Wikipedia talk:Featured list criteria

Embedded lists and featured list criteria

There has been some discussion about the inclusion of lists of companies embedded in business articles, specifically companies as providers of Backend as a service. I've suggested at Talk:Backend as a service#Revisiting the issue of company name inclusion that embedded lists of companies in business articles should conform to the Featured List Criteria. Wondering if someone involved in the development of this guideline could weigh in on the suitability of this suggestion. Thank you. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Commented there. Goodraise 02:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

A standalone list or an article with embedded lists

Hi all! I'd like to invite more comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#A list or a regular article? to help draw a line between sandy water and wet sand in respect of the Croatian special police order of battle in 1991–95. Thanks.--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:18, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Help needed over lists issue

Hi, this isn't directly related to FLCs so I'm sorry for posting here. But I'd really like some input from users experienced in lists. I've started a discussion at WP:ACTOR questioning whether it is appropriate for "List of awards and nominations received by X" articles to be comprehensive, or should they be limited re WP:INDISCRIMINATE? Does this policy even apply to lists, given that one of the FLC criteria is that "where practical, a complete set of items" be included? One user has been removing material from awards lists based on this policy, but I disagree with it. The discussion can be found here. I'd very much appreciate input from those involved at FLC. Thanks! --Loeba (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Accessibility as criterion

Re: "Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.

(a) Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked."

The manual of style includes MOS:ACCESS, yet some lists are:

- not accessible, for example:

-- use color as the only indicator of meaning, as in the Baryon J P column in the first table

-- or use layout table in a non-accessible manner, as in an older version of the 86th Academy Awards as opposed to the current, accessible version of the 86th Academy Awards

...or could have accessibility improved:

- have non-unique identifier in the first column where another column which does have unique, meaningful content, is in a later column, as in Leuchenberg Gallery where the Painter (non-unique) is in the first column and the Work is in the third (mostly or completely unique). The Work would better be the first column and the Painter the second.

Is accessibility, a Manual of Style specification, a criterion for Featured List? Shall it be?

Posting question to Village Pump (policy) Thisisnotatest (talk) 07:44, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

If a list is not accessible, this can interfere with the ability of a blind or color-blind person to use, edit and verify lists within Wikipedia. Thisisnotatest (talk) 07:53, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm concerned that accessibility standards might prevent certain desirable characteristics. I can't tell if that actually happens or not, I'm just concerned. --NaBUru38 (talk) 16:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Good Lists

There is a proposal to set up a new classification level, Good List. Please add your comments there. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:10, 4 May 2015 (UTC)