promote 3 |
The Rambling Man (talk | contribs) pr 1 |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Featured list log}} |
{{Featured list log}} |
||
{{TOClimit|3}} |
{{TOClimit|3}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/1966 NBA Expansion Draft/archive1}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Honorary Fellows of Keble College, Oxford/archive1}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Honorary Fellows of Keble College, Oxford/archive1}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/1991 College Baseball All-America Team/archive1}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/1991 College Baseball All-America Team/archive1}} |
Revision as of 08:02, 2 June 2010
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 08:02, 2 June 2010 [1].
1966 NBA Expansion Draft
- Nominator(s): —Chris!c/t 01:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC) & User:Martin tamb[reply]
I am nominating this on behalf of User:Martin tamb because I think it is ready. It will hopefully be a part of a future Chicago Bulls GT.—Chris!c/t 01:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Wow, still no comment. My list is that boring that no one wants to read it. :)—Chris!c/t 18:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from KV5 |
---|
First! (I guess) KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problems in the table. Well done. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Once these are completed, I can support without hesitation. — KV5 • Talk • 13:57, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
- Comments from Zagalejo
- I know that the Chicago Bulls Encylopedia has some additional info about this draft. I own a copy, so when I get a chance, I'll add some stuff. One thing I remember is that Dick Klein (the Bulls' GM) planned to use Kerr and Bianchi as coaches before the draft even took place. (So, basically, they were drafted to be coaches; they were still under playing contracts, so they couldn't be signed outright.) I also remember that Klein worked out some deal with Red Auerbach in which Klein promised not to select a certain Celtics player (I forget which one) if Auerbach shared his evaluations of other players throughout the league. Zagalejo^^^ 19:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Do we really need to mention here that Sloan was inducted into the HOF as a coach? He was primarily inducted because of his work with the Jazz. Also, I don't think we should mention Thompson at all, since none of his accomplishments have anything to do with the Bulls. Zagalejo^^^ 19:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:04, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 18:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments – I only have a few issues, but they are significant. Not everything in the table is cited at the moment, and there are a couple of inaccuracies/omissions.
Couple more comments after the changes:
|
- Support – After the fixes, the list meets the criteria. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Good list, but there's one thing I'd like to see. For Sloan, I'd like to see a highlight/key either for being in the Hall of Fame as a coach, or for having his jersey retired by the Bulls (or both). Do that and I'll support it. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:19, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really agree with the colorings because this isn't a normal draft articles. The colorings could have ambiguous meanings, for example: whether the players has been selected to the All-Star Game before he was drafted by the Bulls or after his whole playing career ended. Non-expansion draft articles wouldn't have this problem because the draftees were never been in the league before being drafted, while in an expansion draft, the draftees are usually already in the league. Also a coloring for Hall of Famer coaches is never being used in any draft articles because it's irrelevant for a list of players drafted. Hall of Famer coaches are usually mentioned in a short paragraph on the lead. Furthermore, the information about the Hall of Famers and the All-Stars was already included in the lead. It even mentions which player was already an All-Star when he was drafted and which player became an All-Star after their Bulls drafted them. I would like another opinion from the others on this issues. — Martin tamb (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That sounds reasonable to me. I didn't think about this when I added the color.—Chris!c/t 23:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not crazy about the colors. They're misleading; I think Boozer is the only one who actually earned his "color-worthy accomplishment" as a Bull. Zagalejo^^^ 05:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really agree with the colorings because this isn't a normal draft articles. The colorings could have ambiguous meanings, for example: whether the players has been selected to the All-Star Game before he was drafted by the Bulls or after his whole playing career ended. Non-expansion draft articles wouldn't have this problem because the draftees were never been in the league before being drafted, while in an expansion draft, the draftees are usually already in the league. Also a coloring for Hall of Famer coaches is never being used in any draft articles because it's irrelevant for a list of players drafted. Hall of Famer coaches are usually mentioned in a short paragraph on the lead. Furthermore, the information about the Hall of Famers and the All-Stars was already included in the lead. It even mentions which player was already an All-Star when he was drafted and which player became an All-Star after their Bulls drafted them. I would like another opinion from the others on this issues. — Martin tamb (talk) 20:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
Comments
|
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by Dabomb87 02:59, 1 June 2010 [2].
List of Honorary Fellows of Keble College, Oxford
- Nominator(s): Bencherlite (talk · contribs), Felix Folio Secundus (talk · contribs)
OK, time for another Oxford-related list. I have no connections to Keble College, but fortunately Felix Folio Secundus does and he has been very helpful in providing print references to supplement the resources I could find online. The list is along the lines of List of Honorary Fellows of Jesus College, Oxford and I think that it matches the FL criteria. There are a couple of redlinks, for two people who have or have had prominent positions in the worlds of business/finance, but about whom I couldn't find enough to make an article. The blacklinks are for a few people who, as far as I can tell, only are notable in a college sense rather than a WP sense. Enjoy! BencherliteTalk 10:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I can not find anything that could prevent promotion of this list to the featured status. Ruslik_Zero 17:26, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hooray! BencherliteTalk 15:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - One caption ends in a full stop, but the rest don't. Jujutacular T · C 07:32, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The punctuation in the captions is correct as per WP:CAPTION. Complete sentences require periods at the end, while sentence fragments do not. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:21, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sandman888 (talk) 05:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- table:
- wl all Oxford, it's sortable
- refs
- wl publishers where possible, e.g. keble college
- Thanks for your review and support. I'm not convinced that it's necessary to wikilink Oxford in notes such as "White's Professor of Moral Philosophy at Oxford", since the most interesting link is to the position, not the university; but out of deference to your request, all instances of "Oxford" in the table are now linked. I had deliberately not linked Keble College or the University of Oxford in the publishers, on the basis that existing wikilinks to these articles in the list would probably be enough, but again out of deference to your request I have wikilinked the first instance of each as publisher. BencherliteTalk 15:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:55, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Light blue (boat race-winning) comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support a really nice piece of work, and, dare I say it, an example of what we should be aiming to produce at FLC. Half a dozen minor comments, not months of debate over this and that. Good stuff Bencherlite, please keep up the good work and the impeccable standard. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:55, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
*Comments'
Great list, I'm scratching the barrel to find something to say on this one. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 14:58, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by Dabomb87 02:59, 1 June 2010 [3].
1991 College Baseball All-America Team
- Nominator(s): TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I feel this is a complete and encyclopedic list. I am competing in the WP:CUP and may produce several more of these if this is favorably reviewed. I am attempting to obtain a commitment from a WP:MLB member to stub out player redlinks as a co-nominator on future lists, but am moving forward as a solo nominator on this current list. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from NMajdan |
---|
Comments
Not to mention that you are still very much active on this page after creating it yesterday, so it definitely lacks stability (it has already changed quite a bit from my review minutes ago). That would be a start.—NMajdan•talk 18:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll re-evaluate when these items have been addressed.»NMajdan·talk 14:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
- Support pending an access date on ref #1.»NMajdan·talk 15:59, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not sure an accessdate is appropriate. The link does not actually show the relevant text from the print edition. Thus, there is no date where I actually saw the relevant text online.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If you can't see the text online, then there's no need to link to it. WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT. — KV5 • Talk • 18:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Link removed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If you can't see the text online, then there's no need to link to it. WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT. — KV5 • Talk • 18:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not sure an accessdate is appropriate. The link does not actually show the relevant text from the print edition. Thus, there is no date where I actually saw the relevant text online.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from KV5 |
---|
Does not meet the criteria.
There are additional items, but this is a start. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've also copyedited the lead to fix some grammar and formatting errors. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 00:42, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
- This list is much improved since its nomination. I will give an additional check within a few days
before supporting. — KV5 • Talk • 16:24, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 06:44, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
Nmajdan (talk · contribs) has stated that he is out of town on business and wont be able to reconsider his comments until Monday.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:01, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 18:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments –
|
- Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 18:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by Dabomb87 02:59, 1 June 2010 [4].
Grammy Award for Best Alternative Music Album
- Nominator(s): Another Believer (Talk) 16:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets criteria and closely resembles the FL status lists (which also happen to be Grammy-related) Grammy Award for Best Traditional Pop Vocal Album and MusiCares Person of the Year. Note: I also nominated Grammy Award for Best Male Rock Vocal Performance recently (see nomination page), which are similar, so reviewer's concerns might apply to both lists. This list should be up to par as far as disambig. links, alternate text, formatting, sorting, etc. go. Thank you for your time and feedback. Another Believer (Talk) 16:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 06:36, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments top stuff...
The Rambling Man (talk) 18:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
- Support my issues resolved. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
|
- Comment: My only irk is with the first sentence. I think it could be split into two, such as "The Grammy Award for Best Alternative Music Album is an award given to recording artists for quality albums in the alternative music genre at the Grammy Awards. The ceremony was established in 1958 and originally called the Gramophone Awards." Problem is if we do that I'm not sure if that sentence really fits. Is that one needed? I'll provisionally support this and will fully if the reply is fine. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Doing...--Another Believer (Talk) 17:35, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]- On second thought, I feel the current sentence stands on its own. By splitting one sentence into two, emphasis is placed more on the ceremony itself in the second sentence than the actual award. However, if you feel strongly that a change is needed, I am open to making edits. No additional reviewers commented on your suggestion, so I am not sure if some sort of consensus needs to be reached. --Another Believer (Talk) 01:07, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. I'm late to the party, but it looks like everything is in order. Nice job. NYCRuss ☎ 17:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. I'm also late, but this article looks fantastic, and it meets all FL criteria. Great work! WereWolf (talk) 20:34, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.