contract, making him the franchise's first player." This needs a source.
Rules
  • You have some instances of numbers larger than 10 being spelled out and others where they are rendered as numbers. Whichever style you choose, they should be consistent.
Tables
  • The tables look great now and appear to be properly structured per MOS:ACCESS.
Post-draft
  • "Not all players selected by the Golden Knights in the Expansion Draft remained with the team."

User:The Kip: I swear, I've reviewed a similar article to this in the past. Did you submit another hockey draft article through FLC recently? Anyway, please let me know if you have any questions about my comments or suggestions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:24, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98 Sorry for the delay:
  • Moved the info to two different sections, along with the citations.
  • Frozen Fury and the 1991 outdoor game are sort of self-sourced to their respective articles (1991 one wasn't previously linked, I added it), but I've added a cite for them being the first major pro team in Vegas.
  • Opted to go for numbers for anything over ten.
Everything else has been taken care of. The Kip (contribs) 07:31, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Buffalo Sabres draft picks

[edit]
Nominator(s): Kline • talk • contribs 21:14, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Round three of me nominating a list for FL! As you might be able to tell from my userboxes that the Buffalo Sabres are my favorite hockey team, I decided to take a stab at finishing off some of the lists for the Sabres. They have had a wide variety of picks that they have made, ranging from some all-time greats to some... questionable first round picks that busted in quick fashion. Hope you enjoy! Kline • talk • contribs 21:14, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

[edit]

Source review (HurricaneZeta)

[edit]

As of this revision:

  • 1 -  Pass
  • 2 -  Pass
  • 3:
    • 3a -  Pass
    • 3b -  Pass
  • 4 -  Pass. However, I recommend moving this after move up to the first overall pick. since source 5 is the one that mentions From 1995 to 2012, the winner of the draft lottery was allowed to move up a maximum of four positions in the entry draft.
  • 5 -  Pass
  • 6:
    • 6a -  Pass
    • 6b -  Pass
    • 6c -  Pass, took a while but spot checks check out for the table
  • 7 -  Pass
  • 8 -  Pass but is there a better source than NYP?
  • 9 -  Pass
  • 10 -  Pass
  • 11 -  Pass, but by the way his article's titled Gilbert Perreault but it's spelled as "Perrault" throughout this article.
  • 12 -  Pass
  • 13 -  Pass
  • 14 -  Pass
  • The 2 general references are relevant to the article and complement the table.
  • There's only one image that checks out, so pass on that as well.

Support on sourcing, but the few concerns do need to be addressed Kline. HurricaneZetaC 21:05, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneZeta Done, apparently I forgot how to spell Perreault. Kline • talk • contribs 23:52, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of constituencies of the Kerala Legislative Assembly

[edit]
Nominator(s): -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:01, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The 10th in the Indian constituency series. I've improved the lead, included some history, updated the table, and brought the table accessibility to FL-standards. Similar, recent FL: Goa. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:01, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ES

[edit]
  • "it sits for a term of five years unless it is dissolved early"→"the assembly sits for a term of five years, unless dissolved early" shorter and repetition of "it" kinda hinders flow. Initially, I was confused as to what "it" referred to because lots of new things are introduced before this part
  • "|1977 election]] it"→|1977 election]], it" introductory dependent clause
  • "who each directly elect a representative." uncited
  • "Changes in the constituencies of the Kerala Legislative Assembly over time" the "over time" is redundant. See Principle of Some Astonishment (albeit the entire thing is quite lengthy, the "stating the obvious" section is most relevant here)
  • map for reservations is consistent with table for reservations
  • the map creates a big gap from the beginning of the section to the beginning of the table on my screen. I don't see a fix here but keeping that as a note in case someone else more capable than me can suggest something.

I do think the former constituencies should be merged with this list, but I do know that there usually aren't sources for these (like in the bihar one). Could you investigate to see if there are? If there aren't then I would reccomend that you redirect the former list into the history section of this list, tagging it as {{Category:Redirects with history|R with history}}. I know that other lists don't have this but it I think it is sensible to include historic information. Government archives may help you find sources. Also nice to see content on Kerala. User:Easternsahara 07:07, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Easternsahara: Except for the map issue (which looks ok to me on a desktop) I have fixed the other issues that you've pointed out.
I think List of former constituencies of the Kerala Legislative Assembly is wrongly named right now: It has all the MLAs that represented those constituencies too. Ideally a former constituency list would just have the start year, end year, and district of each former constituency. There are references (all primary) in that list right now, but having looked for such stuff before, I think it will be hard to find secondary refs.
I'll need to have a think about doing a WP:BLAR on the former constituency list. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:12, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Quick accessibility review

[edit]
  • The !scope=row for the Constituencies section should be on constituencies instead of the number as the scope for the article is on the constituencies and not the numbers.
  • Pseudo-header for the key should be fixed (MOS:PSEUDOHEAD). Use a template like {{Legend table}} instead.

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:34, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowboygilbert: Fixed both, thanks. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:10, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Billboard Adult Contemporary number ones of 2002

[edit]
Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:06, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the 42nd list in this series. Do you love Celine Dion? Then you would have (apparently) loved listening to AC radio in 2002...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:06, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (12/22/25)

[edit]
  • "Celine Dion, one of the most successful pop/AC acts of all time..." That is going to need a source or else it reads as an opinion.
  • The prose seems to skip over all of October through December.

No issues with the table. User:ChrisTheDude: let me know when you've had a chance to examine my (very few) comments. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:35, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: - done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:47, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:ChrisTheDude: I have the following up for Featured status if you'd like to take a look:
Thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:02, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824

[edit]

Generalissima

[edit]

Prose is very solid throughout, I can't find any room to nit-pick. All the images are properly licensed and appropriate for the article. Support on prose and pass on image review. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:10, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vestrian24Bio

[edit]
  • Link Billboard in all refs.
  • Could use the {{Ref.}} template for ref header.

Vestrian24Bio 12:22, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Vestrian24Bio: - done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:37, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are 4 refs needing an archive URL as well.

That's all I got. I'll go ahead and give my Support now. Vestrian24Bio 03:27, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of accolades received by In Bruges

[edit]
Nominator(s): Cavan121012 (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In Bruges is a 2008 black comedy crime film written and directed by Martin McDonagh in his feature-length directorial debut. The film follows Ray (Colin Farrell) and Ken (Brendan Gleeson), two Irish hitmen in hiding in Bruges, Belgium, awaiting orders from their mob boss Harry (Ralph Fiennes). I am nominating this for featured list because I have put in a lot of effort recently to improve the quality. I have added all missing awards and the list is comprehensive, every award/nomination is referenced and I believe it meets all of the criteria. This is my first attempt at promoting a featured list, I have based it off other recently promoted film accolades lists. Any comments or suggestions welcome, and thanks in advance. Cavan121012 (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

List of World Heritage Sites in Africa

[edit]
Nominator(s): User:Easternsaharareview this 01:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I started working on this list in October in my sandbox after the Arab list passed, to which this is formatted similarly. This is a restoration of the first featured list on world heritage sites (i think), which was the first one covering a continent, not just a country; that's pretty cool.
I will work on the Latin American list, then the Asian one, and then the European one. After that, I will reformat Lists of World Heritage Sites to have more information and nominate that for FL as well.
Pinging users who may be interested in reviewing this @Tone: @MPGuy2824: @SafariScribe: @Vanderwaalforces:. (sorry for pinging you if you don't want to review this) User:Easternsaharareview this 01:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824

[edit]
  • There is one cite error that you need to fix (134:comorros)
  • In the table, make all the number cells right-aligned since they have a varying number of digits
  • See if left-aligning the State column looks better. All the flags would be lined up.
  • Angola has 4 tentative sites
  • Burundi: only 9 of the 10 tentative sites are mentioned. Also the ref for "The royal residence of Burundi" is wrong.
  • DRC: Only 4 of the tentative sites are mentioned.
  • Ethiopia and Gabon have 6 tentative sites each, not 7.
  • You might as well put Guinea-Bissau's site as a bullet point for consistency
  • Kenya's tentative list is supposed to have 21 entries.
  • Madagascar: 7 tentative, only 3 mentioned
  • Malawai has 7 tentative
  • Mali has 4 main sites
  • The Mauritius ref goes to the Algeria page
  • Nigeria: Only 2 of 14 tentative sites mentioned
  • Somalia's tentative sites aren't listed at all
  • Togo has 4 tentative sites
  • Tanzania and Uganda aren't sorted alphabetically.
  • Uganda isn't mentioned in the table. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:38, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @MPGuy2824: Easternsahara (now blocked) says on his talk page that he has addressed all of these points. --PresN 02:04, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Support on prose, table accuracy and accessibility. A few of my points from above were missed out, but I've now fixed them. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:29, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shwabb1

[edit]

@Shwabb1: thanks for the review. I added the Somali and Malawian sites. User:Easternsahara 17:16, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have more free time soon, so changing this from drive-by comments to full review, which I will do over the next few days. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 21:56, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • List of World Heritage Sites in Arab States has this section in the lead: "The implementation of the World Heritage Convention, the addition or removal of properties from the World Heritage List, and the allocation of funds, among other responsibilities, are managed by the World Heritage Committee. There are twenty-one state members on the committee. Although a term is a maximum of six years, most state parties choose to relinquish their responsibilities after four years so other countries can have the opportunity to be a member of the committee."
    Is there a reason why it is not included in this list? Regardless, I think it makes sense for the two lists to use a consistent structure, so either include this here as well, or remove from the other list if you consider this unimportant.
  • Something's wrong with the Guinea mixed sites cell in the table
  • For Benin, remove period after W-Arly-Pendjari Complex
  • Is there a specific order for the sites in each list? Skimming through parts of the article, it seems you're trying to sort them chronologically (according to time of inscription or addition to the tentative list), in which case at least Benin's list is incorrect. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:25, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Added the blurb from Arab States to the lead, fixed guinea's sites and fixed the chronological ordering User:Easternsahara 16:46, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks good. I'll finish the review some time this or next week. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 17:52, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing...

  • Missing Njock Rail Tunnels in Cameroon's tentative list
  • Mixed up site (Dimba and Ngovo caves) and province (Kongo Central) for DRC's tentative list
  • Missing Mt. Elgon Ecosystem in Kenya's tentative list
  • Missing some Malagasy tentative sites
  • Missing some Nigerian tentative sites
  • For all countries without any sites on their tentative lists, change wording to "does not maintain any sites on its tentative list" for consistency
  • For Somalia, change "As of December 2025" to "As of 2025" for consistency
  • Missing Serial Granaries of the caves of Nok, Mamproug, Kouba and Bagou in Togo's tentative list
  • For Uganda, remove country name from a couple of tentative transnational sites as it is not part of the sites' names. This is (seemingly) a new requirement for such sites to distinguish the submissions from each country on UNESCO's website (as I also remember seeing this for other similar nominations, e.g., European Paper Mills).
  • Some French-language titles in sources have to be fixed
  • I've implemented all changes other than the last one, though I'll go over the sources soon and finish that up as well. I have no points that require further discussion, so I'm ready to Support. Good job. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 00:11, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
User:Shwabb1: That's very kind of you to implement those changes yourself in Easternsahara's absence. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:35, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

VWF

[edit]
  • Source review – pending
  • Good job as usual with the sources, Easternsahara.
  • Please run the dmy script on the article to fix the inconsistencies.

@Vanderwaalforces: What is the dmy script? Could you link it so I can use it on this page, thanks. User:Easternsahara 17:16, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Easternsahara MOSNUMscript. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:37, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since Easternsahara is no longer here, I ran the date converter for him. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:00, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@FLC director and delegates: : Easternsahara has unfortunately been indefinitely blocked (see User talk:Easternsahara). I don't know what the procedure is for pending FLCs in this circumstance. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:41, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If someone wants to adopt it they can, otherwise it usually would be closed if there's major outstanding issues. It looks like they addressed MPGuy2824's concerns but didn't actually say so, so it may be clear to go once people finish their reviews, pending any source review concerns? I'll ping them on discord to see if that's the case, if it's just going to be a case of minor tweaks and bookkeeping I'm willing to keep it open rather than let it die. --PresN 23:07, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, to make it explicit, we're handling this as a community FLC- Easternsahara says they've addressed the existing review comments, existing reviewers are being kind in fixing the issues they find themselves, and I'm willing to take on any issues reviewers raise that they don't want to/feel comfortable with doing themselves. So we'll leave this open and muddle along, as I expect it to be promoted in the end. --PresN 02:06, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian Figure Skating Championships

[edit]
Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:56, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another list of national figure skating champions for your consideration. This one should be easier than Hungarian Figure Skating Championships, which was just promoted, because none of the sources are locked behind a paywall. They are, however, in Norwegian for the most part. While I don’t speak Norwegian, I found these sources easier to navigate because it turns out Norwegian (along with Swedish and Danish) have a lot of similarities to German (I am a German teacher). And while Norway has historically been a winter sports powerhouse, you can see from the tables that competitive figure skating has not been as big in Norway as it has been elsewhere. Special thank you to User:Migrant for scanning pages from the Norwegian Skating Association’s handbook for me as well as other assistance with Norwegian. Please let me know if you have any concerns or suggestions, and thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:56, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Neither Old News nor the National Library of Norway will cooperate with Internet Archive. 😒 Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:03, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824

[edit]
  • There are few cells like Men's singles - 1897, where Johan Lefstad seems to have won gold but not have enough points to be the champion. The background color there is the same as for "No other competitors". I think it should be different. You do have a footnote added for each of these situations, otherwise a symbol would also be needed for them.
  • I couldn't find any problems with prose or accessibility. (please Reply to icon mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:08, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Ollifant

[edit]
  • Ref 21 does not link "Trondhjems Adresseavis"
  • I checked the English sources and didn't see anything, I'll assume the Norwegian ones are accurate
  • No MOS:DASH errors
  • Dates are consistent
Just the one easily fixable issue so I'll go ahead and Support Olliefant (she/her) 02:03, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:09, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Crash Bandicoot video games

[edit]
Nominator(s): Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 03:49, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After 18 years (10 not counting that hiatus) of working on all notable entries in the Crash Bandicoot video game series, it's time to cap things off with the comprehensive list of such. The lead is engaging as a summary of the series, just about every entry covered by reliable sources has been accounted for, all information comes with adequate citations and is laid out in a series of clean and navigable tables. If anything's amiss, please let me know! Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 03:49, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

[edit]

Comments

[edit]
  • "The Crash Bandicoot series sold over 40 million copies worldwide across all titles by 2007" => "The Crash Bandicoot series had sold over 40 million copies worldwide across all titles by 2007"
  • Why is "Crash of the Titans" (handheld version) listed twice? The platforms are different, but further up you have a single entry for the console version, which was apparently released for four different platforms.....
    @ChrisTheDude: The Nintendo DS and Game Boy Advance versions are different games. Unfortunately, the GBA version did not receive enough coverage to qualify for an individual page, so this isn't immediately obvious. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 10:39, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Canceled near its completion to avoid competition with Mario Kart DS." and "Canceled due to low sales of Crash Bandicoot 4: It's About Time and a shift in focus toward live-service multiplayer games." are not sentences so should not have full stops
  • That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude: Points 1 and 3 addressed Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 10:39, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:41, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Cukie Gherkin (117/117)

[edit]

I will be conducting a source review soon - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 10:05, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sowwy, forgot about this with the holidays, will resume now. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:06, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Checking citation info

  • IGN links in general should be fixed to link to the live pages: [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19]
  • [20] This site's citation links to an archive instead of the live site in the |url field (replace with [21]
  • [22] Live version for citation 10
  • Live versions for citation 13: [23]
  • [24] This archive should be removed, as it's an archive of an archive
    @Cukie Gherkin: All fixed Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 12:15, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see the Warped release date here: [25] (also here's the live version of the article)
    @Cukie Gherkin: The live version is incorrectly dated, so I just replaced it with a Game Informer source. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • [26] Live version of citation 33
  • [27] Identifies publisher as Vivendi Games; this source correctly identifies the Twinsanity publisher
    @Cukie Gherkin: Fixed Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ripto's Rampage is titled "Crash Bandicoot Fusion" in the article, but in the citation, it's "Crash Bandicoot: Fusion"
  • [28] does not cite the release date; should replace citation with this
  • I'd suggest mentioning that Crash Bandicoot Purple is a sibling game to Spyro Orange
  • Vivendi Universal Games being the publisher not properly cited; use this
  • Neither citation on "Developed by Griptonite Games and published by Vivendi Games" verifies Vivendi's involvement in this game. I see on the Wikipedia page that it says it was released under the Sierra brand. I reckon this should be stated and properly cited
  • Jeuxvideo citations seem problematic; for example, for Crash of the Titans GBA, the Jeuxvideo page says October 4 for the US, whereas the list says October 2. I see that the archive page contradicts this. Is it possible to replace citations where such errors with the live page are occurring with articles that are consistent with the archived version?
    @Cukie Gherkin: Unfortunately not in this particular case. As far as I can tell, that page is just about the only reliable proof that the GBA version even exists. Since the live version doesn't even list a release date from what I can see, I've listed the verifying url as dead for the time being. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:23, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    That's fine to me, as long as the archive link gives this date. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 17:49, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • In general, I'd advise making sure the citations are accurate to the specific developer and publisher names, which is understandably annoying since Crash has a bit of a publisher hot potato going on.
  • [29] This page fails to verify the following: 1) Kaolink; 2) Action game
    @Cukie Gherkin: The GameSpot review page, already in use, does. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:23, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • [30] It might be nitpicky, but is there something in this page that could be used to verify that this became MiniGames?
    @Cukie Gherkin: The Pocket Gamer review page uses both names, so that's been added. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:23, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • [31] Genre unlisted
  • Suggest clarifying the original Crash Bandicoot level "Boulders"

Checking reliability

Support I feel p good about my source review and the accuracy of the list. My only suggestion would be to say that I think a reader would be more interested in cancelled Crash games than games related to it, so that should be listed first. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 17:56, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also, would you be willing to provide comment on List of cancelled Virtual Boy games once it's brought to FLC? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:35, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I've never participated in an FLC in that sort of capacity, but I'll see what I can manage. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 18:39, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of octodontids

[edit]
Nominator(s): PresN 03:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey y'all, mammal list #66 in our perpetual series and rodent list #11: Octodontidae. This is our 7th and final list covering the Caviomorpha parvorder, aka "things shaped kinda like guinea pigs", with the degus and rock rats, which look like half-rat, half-guinea pigs with tails. They're down at the bottom of South America, mostly up in the mountains and highlands and generally with relatively small ranges, so you almost certainly have never heard of them. There's 14 species, but the 3 that are trapped on an island or pretty restricted to wetlands are critically endangered, while the rest seem to just hang out in or near central Chile eating plants and not bothering anyone. This list was started by Reconrabbit, who has also made several of the maps. As always, the list reflects the scientific consensus as well as the results of prior FLCs. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 03:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (12/1/25)

[edit]

No issues at all with the prose. Just two suggestions:

User:PresN: I'll come back later and do your source review for you. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:22, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: Linked, and I think Reconrabbit's new map fixes that issue. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 16:37, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that map is much better. Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:43, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Reconrabbit

[edit]

Since I worked on this pretty heavily in its early stages I don't know how impartial I can be on a review but can at least vouch for the range maps I created being accurate. If there are any needed changes (as above) let me know. -- Reconrabbit 16:06, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Reconrabbit: Ah, I'm so sorry, I forgot this was the one that you had put together last year, I meant to put that in the nomination statement. Yes, you did a bunch of work on this list, especially making those maps! --PresN 16:37, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • File:Degu eating a piece of dried banana.jpg CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Aconaemys fuscus.jpg PD the source for this is dead, could it be archived or could a new link be found?
  • File:Aconaemys fuscus map.jpg PD source?
  • File:Aconaemys sagei map.jpg PD source?
  • File:Octodon degus -Heidelberg Zoo, Germany-8a.jpg CC BY-SA 2.0
  • File:Octodon degus range.svg CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Octodon lunatus range.svg CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Octodon pacificus distribution zoomed.svg CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Octodontomys gliroides 238516748 CC BY 4.0
  • File:Octodontomys gliroides range.svg CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Cururo en el Parque natural Gómez Carreño.jpg CC BY-SA 4.0
  • File:Tympanoctomys barrerae.jpg CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Tympanoctomys barrerae range.png PD (I didn't spot check its sources, but it cites them, so I think its good)

I think the maps from uk.wp could be higher resolution and zoomed in. If you can find replacements that do this, then I'd recommend to use those. Maps don't have alts, thats okay range is described in words. Usually, the recommendation would be to say "see range text" but that comes before the actual map, so I'd say its alr for them to not have alts. Just fix the 2 maps without sources and I'll pass. User:Easternsaharareview this 16:49, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Easternsahara: Fixed the dead source, and removed the two maps from uk.wiki as they don't cite the source and are slightly off from the IUCN maps so I can't assume that was it. --PresN 20:08, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
pass image review User:Easternsaharareview this 20:34, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Generalissima

[edit]

Sources are all fairly consistently formatted; however, I feel Kelt et al 2007 could be formatted better. It's missing the editors (Kelt and Kaspin). You're citing " The Octodontidae Revisited: Una Revision De Octodontidae". This seems to check out with your tree, but this is a specific chapter in a book where each chapter is by a different set of authors. I feel you should put the name of the chapter in the field, as well as the name of the authors of that chapter ( Milton H. Gallardo, Ricardo A. Ojeda, Claudio A. González, and Carolina A. Ríos). I'll do spot checks this evening. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:06, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I put an expanded (corrected?) citation on the talk page of the list that could be used. -- Reconrabbit 14:35, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, updated the citation with your version. --PresN 14:56, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Greek deities

[edit]
Nominator(s): Michael Aurel (talk) 05:04, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This page is an attempt at a comprehensive and structured enumeration of the Greek gods, an endeavour which probably requires a fair bit more ambition than common sense. Deities have been grouped in a manner which is in line with authoritative sources, while hopefully still being fairly intuitive to the uninitiated reader. This section of the talk page explains the reasoning behind choices made during the writing of the article (in particular, see the points towards the end, which were made in anticipation of queries about links, dates, and the like). Also, it's worth noting the existence of List of Mesopotamian deities, the only comparable featured list I'm aware of, and List of Hurrian deities and List of Ugaritic deities, two other well-written articles of a similar nature. – Michael Aurel (talk) 05:04, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

[edit]

Also doing a prose review:

Shwabb1

[edit]

I've experienced the frustration of getting a large list through the FL nomination process so I'll help along by leaving a review (only partial for now, will expand later).

Yes, I imagine the combination of length and considerable textual content here might scare a few reviewers off. Thankyou for getting the ball rolling! – Michael Aurel (talk) 21:03, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing...

  • Is there a reason why there are no Ancient Greek names for the primal elements and onward?
    Only visual niceness, really. The Greek names are a vestige of the old version of this article, and I've retained them in the "Major deities" section just for a bit of pizzazz (ie., I wouldn't have much against their removal). In later sections, I think including them could cause visual clutter (consider the "Abstract personifications" section, for example). One way to address this would be placing them in a separate column, though that would probably give undue weight to fairly inessential information. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:05, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Then I feel like the Ancient Greek names should be either everywhere or nowhere for consistency. However, I don't have a strong opinion on this and it's not a deal breaker, so I'll leave the decision to you. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That's quite reasonable, and perfectly fine by me. If the inconsistency sticks out to you, then there's a good chance other reviewers will feel the same. Removed. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:56, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • For Maenads, maybe it would make sense to use Template:Transliteration for "thyrsi, kantharoi" while keeping the wikilinks. There may be other instances like this that I've missed.
    Done, and done in a few places elsewhere. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:19, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider using Template:Interlanguage link for Silenoi (Q9348775) in whatever language you see fit, as you've done with Damia [fr] later on
    That could work. Silenoi is currently a redirect to Satyr, though, so linking there might be a simpler solution. The latter article unfortunately doesn't really delineate between the two groups of figures, though I suppose a link is more helpful than no link. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:19, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I saw the redirect and that Satyr treats Silenoi and Satyrs as the same, which is why I suggested an ILL (then you'd have to change the article name in the template to something like "Silenoi (mythology)" to get a redlink). Or you could make a small article about Silenoi since you already have some sources. Though, if you think the redirect works well enough, that's fine by me as well. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • For Telchines, no need to capitalize "Trident"
    I think you're right. Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:19, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • For Thriae, link divination
    Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Note that abstract personifications listed in previous sections are excluded here" – is there a particular reason for this? Above, there's a lot of repeats linking to corresponding sections.
    This touches on the aspect of this article I've found the trickiest, the structure. I think one issue here is that there isn't a canonical list of abstract personifications. Some of the figures in earlier sections (such as Erebus, Hemera, and Nyx) would fit fairly uncontroversially into this category, while for others the situation is more complex. Eros and Themis can probably be considered "abstract personifications", as they personify the concepts their names describe (and Stafford, in her study on the topic, includes them in her definition of the concept). Eos perhaps also qualifies, as her name means 'dawn', though sources appear to more often describe her as the "goddess of the dawn" than the "personification of the dawn". Penelope Murray has even written a book chapter discussing the Muses in relation to the concept of personification, and while she acknowledges that they "are not, strictly speaking, personifications", she states later on the same page that "[t]he question of how the Muses relate to personification is complex".
    All of this is really just to say "it's complicated", and that, because we aren't following a particular source in this section (the way we follow Gantz in the "Early deities" section, for example), I'd hesitate to partition all of the figures in the previous sections myself. It's worth noting that this ambiguity mostly exists for more "major" deities, most of whom are listed above the "Abstract personifications" section; there isn't any disputing that minor personages such as Moros, Limos, or Kratos fall into this category. I realise this is a rather lengthy response, though I figured I'd address this point fully, as others are bound to have the same query. – Michael Aurel (talk) 09:20, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I see, and makes sense especially considering the limited and often contradictory sources mentioning the deities. Perhaps you could condense this into a sentence or two and include it in the article to make this clear to the reader as well? Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:35, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That isn't a bad idea, though unfortunately I don't think it's one we'll be able to source. I'm not aware of any sources which say something to the effect of there isn't a canonical list of abstract personifications, or comment on the difficulty of classifying deities into figures who are abstract personifications and figures who aren't (which is probably a problem unique to Wikipedia). If you think it might leave the reader a bit less confused, I could list a few such deities in a pair of brackets (eg. (such as Nyx, Erebus, and Hemera)), though I realise this doesn't represent much of an improvement over the current note. – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:32, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that would be an improvement, although I agree that it doesn't address the core of the issue. Since there are no sources on this, not much can be done anyway, so I suppose most of it can be left as is then. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 17:36, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Added. – Michael Aurel (talk) 04:56, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Might the Personifications article by William Gillan Waddell in the first OCD, much longer than the current online Personification, be any use? For example, "Between the objects of actual popular worship and the literary devices of a poet the line is often hard to draw. ... A single figure, such as Ate, varies from passage to passage and from poet to poet, being now a physical or psychological phenomenon, now a moral force, now full-fledged divinity with family connexions [passages cited]. Even a given poet within a single work often vacillates between the genuine personification of a vividly characterized abstraction and 'grammatical apotheosis' (the illuminating phrase is that of Bouché-Leclerq), to the despair of modern editors who would like to be consistent in the matter of capital letters." NebY (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for that quote. As to whether it's useful here: mmm, maybe, though probably not. ;) The sentence about Ate is suggestive, though I think Waddell would probably consider both the "objects of actual popular worship" and "literary devices" to fall within the "personification" category (to whatever degree that word denotes a "category"), whereas here the dilemma is something like distinguishing between a "full-fledged divinity" who is a personification and one who isn't. Stafford 2000, p. 2 (from The desire to distinguish between such artistic personifications and real cult figures ...) articulates roughly the same idea as Waddell. – Michael Aurel (talk) 04:53, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No worries. I was tickled by Wadell's "despair of modern editors", as if the problem wasn't quite so unique to Wikipedia after all. NebY (talk) 11:50, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • For Arke, change the last sentence to "In the Titanomachy, she supports the Titans, and once the Olympian gods are victorious, she is punished – imprisoned in Tartarus and stripped of her wings" or something similar. The original wording (especially towards the end) seems a bit awkward to me.
    Reworded along the lines of your suggestion: In the Titanomachy she supports the Titans, and once the Olympian gods are victorious she is imprisoned in Tartarus and stripped of her wings. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That works too. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • For Comus, maybe condense the beginning to "According to Philostratus the Elder, ..."
    Done, though by moving him into the "Abstract personifications" section (where he probably should have been). – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's it from me. This turned out to be a very well-written and interesting read. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 20:28, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Great, thankyou for your helpful review, Shwabb1. – Michael Aurel (talk) 09:25, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:13, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PanagiotisZois

[edit]

Leaving this here as a placeholder. (Just so you know others are seeing your work and appreciate it) I have to say, great work on this list! Really glad that more Classical mythology-related things are seeing improvements. I plan to look over through the whole thing, but it might take some time. And I can get quite anal with these things, so I hope I don't come off as too nitpicky.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 23:55, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thankyou PanagiotisZois: looking forward to your review. – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:40, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To make the process a bit easier and faster for both of us, I decided to look into the first half of the article with the lede and the "Major deities" section. For the most part, these section are very well-written and the only issues I found are small nitpicks or questions. You have done great work with the article. :) Once these comments are addressed, I will then move on to the "Early deities" section.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:39, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I think I've addressed all of these points so far. Looking forward to further comments. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:13, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Lede
  1. I think "anthropomorphic" should come before "immortal". Firstly, so that the three adjectives are in alphabetical order. Secondly, because after this sentence, the first thing you describe about them is how they were like humans in appearance, rather than abstract concepts, and then bring up them being immortal.
    Sure, done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Granted, this isn't Simple English Wikipedia, but could we use a different word instead of "demarcated" that signals the same meaning? I'm guessing the meaning here is "distinguished/differentiated primarily by their name"?
    Something along the lines of "mark out or determine the boundary or limits of" (quoting the OED). Bremmer uses the word "established", though the following paragraph in his book makes his meaning clear: he's talking about where one draws the line between what is "part of deity x" and "not part of deity x". For example, Zeus Meilichios seems rather different to the Zeus of Homeric epic, so it might be reasonable to consider them separate figures; both, however, are still part of "Zeus". I think "defined" is probably the closest synonym here, though I'm not sure it conveys quite what we want. "distinguished" is close, though we're probably more concerned here with what falls within the bounds of a god's identity than that which sits outside it. – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  3. I'm not sure if "Dionysus is the deity who has received the most attention in modern scholarship" is necessary. I do think it is very interesting, but it's not really something that pertains to Ancient Greece itself, or which deities were most significant to the Greeks.
    That's true. This sentence was essentially a way of mentioning some of the twelve Olympians, while giving a sense of a few different ways gods can be "important". I think it's alright as is, though there are probably other statements that could be made about Dionysus. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:17, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Not something to be changed, but I find the last sentence interesting. I guess that means that something like the Titans had a significant role to play in mythology, but weren't worshipped in any way, correct? By contrast, while the Muses may not appear often in mythology, they were regularly worshipped in the hopes of received graces from them. At least, that's my understanding.
    Yes, that's pretty much correct. There's no evidence that, as a collective, the Titans were worshipped, whereas the Muses possessed a substantial cult. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:17, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Twelve Olympians
  1. Technically not of this subsection. When exactly was Greek Religion published?
    The German original was published in 1977, and the English version was published in 1985. I suppose this could be added to the article, though I'm not sure whether it's necessary. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:17, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Ideally, we uses sources as close to our present date as possible, and it would be beneficial for readers to know when the book was publsihed. I think adding a simple parenthesis like (1977) would suffice. PanagiotisZois (talk) 15:02, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, that seems quite sensible. I've used the 1985 date for Burkert, and added similar dates for sources mentioned in later sections. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:22, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Minor, but "said not to" to "said to not" seems slightly better.
    Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  3. For Aphrodite, I think "and in the Iliad" would read better as "while in the Iliad". More importantly, I would argue the order should be switched. In the lede, you state that the Iliad was written first (around 750 to 700 BC), while Theogony was written c. 700 BC. Ergo, shouldn't her "first" chronological origin be placed here?
    Sure, that's seems fine: done. It is worth noting that those dates are fairly approximate, though (cf. Iliad#Date and textual history). – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  4. "her most renowned cults were located on the island of Cyprus". Not surprising, but nothing about Kythira? I'm aware both of these islands were treated as her birthplace; depending on myth. Still, if the source mentions only Cyprus, leave it as is.
    The online 4th edition of the OCD does mention Cythera, though the cited, revised 3rd edition doesn't (assuming I'm not missing it). We probably could mention Cythera, though we'd need to add a new phrase (because it wasn't where her "most renowned cults were located"). – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand. In that case, leaving it as is would be fine. PanagiotisZois (talk) 15:03, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Why use "males" in "and with males such as Hyacinth" instead of just "men"? Especially as the prior part of the sentence uses "women".
    Sensible, done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  6. "he often appeared alongside Aphrodite in cult". Aphrodite's already linked in the first line.
    Fixed. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Athena can be "found holding the aegis or a shield adorned with a gorgoneion (a Gorgon's head)". I'm a little confused. Is the aegis a shield with a gorgoneion, or something different? I looked it up, but at first glance the wording was a bit confusing. Maybe a parenthesis about the aegis is could help.
    Mm, good point. This was a bit clearer in the source. I think omitting "aegis" is the easiest solution here, as trying to explain the matter will probably take up too much room. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  8. No mention of Dionysus' worship in Rome as Bacchus or his syncretism with Liber?
    This is one of quite a few things that we probably could mention, though at the time I didn't feel was WP:DUE. The OCD and Brill's New Pauly both mention it, though only briefly, and I think I felt the description for Dionysus was already long enough. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Understandable. We wouldn't want any one section to be too bloated. PanagiotisZois (talk) 15:04, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Hermes' cult "existed in a particularly old form in Athens". What does this mean?
    Rephrased a little: His cult [...] was very old in Athens. Without looking at some further sources (as the OCD is a bit light on details here), I think we mean that his worship there stretched back to an early date. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  10. "whose job it was". We can lose the "it".
    True, done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Considering that both Poseidon's and Hades' (further down) section mention how the three brothers split the cosmos in three, shouldn't this also be mentioned in Zeus' section?
    Similarly to above, this is something that probably could be mentioned, but it seemed as though there was too much else to say about Zeus for it to be WP:DUE. (I'd also note that he attains his power, a similar point, is probably a little more important than his receiving the domain of the sky.) – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Chthonic deities

Not much to say here. :) Though I have to admit, I've always been a bit confused by the whole Hades/Pluto situation. So Pluto was initially a distinct deity associated with wealth, with Hades receiving no worship (as the god of the underworld). But then, people started using Pluto as an alternative name for Hades and worshipping Hades as a god of riches with an alternative name, essentially syncretizing the two figures? Did the ancient Greeks view them as two different figures, or simply a radically different (and positive) way to worship a particular deity? Kinda like how the Spartans had Aphrodite Areia who was worshipped as a war goddess?

Yes, something along those lines. They could probably be described as two different names for or aspects of the same figure. Pluto is attested from around the early 5th century BC; he was particularly important in the Eleusinian Mysteries, and was the form under which the god was usually worshipped. The name isn't really an epithet, though, as you don't encounter "Hades Pluto". – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:13, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification. :) PanagiotisZois (talk) 15:20, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nature deities

Nothing here either. Though shouldn't it be "The personification of the Sun and its god" for Helios?

He could probably also be called a personification (as does our article), though most sources on Helios seem to simply describe him as the literal Sun (eg. the OCD). – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:13, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Other major deities
  1. "his worship spread to Athens from Arcadia" to "spread from Arcadia to Athens".
    Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:13, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Foreign deities worshipped in Greece
  1. "Greek attention towards Ammon was due primarily" to "primarily due".
    Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:13, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Not saying this is an "omission" or that you have to include him, but given that Serapis is featured here, did any of the sources you find make references to Hermanubis? Similarly to Serapis, Hermanubis was a Greco-Egyptian figure created from the syncretism of two separate figures. Although I have to admit, I'm not sure if Hermanubis appears in any myths, and whether any cults of his existed within Greece itself; I guess Ptolemaic/Greek Egypt wouldn't really count as part of "the Greek world".
    The current "Foreign deities" section plays a little fast and loose with the inclusion criteria: strictly speaking, Isis and Men should probably be removed, as they aren't in Burkert (or at least they aren't discussed in separate paragraphs) and I'm not sure they can be considered all that "major" in Greek religion. There are some other foreign gods that could be mentioned here (Bendis comes to mind), but knowing where to draw the line is tricky. Hermanubis is a figure who could be mentioned, but probably doesn't quite make the cut in the restrictive list we have here. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:13, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm... Well, in Isis' defense, from what I've read on her Wikipedia article and the little stuff I've read online, while she may not have been as "assimilated" into Greek mythology and cult practices as Adonis or Cybele were, she definitely was a significant figure in the Roman Empire, which included Greece, and I know had a few temples dedicated to her there. Not sure about Men.
    I'm curious, outside of Bendis and Hermanubis, are there any other deities that could be included here? I understand that the section is specifically for "Major deities", so I'm guessing there are a few foreign deities that couldn't be added due to their limited worship.
    But anyway, this question is mostly for me; and probably because part of me would like for Hermanubis to be included, but I understand as to why he may not fit here.
    I appreciate you going through my comments. I will look into the next section first, which is kinda long, and then the last two major ones. PanagiotisZois (talk) 15:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    There are probably a few others. Osiris and Mithras come to mind, though I'm not sure either had a distinct, meaningful cult in Greece before Roman times. The other option here would of course be to turn "Foreign deities worshipped in Greece" into a section in its own right, though I think that'd probably create more problems than it solves. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:11, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, yeah, Mithras. I'm almost entirely sure that his worship didn't start until after the Roman period. Granted, he probably was worshipped in Greece, but since one could argue that his worship was imported by Romans or Roman officials, how Greek was it, you know?
    If you think that a "Foreign deities" area could be turned into its own section, rather than a subsection, I'm not gonna stand in your way, lol. Of course, in its current placement, the subection is about "MAJOR deities in the Greek religion", so I understand why a figure like Isis is included, while others like Hermanubis or Bendis aren't. PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:31, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Primal elements
  1. For Eros, "figure, a portrayal" would better with a semicolon.
    I've rephrased this a bit: In other cosmogonies, including some that are Orphic, he is similarly a primordial figure. "a portrayal also present in Orphic literature" isn't a full sentence, so I don't think a semicolon would work. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Also for Eros, Aphrodite is linked twice.
    Fixed. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Again for Cupid, the sentence about him being absent from Homeric epics is too small. Maybe the sentence as a whole can read "In other cosmogonies, he is similarly a primordial figure, which is a portrayal also present in Orphic literature; Eros is absent from Homeric epic."
    Agreed. I've combined it with the following sentence: Although absent from Homeric epic, lyric poets of the archaic era (c. 800–480 BC) present him as a representation of the subjective experience of love. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The Titans and their descendants
  1. "One of the Titans, children". Should be singular.
    Added "the". – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I think "She was possibly considered the wife of Zeus prior to Hera, who already occupied this role in the Mycenaean era (c. 1750–1050 BC)" should be slightly rewritten to clarify the meaning more well; if I understand it correctly. "It is possible that Dione was considered the wife of Zeus/Zeus' wife prior to the Mycenaean era (c. 1750–1050 BC), by which point Hera definitively occupies this position/role".
    The source points to Tn 316 here, so I don't think it necessarily means that Dione could only have been his consort prior to the Mycenaean period. I've gone for "at some point in the Mycenaean era", which hopefully makes this a bit clearer. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  3. "Dione was venerated as his consort at the oracle of Dodona". Wouldn't it be "by the oracle of Dodona"?
    The word "oracle" can also refer to the site of an oracle, but this could have been clearer: I've changed it to the oracular site of Dodona. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  4. "the name Dione is a feminine version of Zeus". As a speaker of both Greek and English, this makes sense to me, as we refer to Zeus as Dias in Modern Greek. However, I fear many people will be confused by this. Perhaps you can say "feminine version of Dios/Dias, an alternative name for/of Zeus".
    Good point. I've used a different source, which explicitly mentions the form "Dios". – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  5. "In the Theogony, she is the first goddess Zeus marries". God, how many wives did this guy have?
  6. "She is also said to be an owner of the Delphic oracle prior to Apollo". Wouldn't Delphic oracle be the Temple of Apollo?
    She wasn't necessarily the owner of the temple itself (as that word refers to a specific, physical structure), but more the keeper of the prophetic capacities of the site. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Abstract personifications
  1. Is Horkos male or female? The jump from one to the other.
    Male: fixed. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  2. "She was sometimes instead considered his wife" to "She was sometimes considered to be Asclepius' wife, instead of daughter".
    I've repeated the name "Asclepius". We do mention that she's his daughter earlier in the paragraph, so I think it's probably alright to just use "instead". – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  3. For the Oneiroi, I'm not sure "while in the Odyssey" is necessary. Just use a full stop in then say "In the Odyssey". Sidenote, do any Greek sources refers to the individual Dreams by name, or was Ovid the first person to do so in the Metamorphoses?
    Agreed, used "and". I think splitting into two sentences might leave them a bit too brief. As to the question about names: I'd need to look into it to know with certainty, but I'm at least not aware of a source prior to Ovid that gives names to individual Oneiroi or Somnia. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Would Pheme personify fame?
    Sources aren't completely consistent on this point, but most appear to describe her as the personification of something rumour-related. The OCD has a rumour of unknown origin which springs up among the people at large, Brill's New Pauly has public speech, rumour and (helpful or malicious) gossip, and Stafford 2000 has Rumour or Report. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Soteria also means salvation.
    Sure, that's true, and Soter and Soteira are commons epithets of major deities. In this case, Zimmermann seems to think "physical well-being" is the right word to describe what's being personified. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Does Telete personify Dionysiac rites only, or "rituals" in general? Which is what her name means.
    In this case, Schuddeboom seems to think she personifies Dionysiac rites in particular. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    To the three above points: Understood. We obviously can go based on what the sources say, not what we (I) think. PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:41, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Other deities
  1. Regarding Agdistis, you can change "place" to "location" and "seed" to "semen" for clarity. Also, how are her genitals severed; does the source provide any info? If not, leaving it as is would be fine.
    Sure, I've done both. I think versions vary a bit: sometimes it's the doing of Dionysus, and sometimes it's the doing of the gods as a group. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Again with Agdistis, I think the third sentence is a bit unnecessarily complex in structure. You can say "Her male genitals are severed, with an almond tree growing where they landed. When a woman named Nana is under the tree, an almond falls into her lap, causing her to become pregnant, (later) giving birth to a boy named Attis."
    Agreed. I've used a semicolon here, and rephrased along the lines you've suggested. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Seeing a pattern? "and eventually causes" to "eventually causing", to avoid repetition of "and".
    Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  4. "he transports the alive Heracles" to "living Hercules".
    Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Would the Palici count as Greek or Roman deities, given their origins in Sicily?
    Yes, you're probably right. I've removed them. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael Aurel: All right. I've gone through the whole article. These are my remaining comments for the list's prose. Thankfully for the both of us, despite the size of the article, there was very little that may need changing.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:55, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Thanks again for these comments, PanagiotisZois. This is a pretty hefty list, and there was always a danger it wouldn't receive enough reviews. I think I've now addressed all of your suggestions. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:52, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael Aurel: I've been following you work for more than a year now ever since I discovered the Amaltheia article. You have done tremendous work on Wikipedia, and especially here. As a Greek, and someone who has an interest in Greek mythology (and a few other periods of Greece), I'm really happy that this list has been improved upon to the wonderful state it currently is it. It probably doesn't mean much coming froom me, but you should be very proud of the work you have done here. I can tell it took a tremendous amount of time and effort on your part.
I also understand your fears about the list not getting enough reviews; admittedly, it is quite large. I planned on reviewing it earlier, but November and December were pretty hectic and tiring months for me. I actually wished to partake in the peer review months earlier, but couldn't do that. Sorry. :/
Anyway. While the page probably needs to go through a spot check and source review, at least when it comes to the prose itself, I'm happy to support its promotion to Featured List status. :D
[Sidenote: I find the tale of Agdistis interesting. (In case that wasn't obvious) Why did she think it was a good idea to castrate him? Did she force him to do that, or did she perform the "surgery" herself?] PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:49, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2021 NHL expansion draft

[edit]
Nominator(s): XR228 (talk) 05:25, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because when I tried nominating this for GA, I was told that this article should be a list, so here I am. It meets everything it should. XR228 (talk) 05:25, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824

[edit]
  • The image in the infobox is missing alt-text.
  • Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead. This is for the Draft selections table.
  • If the row header cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead of scope=row. This is for all the "protected players" tables. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:44, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @MPGuy2824: I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 16:32, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:39, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • P.S. Looking at the background section, a lot of the details there don't seem warranted: Introduce the Oak valley group and the team name while saying that the NHL BoG approved their addition, in a couple of sentences. Then move on to the last paragraph of that section with appropriate tweaks.

Comments

[edit]
  • The lead looks very short at just three sentences. There's surely more that can be said.....?
  • "As general manager, Francis oversees" - the present tense here will eventually stop being accurate, so maybe change to "As general manager, Francis was given responsibility for"......?
  • "who were under contract for the 2021–22 season and played in at least 27 games in the 2020–21 season" => "who were under contract for the 2021–22 season and had played in at least 27 games in the 2020–21 season"
  • "The player with an NMC continuing past July 28, 2021, was deemed to have a career-threatening injury and is thus declared exempt from selection and use of a protection slot." => "The player had an NMC continuing past July 28, 2021, was deemed to have a career-threatening injury, and was thus declared exempt from selection and use of a protection slot."
  • "the 2021–22 salaries of the thirty players selected (as measured in terms of what is counted against the salary cap, had" - the closing bracket is missing
  • "On July 18, the protected player list, a list of players who the Kraken were not allowed to select during the draft" => "On July 18, the protected player list, a list of players whom the Kraken were not allowed to select during the draft"
  • "a three-day period where the Seattle Kraken could talk to unrestricted free agents (UFAs) begun" => "a three-day period during which the Seattle Kraken could talk to unrestricted free agents (UFAs) began"
  • That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:44, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude: I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 02:24, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Electoral history of Al Gore

[edit]
Nominator(s): Olliefant (she/her) 07:15, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My third Vice President Electoral History list. A personal favorite of mine, Gore has participated in 10ish elections. I would like to thank Darth Kalwejt for creating the page back in 2008. I hope to continue this series of VPEH soon. (currently between someone who would never shoot someone and then make the person they shot apologize to them and Dick Chaney) Olliefant (she/her) 07:15, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This calls for a celebration! Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:09, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (12/29/25)

[edit]
  • There is some inconsistency on the tables with regards to the word "incumbent". Sometimes it's wikilinked; sometimes it's capitalized; etc. I recommend picking one format and sticking with it. Done
  • I think "Election Day" is a proper noun and should be capitalized. Done
Lead
  • "and his third defeating by Republican challenger James B. Seigneur." – Get rid of that "by". Done
  • "to be his running mate in 1992 United States presidential election." – You need an article after "in". Done
1976
  • "Joe L. Evins announced he would not be seeking another term" – Recommend rewording as "announced that he would not seek another term"; the progressive tense is not needed. Done
  • "The primary race was close, with Gore and Tennessee House of Representatives Speaker Stanley Rogers as the front runners." – I would recommend rephrasing as "Gore and ... emerging as the front runners." Done
1978
  • Recommend rewording those large numbers as 90,000 and 108,000, and so on.
    • Opted to make words for consistency
1982
  • "around thirty thousand less votes" – Should be "fewer votes". Done
1984
  • Democratic should be capitalized when referring to the political party. Done
1990
  • "Republican Representative Don Sundquist felt that the Hawkins was a weak candidate" – You don't need that "the". Done
1988 Democratic Primary
  • "followed by Jackson at 37% with Gore receiving only 10%." – You need something between "37%" and "with". Done
1992 nomination
  • "Governor Bill Clinton considered around forty different politicians to be his running mate." – Recommend replacing "about" with "approximately". Not done
    • The exact number is unknown, I found varying numbers and the LA Times article cited said Clinton "had a list of about 40 possibilities" so I just went with "around fourty"
      • For some reason, I read that as “about” when you clearly used “around”. Your original sentence is fine.
  • Is there a wikilink for shortlist?
1996
  • You probably don't need two subheaders considering how small both sections are, but that's up to you.
    • I just left it for consistency,
  • Who was the Secretary of HUD, Dole or Kemp?
    • Kemp, I've tweaked it a bit, but I don't know how to improve the wording without running into a MOS:SOB issue
2000 nomination
  • Recommend writing out Democratic National Convention. Done
  • "He formerly announced..." – I believe you mean "formally". Done
General election
  • You have Dick Cheney misspelled as "Dick Chaney". Done He won't like that; his ghost might shoot you in the face while quail hunting and call it an accident...
    He didn't :(
  • "Gore initially gave a concession speech; however he retracted it after a recount was ordered.[1] However, the Supreme Court's 5–4 decision in Bush v. Gore" Too many howevers in close proximity. Done
  • "Some Democrats attributed Gore's loss to the presence of third party candidate Ralph Nader of the Green Party causing a "spoiler effect" detracting from Gore's vote count in Florida and New Hampshire." – There's something wonky here; something between "spoiler effect" and "detracting". Done

User:Olliefant: Please let me know when you've had a chance to examine these comments! Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:23, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: Thank you for the review, I hope I addressed all of your concerns. Olliefant (she/her) 01:50, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Olliefant: Looks good! Support. I will do your source review later today. I think I did the source review for Dan Quayle too, but if not, I'll do that one too. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:03, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review (11/30/25)

[edit]

All of the images have appropriate licenses and captions. The maps do not have any alt-text. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:06, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review (11/30/25)

[edit]

This table checks 15 passages from throughout the article (19.7% of 76 total passages). These passages contain 20 inline citations (17.9% of 112 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:38, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reference # Letter Source Archive Status Notes
Nine different candidates sought the Democratic nomination.
4 a newspapers.com Good This article says nothing about nine candidates seeking the Democratic nomination. Approved
5 newspapers.com Fail The article describes Gore's competition in the primary as "crowded", but did not cite numbers.
McGlamery did not actively campaign and only ran to prevent Gore from winning unopposed. On Election Day, Gore won in a landslide, receiving 94 percent of the vote.
7 b Guthrie, Benjamin J. (April 15, 1977). Statistics of the Presidential and Congressional election of… ? Unable to access as no link provided.
9 newspapers.com Good This source verifies the first statement ("McGlamery did not..."). I recommend moving this citation to directly after that statement, as it does not verify that second statement ("On Election Day...").
He was challenged in the general election by Republican James B. Seigneur. Seigneur ran as he disliked the fact that Gore won unopposed in 1978; he criticized Gore's voting record, labeling it as "disgraceful".
14 newspapers.com ? This does support these statements. However, this is clearly a paid political advertisement as stated at the bottom of the page. Is this really the best source available?
A debate between Ashe and Gore was held on October 8, 1984.
25 c-span.org Good
Gore received almost 480 thousand votes with 54 votes cast for write-in candidates.
28 a newspapers.com Good "480 thousand" looks weird.
Republican Representative Don Sundquist felt that Hawkins was a weak candidate and that Republicans would likely have a better chance of taking the seat in the 1996 election.
33 newspapers.com Fail I do not see any mention of Hawkins being a weak candidate. If I have missed it, please let me know.
After being elected Vice President in the 1992 presidential election, Gore resigned from his Senate seat on January 2, 1993. Harlan Mathews was appointed to replace him by Governor Ned McWherter.
37 deseret.com Fail This is going to sound pedantic, but this article describes what would likely happen in the future. The article was written in December 29, 1992; it can't verify events that happened on January 2, 1993. Approved
He hoped to make up for his loss on Super Tuesday.
40 b cnn.com web.archive.org Good
Following his victory in the 1992 Democratic Party presidential primaries, Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton considered around forty different politicians to be his running mate. His shortlist consisted of Gore, Senators Bob Graham of Florida, Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, and Harris Wofford of Pennsylvania, as well as Representative Lee Hamilton of Indiana's 4th congressional district.
52 a latimes.com ? None of those names are cited in this source.
53 a nytimes.com Good This source does cites those names. In fact, this source cites everything in the above statement; you don't need source no. 52 here. Approved
Clinton announced his running mate at the Arkansas Governor's Mansion; during his speech, he emphasized Gore's work in protecting the environment and foreign policy.
53 b nytimes.com Good
The Clinton-Gore ticket was the youngest presidential ticket ever elected to the presidency.
53 c nytimes.com Good
Following the 1996 Democratic National Convention, many felt Gore was likely to run for president in 2000.
63 newspapers.com Good
64 newspapers.com Good
Following Super Tuesday, Bradley conceded the primary and congratulated Gore on his victory.
70 "Super Tuesday, March 7, 2000". archive.nytimes.com. Retrieved November 9, 2025. archive.nytimes.com Good I would change the source to The New York Times in the citation. Approved
On August 17, the two received the Democratic Party's nomination at the 2000 Democratic National Convention.
74 Berke, Richard L. (August 16, 2000). "The Overview: Lieberman Sets Stage for Gore as Democrats Seal… archive.nytimes.com Good
His loss has also been attributed to the potentially misleading design of the butterfly ballots used in Palm Beach County, Florida, which heavily leans toward the Democrats, causing Gore voters to accidentally vote for Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan.
87 nytimes.com Good
88 cnn.com Good I question whether this source is necessary, but that's up to you. Approved

User:Olliefant: There are several issues that require attention as shown on the above chart. Please let me know when you've had a chance to address them! Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:50, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Issue 1. I replaced ref 4 but left ref 5 Approved
Issue 2. No link exists for ref 7, you can download it here
  • Recommend adding this link to the citation.
  • Not done, I'm citing the PDF file not the House page, It would be like linking to an Amazon listing for a book.
  • Okay, that's fine. Approved
Issue 3. Not from what I can tell
  • Say what?
What I meant to say was, from what I can tell this is the best source available. The election didn't get much coverage.
  • Okay, since what's being verified is what the candidate thought of Gore, it should be acceptable. Approved
Issue 6. The article is on two different pages, the link is to B11 while the fact in question is on B13
  • See the following to link regarding how to format two pages for the same article: Wikipedia:Newspapers.com#Citations across multiple pages/clippings. Also, I re-read the article on p. B13, and Sundquist does not mention Hawkins, nor does he say that Republicans would have a better chance of winning a seat in 1996. He simply notes that Gore's seat would likely be vacated if he chooses to run for president. If you want to use this source, I recommend a slight rewrite to better reflect what the source actually says.
  • Fixed the citation formatting. However, B13 says: "... the weakness of the Tennessee GOP, as evidenced by their failure to put up strong candidates against Gov. Ned McWherter and Sen. Albert Gore Jr." I did tweak the wording slightly as he says that there was a "very good chance to topple Sasser" Approved
Issue 7. reworded and added a new citation Approved
Issue 9. Moved the LA Times sources to before the names. Approved
Issue 13. Done Approved
Issue 15. I like citing multiple sources Approved
@Bgsu98: Done Olliefant (she/her) 17:46, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Olliefant: There are still a few unresolved issues. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:43, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: responded Olliefant (she/her) 06:28, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:02, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generalissima

[edit]

This all looks good to me. With the tweaks from the past review, no errors stand out to me. Support on prose. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of World Heritage Sites in Libya

[edit]
Nominator(s): Tone 08:22, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Libya has five WHS and three tentative sites. Standard style. I figured I will wait a bit with longer nominations still, this one is compact and should be easy to read. Tone 08:22, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824

[edit]
  • The alt-text for the locator image needs to be fixed.
  • Alt-text needs to be added for the last image (the cave). -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:39, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed, thanks! Tone 09:00, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Continuing...
  • LPQY seems to be name of the Phoenician settlement that became Leptis Magna according to the source.
  • "It was the birthplace of the Septimius Severus"
  • wikilink Arab invasion in the Leptis manga description.
  • "with three orders of columns" By order, I don't think you mean Classical order, since they all look the same to me. If you meant storey, then change "orders" to "levels".
  • "Monuments in the city include the Greek temples of the 7th and 6th centuries BCE".
  • That all I got. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:28, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Tone: I'm not sure if you had a chance to look at the comments that I added later. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:50, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Huh, I must have missed it. Great catch with the columns, it seems it is indeed three levels and not all three types. LPQ->LPQY, done, Y is indeed in the source. The rest I also fixed. Thanks! Tone 13:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Easternsahara

[edit]

Could you nominate Jordan's list next? I am trying to get a Featured topic on the Arab States. Either way, I will put you as conominator because you did the majority of the work

  • File:Leptis Magna Theatre.jpg PD
  • File:Archaeological Site of Sabratha-108976.jpg CC BY-SA 3.0 igo
  • File:Temple of Zeus - Cyrene.jpg CC BY 2.0
  • File:Tadrart Acacus 1.jpg PD
  • File:Old Ghadames (5282815851).jpg CC BY 2.0
  • File:Girza,Libia.jpg PD
  • File:Ptolemais (5283376622).jpg CC BY 2.0

File:Haua Fteah cave (half cropped).jpg CC BY 3.0

  • "Ghadames was removed from this list " could be misinterperted as it was delisted as a whs
  • "instability due to "→"instability caused by" stronger, more varied
  • "post and"→"post, and"
  • "and later Roman"→"and, later, Roman" later is interrupting, can be confused later Romans in time (both instances)
  • "the Greek temples of the 7th and 6th centuries"→"6th− and 7th–century Greek temples" concise, chronological
  • link Temple of Zeus to Temple of Zeus, Cyrene, move citations to preceding sentence
  • "into very distinct" remove very
  • "changes of"→"changes in"
  • "the way of life of the locals"→"local way of life" ('the' not included for other items in list)
  • "styles that reflect"→"styles. They reflect" (big sentence flow, maybe run-on)
  • "of savanna"→"of the savanna" I usually hear "the savanna", 'a' might be acceptable here
  • delete "finally on"
  • "depict large"→"depict the large"
  • "It has been occupied since at least the late 1st millennium BCE and was serving"→"Being occupied since at least the late 1st millenium BCE, it served" for flow, was serving is less encyclopedic and strange in this context.
  • "its unique architecture"→"its own unique architectural style"
  • "feature are"→"feature is" subject-verb agreement
  • "houses where the"→"houses. The"
  • Please clarify what ground floor vs. first floor is, as these terms are used interchangeably in certain english-speaking regions.
  • "by Arab"→"from Arab"
  • "Listed as endangered in 2016 due to the conflict in the country at that time, wildfires and torrential rain, it was removed from the list in danger in 2025 due"→It was listed as endangered in 2016, due to the civil conflict, wildfires and torrential rain, later being removed in 2025, due
  • "list in danger" link to List of World Heritage in Danger and rephrase to "list of World Heritage in Danger"
  • "c. 200 CE"→"around 200 CE" circa is usually only used in infoboxes, english is preferable
  • "well preserved"→"well–preserved" merriam webster
  • "and numerous monuments"→"and numerous monuments remaining"
  • link Roman engineering to Ancient Roman technology
  • "14 m (46 ft) deep" this should be 14 metre-deep, compound adjective
  • "tools of from"→"tools from"
  • beginning of farming link to Neolithic Revolution
  • humid periods link to African humid period

Image review pass, might be inactive sorry if my reply is late

  • Thanks for the comments, I agree with all. Any chance you help me with editing the article like the previous time (busy IRL :/) I will nominate Jordan next, deal! --Tone 09:41, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose User:Easternsaharareview this 00:40, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Aurel

[edit]
  • Some of the sentences in the lead's first paragraph have quite a few parentheses. If possible, I'd recommend trying to move some of this information into the article's main text or otherwise performing some reworking here.
  • consists of monuments – Perhaps link monument?
    • Monument is a very basic concept, it is expected that someone knows what that it is and we do not link obvious things
  • Natural features (consisting ... are defined as natural heritage. – I'd suggest reworking this sentence so that it begins in "Natural heritage includes ..." (or similar) for parallelism and so that the reader understands what we're listing from the outset.
  • Libya accepted the convention on 13 October 1978 – I would either move this sentence to before the definitions of natural and cultural heritage or I would restate the convention's full name, as "the convention" is here referring to something mentioned a few sentences back.
    • The reader must know what the convention that Libya signed entails before this sentence has any meaning to them. Also, since we're on a list about World Heritage Sites, it is very obvious that this is the World Heritage Convention.
  • a further three on the tentative list – Hmm, is "the tentative list" an official title? If so, I would think it should be capitalised.
  • All five sites are listed due to their cultural significance. – Hasn't this more or less already been said (or at least implied) above?
    • No, there are three types of World Heritage Sites, natural sites, cultural sites, and mixed sites. This is explained in the first paragraph.
      • I see what's meant now. This hasn't really been explained, though: we state that World Heritage Sites are "of importance to cultural or natural heritage", and we define those two terms. I think the reader could be forgiven for interpreting the sentence as a generic statement that "The sites are culturally significant", without piecing together that "cultural significance" here refers to specific criteria for a site's inclusion on grounds of cultural heritage. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 2025, the List of World Heritage in Danger – This was linked in the previous sentence. I'd suggest either including the full name there or otherwise removing one of the links.
  • was founded as a Phoenician settlement LPQ – What does "LPQ" mean here?
    That makes sense. You could write "known in Punic as LPQ" in brackets, though I'd probably just remove it here, as I'm not it's crucial information for our purposes. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:19, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • and came under the Romans in 46 BCE. – "came under Roman control", perhaps?
    • Changed control to rule, but done
  • birthplace of the Septimius Severus. – omit "the"
    • Done
  • I'd include some dates for Septimius Severus.
  • After becoming the Emperor – link Roman emperor, remove "the", and remove capitalisation
    • Linked roman emperor, kept "the" per WP:FALSETITLE Sure its not a part of MOS, but it improves clarity which the MOS encourages
      • For a phrase to be a false title, it needs to come before the person's name: "convicted bomber" isn't a false title unless it's part of "convicted bomber Timothy McVeigh". On the use of "emperor" specifically, compare Roman emperor: "When a given Roman is described as becoming emperor in English, ...". – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • he rebuilt and enlarged the city and made it one of the most – Avoid the repetition of "and". Perhaps use a comma after "city" and then start from there with "transforming" or "turning" (or similar).
    • Don
  • of the Roman world. – link Roman Empire
    • Done
  • It was pillaged in the 4th century, – By whom?
  • was pillaged in ... reconquered by ... and was finally abandoned following – no "was" for parallelism
  • Founded as ... and then part of – This doesn't work grammatically.
  • Sabratha got absorbed – "was" is preferable in formal writing.
    • done
  • absorbed in the Roman province of Africa in 46 BCE. – "absorbed into"
    • done
  • It was prospering in the 2nd and 3rd centuries – "It prospered"
    • done
  • the 2nd and 3rd centuries when numerous monuments – "during which"
    • done
  • including a theatre with three orders of columns – By "order", are we referring to the subject of this article?
  • Its fortunes turned in the 4th century with the decline in trade. – I'd excise the expression "fortunes turned", and explain where or with whom trade declined.
  • the Byzantines until – "Byzantines, before"
    • done
  • after the Arab invasions between the 7th and 11th centuries. – I'm not sure the use of two temporal indicators ("after", "between") works so well here. Maybe write "of the 7th and ..."?
  • It was a major city of the Hellenistic and, later, Roman world. – I'd try to include a bit more detail here. "world" should also be plural.
  • the Jewish revolt in 116 – "of"
    • done
  • It's worth noting that the last date mentioned before 116 is 631 BCE. Is there any reason to not write this as "116 CE" (and to perhaps do so across the page), to avoid ambiguity?
  • with the massive 365 earthquake – "the" seems to imply we're using a proper name or that the reader should already be familiar with this event.
    • done, unpiped link to be more descriptive
  • the city include 6th− and 7th–century – use hyphens
  • 6th− and 7th–century Greek temples, – link Ancient Greek temple
  • The rock paintings and engravings in the Acacus Mountains – Worth noting that the entries up until now haven't relinked the site's name in the "Description" column.
  • were created over thousands of years, from 12,000 BCE to 100 CE. – "over thousands of years" is probably redundant, given we've supplied dates which convey the same thing with more precision.
    • removed
  • They reflect the changes – By "they", do you mean the phases?
    Makes sense. I'd go for "These phases reflect", to make clear we aren't referring to the "motifs and artistic styles". – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:21, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • during and after the African humid period – Per MOS:NOFORCELINK, I would give some indication of when this was.
  • Being occupied since at least the late 1st millenium BCE, – "Being" can be omitted.
    • done
  • The town has developed its own unique architectural style, adjusted to the harsh desert climate. – What sort of time period are we talking about here? "has" makes it sound as though we might be talking about architecture of recent times.
    • removed has
  • next floor is for families, – "is living space", perhaps?
  • has the nickname "the Pearl of the Desert" from Arab sources. – Which sources? From when?
  • on the List of World Heritage in Danger, in 2016 – The comma can be omitted.
    • done
  • due to the civil conflict, – Which civil conflict?
  • List of World Heritage in Danger, – I'd try to rework things so we don't need to repeat the full title.
  • Tentative list – Per above, I wonder if the full term should be capitalised? (This applies below as well.)
    • no
  • In addition to sites inscribed on the World Heritage List, – "inscribed" implies physical etching of some nature; I'm not sure it's the right word here.
  • list of tentative sites that they may consider for nomination. – The use of "they" makes it sound a bit as though Libya itself is the one considering them for nomination.
  • Libya maintains three properties – "has three sites", perhaps?
  • The remains of the settlement are well–preserved, – hyphen
    • done
  • It illustrates the adaptation – "it" doesn't have a clear antecedent here.
  • with aspects such as water management. – "aspects" of what?
  • The findings in the two extensive necropolises demonstrate a dynamic interchange between the Romans and the local populations. – If possible, I'd try to be a bit more specific. What was being interchanged between the two groups?
  • It was one of the five important cities that formed the Pentapolis of Cyrenaica. – I would omit "important", as otherwise it could sound as though there were other, unimportant cities that were part of the Pentapolis.
    • done
  • during the Hellenistic and later Roman periods – A bit of a nitpick, but "later" could make it sound as though we're talking about "later Roman periods" as opposed to some earlier Roman periods.
    • encased in commas to prevent confusion
  • Actually, to go one step further, I would be explicit about the time periods we're referencing here, as some readers won't know the dates of the Hellenistic period, for example.
  • periods and in the 4th century surpassed Cyrene that was damaged by earthquakes. – I'd suggest some rewriting here. In what regard did it surpass Cyrene?
    Hm, seems to be another case of the source being a bit vague. I suppose this is fine. Slightly rephrased the "that" part, which didn't quite work. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:50, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The remains of the city illustrate the cohabitation of different faiths and cultures. – "document", or "reveal", perhaps? The word "illustrate" initially led me think we might be leading into a broader point.
  • Monuments from different time periods have been preserved, including a unique type of a mausoleum. – To what period or culture did this mausoleum belong? I'd cut the first part of the sentence (and include a little more detail), or try to rework it so it's saying something more concrete.
  • the Middle Paleolithic, stone blades from the Upper Paleolithic, – Similar to some suggestions above, it might be a good idea to give the reader a more precise idea of when these periods were.
  • includes traces of ... stone flake tools from ... stone blades from ... the beginning of farming – The last item in this list doesn't cohere with the others.
    That's better. I'd try to reorient the last point so that it refers to concrete finds, to match the other items ("traces", "stone flake tools", "stone blades"). Maybe something like "evidence of the transition to farming, 10,000–7000 years ago"? – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:46, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 10,000-7000 years ago – endash
    • done
  • including the African humid periods ("green Sahara") – Hmm, where is this quote coming from?
  • It also provides a record of ... which allowed people to cross what is today a desert. – It sounds a bit as though the records were what allowed people to do the crossing.

All in all, it's a pleasant and interesting read. The only concerns are some fairly minor points of grammar and clarity. I'll let you get a handle on these prose suggestions, and then I'll do a few spot checks just to make sure everything's in order in that regard. – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:25, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tone: my first ping of you didn't work, I tried addressing what I could. User:Easternsaharareview this 02:50, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, again a busy period. I will go through in the following days. Thank you for your assistance, greatly appreciated :) Tone 13:19, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael Aurel:, @Easternsahara:, I think I have addressed the rest of the comments. Sorry it took a while. Please check. Excellent in-depth review! --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm glad you found it helpful. I've struck or supplied follow-up points for all of the suggestions. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:54, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review (1/2/26)

[edit]

I will do your source review since reviews of the prose seem to have been thorough. The source review template does not seem to like tables, so I do it manually.

  • The lead appears to (justifiably) use boilerplate wording, the same as similar lists. I love consistency among article series like this!
  • Source no. 2 – Checks out.
  • Source no. 3 – Checks out.
  • Source no. 7 – Checks out. I know there have been questions raised in the past about the almost exclusive use of UNESCO sources. Are there other historical references that could also be used as a source here, perhaps from the Leptis Magna wiki article? Just curious. This same question could apply to any of these, honestly.
  • Source no. 11 & 12 – The historical information in the prose is supported by source no. 12.
  • Source no. 15 – Checks out.
  • Source no. 18 – Checks out.

The following are comments I have as I'm examining the sources.

  • What does it mean, LPQ? (Archaeological Site of Leptis Magna)

User:Tone: Source review passed. My other comments are merely suggestions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:25, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! We've discussed UNESCO vs. other sources at previous nominations and my opinion is that the list states why something was listed as WHS, for which all other sources than UNESCO would be derivative. I sometimes use other sources if key information is missing (some older tentative sites are missing the text, for example). As for LPQ, that is the name in the Punic language. Tone 08:56, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of 2025 Indian Premier League personnel changes

[edit]
Nominator(s): Vestrian24Bio 03:17, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am back after 4/5 months with a new FLC (with plenty of more lists for a few consecutive months), here is the list of auction and personnel changes from the 2025 Indian Premier League, the 18th edition of the Indian Premier League (IPL), a professional Twenty20 (T20) cricket league held in India, organized by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). Vestrian24Bio 03:17, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "It is held annually since the first edition in 2008" => "It has been held annually since the first edition in 2008"
  • "₹120 crore (US$14 million), highest in the history of IPL" => "₹120 crore (US$14 million), the highest in the history of IPL"
  • "surpassing ₹26.75 crore (US$3.2 million) paid" => "surpassing the ₹26.75 crore (US$3.2 million) paid"
  • "Vaibhav Sooryavanshi became the youngest player sold in the IPL history" => "Vaibhav Sooryavanshi became the youngest player sold in IPL history"
  • "notably West Indies tour of Ireland, West Indies tour of England and World Test Championship final" => "notably the West Indies' tour of Ireland, the West Indies' tour of England and the World Test Championship final"
  • "The six players could consist of a maximum of five capped players" - link capped
  • "Franchises who did not retain the maximum number of players, were allowed" - no reason for that comma
  • "Any player willing to play in the IPL were required to register for the auction" => "Any player willing to play in the IPL was required to register for the auction"
  • "Any auctioned player withdrawing before the season without legitimate reason or injury, would be banned" - no reason for that comma
  • "Any Indian capped player who wasn't named" => "Any Indian capped player who had not been named"
  • "Each playing member (including the impact player) " - this is the first mention of an "impact player". Can you explain it somehow?
  • Name columns in the Support staff changes support based on forename eg Adam Griffith sorts under A. They should sort based on surname
  • Same for the withdrawn players table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude: All done. Vestrian24Bio 10:38, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:45, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by

[edit]
  • Please remove the small font sizes on the tables, I can hardly see as is.

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 02:02, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowboygilbert: is it okay now? Vestrian24Bio 09:34, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

[edit]
  • Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead. You can convert the team names into captions
  • Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | 1987 becomes !scope=row | 1987 (on its own line). If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
  • Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.

(please Reply to icon mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:48, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824: All done. Vestrian24Bio 07:24, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • The flag images have empty alts. Per MOS:EMPTYALT, this means that the filename will be read out by a screen reader. Please fix.
  • Also, I don't know what a few of the terms mean: e.g. marquee, "Accelerated round". "Withdrawn" might be also be slightly ambiguous. So an explanation would be nice. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:48, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of constituencies of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly

[edit]
Nominator(s): -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:23, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FL review checklist:      Prose: 2/3 done      Source: Done      Accessibility: Pending      Image: Done

The 9th in the Indian constituency series. I've improved the lead, including some history, and brought the table accessibility to FL-standards. Similar, recent FL: Rajasthan. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:23, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment - Modern featured lists do not start sections with "The following is a list of the", as it is tautological. Consider something like: There are x constituencies of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly...." Mattximus (talk) 15:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't think it was a violation of MOS:THISISALIST since it wasn't in the lead, but I can see how it is redundant. I've removed it completely and moved the ref to the table caption. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:32, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Easternsahara

[edit]
  • File:Jharkhand Legislative Assembly.jpg - CC0 Needs alt which says see caption and i am pretty sure 300px is supposed to go in session_res =
  • File:IN-JH.svg - CC BY-SA 4.0
  • File:Wahlkreise zur Vidhan Sabha von Jharkhand.svg - CC BY-SA 3.0

Otherwise the images look good, I may do other reviews on this article later -- Easternsahara

Fixed. I prefer to let the infobox template choose the image size, so I've only added alt text. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pass image review User:Easternsaharareview and this 03:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "Its seat is at Ranchi, the capital of the state and it sits" => "Its seat is at Ranchi, the capital of the state, and it sits"
  • "81 single-seat constituencies, who each directly elect a representative" => "81 single-seat constituencies, each of which directly elects a representative"
  • "Jharkhand was formed in 2000, when the state of Bihar was split, after the passage of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000." => "Jharkhand was formed in 2000 when the state of Bihar was split after the passage of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000."
  • That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:32, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude: Fixed all. Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:46, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:47, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review (12/28/25)

[edit]

This table checks 2 passages from throughout the article (25.0% of 8 total passages). These passages contain 2 inline citations (22.2% of 9 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:19, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reference # Letter Source Archive Status Notes
The Jharkhand Legislative Assembly is the unicameral legislature of the state of Jharkhand in Eastern India. Its seat is at Ranchi, the capital of the state, and it sits for a term of five years unless it is dissolved early.
1 a legislative.gov.in web.archive.org Fail This source only verifies the following portion of this statement: "it sits for a term of five years unless it is dissolved early". The first part of the statement is unsourced, as is the rest of the first paragraph.
resulting in the President of India passing an order to say that the delimitation would not apply in the state of Jharkhand.
5 joais.in Fail I do not see where p. 6–7 verify the statement that the President of India passed an order.

User:MPGuy2824: Neither of the sources that I checked verify the statements to which they are attached. Please take a look at these and let me know if you have any questions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:26, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98
  1. For passage 2, ref 5 had the wrong page numbers. The quote is on pages 26 and 27 (not 6 and 7) going by the page numbers mentioned in the pdf. Fixed now.
  2. One sometimes glosses over stuff that is obvious to a local (WP:SKYISBLUE), which is why it is good to get reviewers from across the world. I've added a few more refs for the first paragraph.
Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:09, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review, Take 2 (12/29/25)

[edit]

This table checks 3 passages from throughout the article (21.4% of 14 total passages). These passages contain 3 inline citations (20.0% of 15 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:46, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reference # Letter Source Archive Status Notes
the capital of the state,
3 ranchi.nic.in Good
Jharkhand is India's fourteenth largest state by population
5 censusindia.gov.in web.archive.org Fail Website is not loading.
No text found: citation may be in an infobox or table
12 b upload.indiacode.nic.in web.archive.org Good

User:MPGuy2824: Source no. 5 is not loading. Please double-check the URL and let me know. The sources you added to the lead paragraph are all good choices! Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:57, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98 For ref 5 I've marked the url as dead which switches the first link in the ref to the archived version. I've also added another ref for the sentence. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:41, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:MPGuy2824: I recommend adding archives for all sources. Source review passed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:36, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done, except for one url which the Internet Archive cannot access (probably geo-fenced). -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I run into that all the time, too. Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:02, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dajasj

[edit]

Thanks for the list. I have only two points. Other than this, I support the promotion!

  • I find the legend above the table and the long column name somewhat duplicate. Can we leave out "SC/ST/None" in the column name for simplicity?
  • I would prefer it if the leade starts with info directly about the constituencies, as Mattximus suggested in the driveby comment, given that it is now mostly about the Assembly which has its own page.

Good luck! Dajasj (talk) 10:44, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the first point. On the second point, I do think that a bit of an introduction to the subject is necessary (what is it, where is it), but I'd be fine with reordering the sentences of the lead a bit so that the first paragraph has more content directly about the constituencies. Any suggestions? -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:58, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Dajasj: Forgot to ping. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:59, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My suggestion would be (based on Mattximus): "There are 81 constituencies of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly, the unicameral legislature of the state of Jharkhand in Eastern India." This would keep the rest of the paragraph nearly the same, so would still give the introduction. Dajasj (talk) 11:14, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Dajasj: Done. I also had to tweak a later sentence to avoid repetition. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Great, Support Dajasj (talk) 11:50, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for removal

[edit]

List of Grand Rapids Griffins players

[edit]
Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey

The list was last updated in 2022, so all players who joined since then, as well as statistics from the last four seasons, are missing. Шахматист2025 (talk) 20:27, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delist: It really hasn't been all that significantly updated since the article creator stopped in 2016, and has a number of errors in it. While I'm not philosophically opposed to such lists for minor league teams, with the heavy turnover such teams have, it takes a great deal of effort to keep them updated, and that effort seldom is sustained for long. This probably shouldn't have been feature listed in the first place, and certainly is not worthy of the same now. Ravenswing 20:55, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @DetroitFan7 if you want to handle this. The Kip (contribs) 20:56, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Moons of Saturn

[edit]
Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy/Solar System task force

Per the determination at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Moons of Neptune/archive1 that these articles about moons do not qualify as lists. It is a decent article, but should go through GA or FA instead. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:55, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think a larger discussion with more visibility to Wikiproject Astronomy, perhaps a request for consensus may be warranted. However, I have consulted people on the discord, and they don't seem to regard these types of articles as lists, which is understandable. In terms of content, there is only so much that a page can include without becoming an article. So, I would delist as the list isn't the main focus of this page. Also, I don't think it would be warranted to split the actual list of moons out, per WP:NOPAGE. User:Easternsaharareview this 01:21, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moons of Uranus

[edit]
Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy/Solar System task force

Per the determination at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Moons of Neptune/archive1 that these articles about moons do not qualify as lists. It is a decent article, but should go through GA or FA instead. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:57, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delist per my my comment User:Easternsaharareview this 01:23, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of World Heritage Sites in Spain

[edit]
Notified: User talk:Tone, User talk:Easternsahara, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World Heritage Sites

The article is currently in a very disorganized state, with serious mismatches between the table headers and their corresponding content. In the first half of the list, the "Year listed" and "UNESCO data" columns appear to have been swapped, while in the latter part, the "Year listed" column instead displays locations. This seems to be an error caused by an incomplete update to the table format.

In the Tentative list section, only the names of the sites are provided. While that might have been acceptable when the list was promoted in 2010, current standards—following the examples of newer FLs such as List of World Heritage Sites in Italy—require this section to be presented in a proper table with additional details and descriptions.

Therefore, I believe the article no longer meets the criteria for a FL due to its insufficient content and structural issues, and its delisting should be considered. Nebulatria (talk) 20:59, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I'll see if I can get some time to work on this list the following weekend. User:Easternsaharareview and this 23:18, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delist I probably will not have enough time to work on this until February, if even then. Some of the main list's sites need expansions in their descriptions, some need trimming and the entire tentative list needs to be restructured, with 35 new paragraphs added and a table as standard with other lists. Other people are of course welcome to work on the list. While I would wait until I could work on it usually, this is a high traffic list (comparatively to other WHS lists) and we should not mislead the readers into thinking that this is a good list on Wikipedia. User:Easternsahara 07:44, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I started working on this list a while ago to bring it up with the recent FL standards, since it was promoted before I started working on these lists systematically (as well as Madagascar, Cuba, Peru, and maybe some other). It definitely need work, which will be done eventually, it is just a question whether it is better to delist and renominate when fixed or wait until it is fixed. I may assist but cannot commit to fix it fully. --Tone 13:38, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Nebulatria: What is your take on the quality of this article at this point? It has been nearly two months since you opened this FLR. Just FYI, User:Easternsahara appears to no longer be with us (not sure what happened there). Pinging User:Tone. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:54, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Iowa tornadoes

[edit]
Notified: EF5, Easternsahara, ActuallyElite, WikiProject Weather

I've nominated this list because I don't believe it was properly scrutinized during the review process and simply is not up to FL levels as of right now. See Talk:List of Iowa tornadoes for more specifics, but what's on the table as I type this are a large table cited to a user-generated source (or one that can't be proved not to be UGC, anyway), a significant lack of comprehension listing of data that does exist in reliable sources and can be put together in an afternoon, arbitrary inclusion candidates, and general weird formatting throughout, especially in image placement and citations in the lede, the sort I wouldn't expect from featured content. Departure– (talk) 23:31, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify a few points:
  • By "arbitrary", I mean the line in the sand being "intense tornadoes" being the only ones included and all others being completely discarded. No reason for this is given in the article itself.
    • Typically, lists that include large amounts of tornadoes draw the line at "intense tornadoes" (F3/equivalent), such as Tornadoes in Oklahoma, but again, no reason given. The only actual line I could think of a justification for would be "significant tornadoes" (F2/equivalent), as those are what expert of tornado record-keeping Thomas P. Grazulis uses in his Significant tornadoes line of books.
    • In addition, this list is missing numerous tornadoes within the "intense" range.
  • Details about my UGC concern are further detailed at Talk:List of Iowa tornadoes#Tornado Paths source, but the short version is that a source cited in a table is listed as published by ArcGIS with no credits. ArcGIS is a software at the end of the day, and while it likely was produced by a reliable source (NWS or NOAA), there's no evidence beyond anecdotal comments about the scale of the source.
    • In addition, the source is almost certainly a tertiary source to be avoided in favor of a more focused source.
  • There is some weird formatting right outside the lede. The lede itself also doesn't follow MOS:LEDE, with information in the opening not present in the body (though, with a citation).
  • Sourcing in general has been brought up on the talk page as being far from featured-level. One was revealed to likely be a blog.
  • More details than I can provide quickly here can be found on the article's talk page at the anchor Talk:List of Iowa tornadoes#What in the heck?. Departure– (talk) 23:45, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
One more note: List of Iowa tornadoes is currently scheduled to appear as Today's featured list starting October 6. Departure– (talk) 23:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per my talk page comments. As much as I hate to delist an article as recent as this, it simply isn’t up to par. EF5 01:56, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Update - I have been adding tornadoes over the past week from the Thomas P. Grazulis source, I am still working on completing the list. I changed the intense tornadoes meaning and put it as F3+ rated tornadoes. I removed both non reliable sources that were mentioned and replaced them with reliable ones. I do still have some work to do with adding tornadoes in the tables, but it is in the right direction. ActuallyElite (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait ActuallyElite is actively working to address these problems so I think we should give them a chance to work on it. I admit I was somewhat careless with the source review but it had improved much since this nomination was started. Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 06:16, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Departure–: What is your take on the quality of this article at this point? It has been three months since this FLR was proposed, which should have been more than enough time to correct any issues. Pinging User:ActuallyElite. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:50, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (10/10/25)

[edit]

I don't care much for some of the comments I've read surrounding this list. "How in God's name...?" Save it. I was one of the reviewers on this FLC and spent a lot of time assisting User:ActuallyElite with the style and prose, because the original text was pretty rough. I believe the quality was greatly improved. I did not do a source check. Anyone is welcome to challenge the accuracy or appropriateness of sources. Maybe dialing back the histrionics and offering reasonable suggestions for improving the article would be a positive step? Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:28, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of retired Pacific typhoon names

[edit]
Notified: Jason Rees, WikiProject Weather

I am nominating this for featured list removal because there's several typhoons that are left unsourced, especially the 2020s typhoons. According to Wikipedia:Featured list criteria, it seems like it fails at Number 3, part b; "Statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations." Unless the issue gets fixed, these unsourced claims are seriously hurting the FA status of this article. Hoguert (talk) 00:19, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoguert: Quick note, you tagged Jason Rees and WikiProject Weather as having been notified, but I don't see that you actually did notify them; please do to increase the chance that this list gets fixed. --PresN 12:02, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware of this FLC having seen it on my watchlist and will see what I can do in the coming days to bring it up to scratch.Jason Rees (talk) 16:37, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I have done a lot of weeding on the List of retired Philippine typhoon names and this list today and am pleased to report that the death/damage totals from the 2020s are all sourced/referenced, while all retired names and intensity information is sourced. On the overall list in particular, the damage totals will need further work to incorporate death/damage totals from outside of the Philippines, but that's a job for another night.Jason Rees (talk) 02:14, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will withdraw from this after the issues are addressed, and so far, you're doing a good job fixing the problems. Hoguert (talk) 00:15, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Update - Over the last week or so, I have done more and more weeding on the Philippine list and now have all the Philippine death/damage totals from Reming (Durian) in 2006 sourced back to the NCDC. Some of these death/damage totals have already been incorporated into the overall article, while I plan on getting them into the main overall article over the next few days.Jason Rees (talk) 10:26, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"The name Amuyao was meant to replace Malakas, but because PAGASA selected the name to replace Aghon, which was stricken off the naming list of 2024 as a local name, the name was then replaced by Amuyag." Still unsourced. Roy, Mireille, Rananim, Xangsane, Durian are unsourced. There are typhoons in the 1990s, 2000s, and Linfa in 2020 that don't have damage/death toll estimates Hoguert (talk) 11:00, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoguert: Patience is a virtue since as a part of the FLC, I am trying to ensure that all death/damage totals presented are sourced, accurate and do not include economic losses.Jason Rees (talk) 11:29, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I currently feel like I have brought the majority of the death/damage totals to a point where they are sourced, verifiable and more or less correct. Over the next few days, I will be going over the naming history to ensure it is correct.Jason Rees (talk) 12:13, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I was about to pull back from my FLC until I realize there's some duplication source issues with the article, specific sources 4, 78 and 59, 60 GrenadinesDes (talk) 02:23, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@GrenadinesDes: I have fixed the duplication issue with 69 and 60, 4 and 78 were already fixed, could you withdraw this now? User:Easternsaharareview this 01:09, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Easternsahara @Jason Rees There's still some areas of unsourced, including "At the 46th session of the Typhoon Committee, it was noted the name Vicente appears on both the tropical cyclone name lists for the Western North Pacific and Eastern North Pacific. In response to this duplication the name Lan was chosen as replacement for Vicente on the Western North Pacific name list to avoid potential confusion." paragraph and Roy's section in pre 2000s. Once those are addressed ill withdraw GrenadinesDes (talk) 05:16, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Over the last few weeks, when time has allowed, I have been doing some research through various newspaper archives to try and tell the story of typhoon naming over the WPAC better. As a result, it has emerged that the names Hazen and Pamela were also retired, but it seems to have been lost to history.Jason Rees (talk) 13:41, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you can't cite a source, it is better to remove it. Assuming that the names have been retired and replaced without a source backing that up is WP:OR. See the essay on NOTTRUTH User:Easternsahara 22:15, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Easternsahara: Yeah... I didn't assume anything about Hazen and Pamela being retired and have cited a source in the article but for clarity's sake this is the newspaper article from the Pacific Daily News that shows me that the names Hazen and Pamela were retired.Jason Rees (talk) 23:27, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates&oldid=1332974031"