Nominating featured lists in 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 at peer review at the same time. Nominators should not add a second featured list nomination until the first has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed. Please do not split featured list candidate pages into subsections using header code (if necessary, use bolded headings). The featured list director, Giants2008, or his delegates, PresN and The Rambling Man, determine the timing of the process for each nomination. Each nomination will last at least ten days (though most last a month or longer) and may be lengthened where changes are ongoing and it seems useful to continue the process. For a nomination to be promoted to FL status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the directors determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the director who considers a nomination and its reviews:
It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve critical comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support. After a reasonable time has passed, the director or delegates will decide when a nomination is ready to be closed. A bot will update the list talk page after the list is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the Table of contents – Closing instructions – Checklinks – Dablinks – Check redirects – |
Featured list tools: | ||
Nomination procedure
Supporting and objecting Please read a nominated list fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.
|
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:
The following lists were nominated for removal more than 14 days ago:
|
Nominations
List of Billboard Latin Pop Airplay number ones of 1999
Ah yeah! I remember the Latin pop explosion like it was yesterday. I've been looking forward to nominating 1999 Latin pop for a long time. Anyways, please leave any feedbacks and I'll gladly address them! Erick (talk) 03:42, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "The first number one of the year was "Dejaría Todo" by Chayanne, which had been in the top spot since the issue dated December 12, 1998,[3] where it spent a total of seven weeks at this position and was named the best-performing Latin pop song of the year" => "The first number one of the year was "Dejaría Todo" by Chayanne, which had been in the top spot since the issue dated December 12, 1998;[3] it spent a final total of seven weeks at this position and was named the best-performing Latin pop song of the year"
- "was followed by the release of his song, "Livin' la Vida Loca", and became an international success" => "was followed by the release of his song, "Livin' la Vida Loca", which became an international success"
- "and was longest-running number one of the year" => "and was the longest-running number one of the year"
- "where it spent six weeks on the latter chart" => "spending six weeks at number one on the latter chart"
- "Iglesias also had the most chart-toppers in 1999 with two other songs" => "Iglesias also had the most chart-toppers in 1999, also reaching number one with two other songs"
- "the latter a Spanish-language version of "Rhythm Divine" and final number one of the year" => "the latter a Spanish-language version of "Rhythm Divine" which was the final number one of the year"
- Image caption: "He also had the most numbers of the year with three" => "He also had the most number ones of the year with three"
- Image caption: "Chayanne had the first number one of the year with "Dejaría Todo" and was named the best-performing Latin pop song of the year." => "Chayanne had the first number one of the year with "Dejaría Todo", which was named the best-performing Latin pop song of the year."
- "Millie Corretjer (credited as Millie)," - if that's true, shouldn't she be listed as that in the table?
- Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:13, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
List of international goals scored by Kelly Smith
- Nominator(s): Idiosincrático (talk) 14:34, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi all, Kelly Smith is an English footballer with 20 years with the national team. She was the top-scorer for England before Ellen white took her place. It was a simple list but some match reports for older female games were harder to come by. Its a clean and straightforward list, includes archived refs and has a simple lead. Thank you all in advance for your reviews. Cheers. Idiosincrático (talk) 14:34, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "in a 13−0 away thrashing" - "thrashing" is not encyclopedic language
- "it was the team's highest winning margin before England defeated Latvia 20−0 on 30 November 2021" - this should either be a standalone sentence or the comma should be a semi-colon, also replace "before" with "until"
- "At the 2009 Women's Euro final," => "In the 2009 Women's Euro final,"
- "the 2−6 loss to Germany" => "the 6−2 loss to Germany"
- "Smith enjoyed a short career with Great Britain" - she didn't really have a "career" with Great Britain, a team that only plays very occasionally
- "The team qualified for the 2012 Olympics as hosts, she featured" - again, comma should be a semi-colon
- "games against Brazil, Cameroon and New Zealand, including a pre-tournament match against Sweden2" - you can't have a list of games and then say "including [one that wasn't on the list]"
- "a match which Smith did not feature" => "a match in which Smith did not feature"
- "Scores and results list her team's goal tally first, score column indicates score after each White goal" - copy+paste error there?
- That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:54, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- All addressed, thanks again legend. Every time I read your comments about my inability to write, I try and figure out why I am the most braindead human on Earth. :) Idiosincrático (talk) 11:04, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Don't be silly, the above are all very trivial points and overall the prose was very good. There's always going to be little grammar niggles that you don't spot when you look at your own writing..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:25, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Phikia (talk) 02:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
List of macropodiformes
Next stop our journey through the thousands of animal species in mammalia is number 25 in our series of animal list FLCs (10 lists for Carnivora, 4 for Artiodactyla, 3 lists for Lagomorpha, and 7 single-order lists). We're still in Australia for this one, but we break out of the single-order lists into the first of a trio for the order Diprotodontia, with a list for the suborder Macropodiformes—or to be more clear, for a list of kangaroos. It's not just kangaroos, of course: there's wallabies, bettongs, and potoroos, among others, but together they make up a big chunk of Australian non-carnivorous marsupials. We've got 72 species in 3 families here, plus another 8 extinct species—for now, anyways, as this list has the most endangered and critically endangered species of any list I've done yet. The science is up to date and the formatting reflects prior FLCs, so hopefully it should be all good to go. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 22:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support – following a skim through the article, I see no major issues in the lead or table formatting, and I'm confident key issues have been fixed based on previous lists. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
List of railway stations in Melbourne
I am nominating this for featured list because I have been working it on for the past two weeks and had even taken feedback from other editors during this process. The list article has almost entirley been changed in order to comply with the FL criteria including a new table and lead section. The lead covers the information on the network and gives a summary of the information included in the list. Additionally the list covers all important information including lines, transport connections and year opened NotOrrio (talk) 09:25, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Steelkamp
- Is there a source for lines? You could use [1].
- Is there a source for distance from Southern Cross?
- Is there a source for zones?
- The source for date opened is from 2010, so surely the stations opened since then require their own sources for opening date.
- Is there not a specific page number for "Anderson, Rick (2010). Stopping All Stations"? Or is the opening dates for the various stations scattered throughout?
- Is there a source for suburb? You could use a street directory or maybe there is an online map published by the Victorian government.
- Are there any sources for the Heritage and tourist railways section?
- Puffing Billy Railway, Mornington Railway and Yarra Valley Railway can be linked.
- What does "In this list only, an asterisk (*) indicates stations at which trains are not normally scheduled to stop, and exist primarily for heritage purposes" mean? It is unclear to me.
- What makes https://www.onlymelbourne.com.au/ reliable?
- What makes https://vicsig.net/ reliable?
- " "Media Release: NEW TIMETABLE TO IMPROVE METROPOLITAN TRAIN SERVICES". web.archive.org. 19 May 2011. Retrieved 26 February 2023." This reference format should be improved to name and link the original website and not just the web archive.
- " "Kennett-era project sets bar for affordable level crossing removal | Public Transport Users Association (Victoria, Australia)". Retrieved 25 February 2023." This reference should be changed so that the name of the website and the publication location isn't included with the title of the webpage.
- " Victoria, Public Transport. "Zones". Public Transport Victoria. Retrieved 17 February 2023." The author is malformed, presumably from using an automatically generating citation.
- If you're going to use publication location for some references, it should either be done for all references or none at all. It should be consistent.
- " https://www.ptv.vic.gov.au/assets/PTV-default-site/Maps-and-Timetables-PDFs/Maps/Network-maps/Victorian-train-network-map.pdf" This reference is just a bare link.
- "and 19 more used as Heritage/Tourist railways." Doesn't need to be capitalised.
- Reference titles with all capital letters should be converted to title case as per MOS:ALLCAPS.
- "There are 221 suburban railway stations that are currently operational in Melbourne.[2] In addition to the 221 stations currently opened there are an additional 73 are closed to passengers and 19 more used as Heritage/Tourist railways." This could be reworded so that the 221 stations is not mentioned twice in a row.
- Contractions such as "don't" should be avoided.
- "Most railway stations take the name of their suburb however, there are several stations on the network that don't. Such stations take the name of a nearby area or landmark. Currently, Southern Cross and Batman are the only two exceptions to such naming standards. Most stations on the network provide some sort of transport connections. Bus connections are common at most suburban stations. Stations in the inner suburbs and the central business district additionally may offer tram connection. However, not all stations offer transport connections. This is most commonly seen in the outer parts of the city." This seems like original research. I also question whether the first three sentences are important enough to include.
- "(some stations are in the overlap between the two zones, where tickets for either zone may be used)." Long sentences in brackets should be avoided.
- "On 4 March 2007, zone 3 was abolished by being incorporated into zone 2." This seems like recentism. You would probably be better off not mentioning any history of the ticketing system and only mention how it works currently.
- "The level crossing removal at Mont Albert and Surrey Hills resulted in both stations being closed and replaced by the under construction of the new Union railway station, which brought the number of stations on the network from 222 to 221." Again, this seems like recentism. Unless you are going to do a short history of the entire system in the lead, this should be left out. Even if you do a history of the entire system, this would be too minor to mention.
That's all for now. Steelkamp (talk) 12:52, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- about the suburbs metro trains melbourne does put them on the stations sub page on their website however it there is no large list of every railway station's suburbs meaning a each station requires a source for the suburbs NotOrrio (talk) 22:22, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Source 1 the network map is ment to source the entire paragraph if needed I can copy it
- Similar to the suburbs the zones are on the metro trains website but there is no large list
- Added sources for all the stations opened after 2010
- Decided to change it to "This asteriex indicates that the station is only opened for heritage/tourist based purposes"
- Most sources with publication location are done so because the source title includes the location for example big build victoria puts the station names in all their lxrp articles
- Removed 221 from the first paragraph
- Added a source of an old map network map including transport connections to back that up and removed the suburbs sentence
- Since the old network map (from 2011) includes the zones I could use that source for stations opened before and the metro trains melbourne source for the newer stations
- NotOrrio (talk) 22:34, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Steelkamp
- Addressed all the feedback and had taken action on it except for the sourcing of the distance, zones and suburbs doe they need to be sourced i've read through other railway station featured lists for inspiration and they don't seem to have sources on such information NotOrrio (talk) 03:12, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comments by SounderBruce
Just dropping some notes, but I might conduct a full review later:
- MOS:APOSTROPHE compliance is needed in the citations, especially those for "Victoria's Big Build".
- There seems to be an overreliance on sources from the government (the aforementioned Big Build); consider replacing them with secondary sources.
- Capitalization in "Transportation Connections", "Planned Connections", and "Projected Opening" need to follow sentence case.
- The Heritage and tourist railways section needs to be converted into a table for consistency and beefed up with more sources. As it stands, it's awkwardly pasted on to the end of the long table sections. SounderBruce 23:28, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- looked through your feedback and fixed the apostrophes, capitalaztion, made the heritage and tourist railways a table & replaced several of the government sources with secondary ones NotOrrio (talk) 09:50, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
List of international goals scored by Ellen White
- Nominator(s): Idiosincrático (talk) 06:48, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi all, Ellen White is England Women's top scorer who also played for GB at 2x Olympics, recently retired. I've spent a few weeks on the list and I think it covers everything well, I mostly referred to Alfredo Di Stéfano's equivalent as its slightly uncommon to have played for two nations. As with most of these kind of lists, problems are usually systematic and an easy fix. Much appreciated :) Idiosincrático (talk) 06:48, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- I'd be tempted to use the uncropped version of the lead image, as IMO landscape images work better in the lead and the existing one looks very small. Not a deal-breaker, though
- Image caption: "she played 113 games for England and eight for Great Britain at two Summer Olympics" reword so it doesn't sound like all 121 games took place at the Olympics
- "White would win the 2022 UEFA Women's Championship" => "White won the 2022 UEFA Women's Championship"
- "She would score her first international hat-trick" => "She scored her first international hat-trick"
- "She'd score a second hat-trick" => "She scored a second hat-trick"
- "White would score her final goal" => "White scored her final goal"
- "She announced her international retirement on the 22 August 2022" => "She announced her international retirement on 22 August 2022"
- "She played all four matches for Great Britain at the tournament before being knocked out" - reword as she wasn't personally knocked out
- Dutch needs a capital D
- "Despite scoring a hat-trick, Great Britain would leave the tournament" => "Although she scored a hat-trick, Great Britain left the tournament"
- Wikilink the Australian team in the last sentence of the lead
- Second image caption should not have a full stop as it isn't a complete sentence
- Is it normal to link only the stadia in these lists, not the location? I don't think places like Doncaster are so internationally well-known that a link is not needed under whatever the policy is (I can't remember) that says not to link well-known place names
- Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:55, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks @ChrisTheDude, I addressed most things. I didn't wikilink the Australian team in the last sentence of the lead as I already linked it within the second lead para, as I did with Latvia and the 2020 tournament when I mentioned them a second time. Please let me know if I've done something wrong there. As for the stadia location links, I wasn't too sure either. Other international goal articles are all inconsistent, including featured lists. I did however notice someone refer to MOS:GEOLINK to justify having only having the stadia linked but I'm not entirely sure if that applies here. I'd be happy todo either. Cheers again. Idiosincrático (talk) 01:02, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'd personally suggest linking the towns unless they are massively well-known ones like London..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done @ChrisTheDude, Cheers. Idiosincrático (talk) 11:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'd personally suggest linking the towns unless they are massively well-known ones like London..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Phikia (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- 金色黎明 (talk) 13:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
List of Hot R&B Singles number ones of 1962
- Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi all, here's my 21st nomination in this series. In this particular year in the R&B charts it was all about the dance craze, as everyone was twisting the night away doing the mashed potato. Feedback as ever most gratefully received :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Pseud 14
- Very minor, but suggest using
{{nowrap|chart-topper}}
to avoid line breaks for hyphenated words. (for those who use different display resolutions or mobile devices) - Should The 4 Seasons be sorted first since you listed it as a numeric and not as The Four Seasons?
- That's all I have. Great work as always. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:47, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Pseud 14: - done! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:38, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- {{color|gray|1964}} (in the navbox) answers a question I had about navboxes ... thanks for that.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I found nothing to copyedit. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table. No problems.
- 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
- 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
- 3b. The list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
- 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
- 4. It is navigable.
- 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
- 6. It is stable.
- Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 20:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Registered historic parks and gardens in Monmouthshire
Following on from Grade I/Grade II* listed buildings in Monmouthshire, and with historic parks and gardens getting the same statutory status as buildings in Wales in 2022, I wanted to try and get a list of Monmouthshire gardens up to the same standard. I owe a huge debt to User:EdwardUK who did all of the work on the formatting, making this really a joint nomination. I've tried to get a corresponding article, an image and notes for every entry. Where a full article's not been appropriate/possible, due to the paucity of sources, I've created a section in a linked article. I've gone back through the FL criteria, and it seems to meet these, but I've been very close to the list, so it would greatly benefit from some independent scrutiny. Any and all comments gratefully received. KJP1 (talk) 13:09, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Drive-by comment
- Will do a full review later but just noting that some of the notes don't need full stops. "The rare remnants of a Tudor garden." for example is not a complete sentence so doesn't need one..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Other comments
- You spell mediaeval like that in the lead but without the first a later on
- Done, I hope.
- Apologies - I missed one use of "medieval" in the first paragraph of the lead. So you need to change the spelling there and also move the wikilink to that usage rather than the one in the third paragraph -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:52, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Done, I hope.
- "with possible attributions to Samuel Lapidge, a pupil of Capability Brown, and John Claudius Loudon." - this could technically refer to two or three people. Any way to reword?
- Done - by tweaking the wording to try to make clear there were only two.
- "The gardens, including a lakeside Japanese garden are mostly lost," => "The gardens, including a lakeside Japanese garden, are mostly lost,"
- Done.
- "but traces of the 18th century park, and the earlier deer park, remain" => "but traces of the 18th century park and the earlier deer park remain"
- Done.
- "recorded in his 1807 history; Descriptive Account of the Kymin Pavilion and Beaulieu Grove with their various views; also a description of the Naval Temple that ten counties could be seen from its upper storey; (Gloucestershire, Monmouthshire, Glamorganshire, Breconshire, Montgomeryshire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Radnorshire, Shropshire and Somerset)" => "recorded in his 1807 history, Descriptive Account of the Kymin Pavilion and Beaulieu Grove with their various views; also a description of the Naval Temple, that ten counties could be seen from its upper storey (Gloucestershire, Monmouthshire, Glamorganshire, Breconshire, Montgomeryshire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Radnorshire, Shropshire and Somerset)"
- Done - but I've kept the italics for the book title.
- That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:23, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Older nominations
List of basal eudicot families
- Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 23:46, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
The previous Featured LIsts in this list series are linked in the "See also" section; those lists and their WP:FLC discussions do a pretty good job of covering the story so far. Enjoy! - Dank (push to talk) 23:46, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ceoil: pinging per your request. I don't like to ping from the start because that might be seen as avoiding scrutiny from other reviewers ... but there's been more than enough time for scrutiny on this one :) - Dank (push to talk) 14:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- And a second ping, @Ceoil, because I just remembered I don't entirely trust "[[User:X]]" as a ping. - Dank (push to talk) 14:12, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Mattximus, I see you're in and out, so no rush on this but: you offered in another FLC to review one of mine ... if you still want to do that, this might be the one you'll want ... it's shorter (just 16 rows) and easier than most of the others. If this one already has three reviews by the time you see this ping, then a good second choice would be WP:Featured list candidates/List of early-diverging flowering plant families/archive1 (whenever that link turns blue). - Dank (push to talk) 14:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Maile66, the answer to yesterday's Final Jeopardy! was "Sam Houston", which reminded me about your excellent work on Margaret Lea Houston ... and then I realized I hadn't bumped into you over here at FLC in a while. If you've got anything coming up that needs a review, please let me know. In the meantime ... you might be interested in this list series, and in this list in particular ... it's short! Like I said above, if this one gets 3 reviews before you get a chance to look at it, then a good second choice would be WP:Featured list candidates/List of early-diverging flowering plant families/archive1. - Dank (push to talk) 17:18, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "But unlike the core eudicots, these orders sometimes" - I'd suggest not starting a sentence with "but"
- "The national flower of India and Vietnam is the sacred lotus, and the floral emblem of the Australian state of New South Wales is the waratah." - I'd reverse this to "The sacred lotus is the national flower of India and Vietnam [etc]"
- That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, both done. - Dank (push to talk) 21:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:36, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
United States presidential elections in Florida
I am nominating this for featured list because I have added a lot of content following the format of other Featured Lists (Such asUnited States presidential elections in Arkansas, etc.), I believe this list has FL standards compliant 金色黎明 (talk) 20:47, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Newtothisedit
Initial observations
- Definitely need to mention to mention the states status as a swing state as from the 1990s to 2020, as Florida was far and away the most important swing state.
- The sentence on 2000 is good but I would mention the fact that it was a recount and that Gore won originally.
- Trump is listed as winning over 100% of the vote in 2020
Support--Newtothisedit (talk) 03:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by ChrisTheDude
- "Finally, John C. Breckinridge won the state" - are we still talking about 1860?
- Don't start sentences with "but" (occurs in a couple of places)
- "Florida voted for the Republican nominee in all three presidential elections during reconstruction era" =>" Florida voted for the Republican nominee in all three presidential elections during the reconstruction era"
- And on that note, what the heck is the "reconstruction era"? Is there an appropriate link?
- "shortly after the Reconstruction era" - there was no capital R before....?
- "Thus, prior to the 1952 presidential election, the Republican Party had only won Florida in the 1928 presidential election" - the preceding sentences don't make it clear (to me at least) why this would have occurred? Are you saying that blacks and poor whites vote Republican so the changes mentioned in the previous sentences reduced their support? If so, make that clear.
- It seems like suddenly after 1952 the state swung dramatically to supporting the Republicans. What changed?
- "In the 2000 presidential election, Associated Press" => "In the 2000 presidential election, the Associated Press"
- "first called Florida for Al Gore" - and his party was......?
- "later in the evening, AP reversed their call and giving it to Bush" - "and" doesn't make grammatical sense here
- Also, who was Bush? This is the first mention of him so we need his full name and a link
- "in the Bush v. Gore" - "the Bush v. Gore"? What is this?
- "which made George W. Bush won" - ah, there's the full name and link. Move them to the first mention of him
- also, the above doesn't make grammatical sense
- "Trump's home state" - first mention, so what's his full name?
- Not actually sure how any of the sentence starting "Trump's home state" is relevant to this article without more context
- "furthermore, it has been seen as a bellwether" - pretty sure I have never seen that last word before in my life. What does it mean? Is there an appropriate link?
- That's what I got on the lead, there's quite a lot of work to be done. I'll look at the rest later -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:05, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
More comments
- "And in the 1860 presidential election" - don't start a sentence with "and"
- "Due to the secession, Florida" - Easter egg link on Florida
- " participated the 1868 presidential election" => " participated in the 1868 presidential election"
- From our article, it looks like Reconstruction should have a capital R
- "called Florida for democratic nominee" - Democratic should have a capital D
- "Later in the evening, AP reversed their call and giving it" - doesn't make grammatical sense
- "republican nominee George W. Bush" - Republican should have a capital R
- "the Bush v. Gore on December 12" - still no explanation of what "the Bush v. Gore" was
- Need to link Donald Trump -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:27, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Even more comments
- Rutherford B. Hayes should sort under H, not B
- "Lyndon B. Johnson should sort under J
- Alton B. Parker should sort under P
- Franklin D. Roosevelt should sort under R
- George H. W. Bush should sort under B
- ......and so on. Check the sorting on all the names -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- Quick comment– Not that I want to get too heavily involved in politics, but I think you have the wrong Democrat in 1972. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:18, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
List of accolades received by Toy Story 4
- Nominator(s): Chompy Ace 07:02, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because I created this page above 50,000 bytes, citing the addition of more awards and sorting; and the reference overhaul, especially WP:SECONDARY sources. The table I improved is Toy Story 4 (the parent article), before I split into a separate list article about the film's accolades. Chompy Ace 07:02, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support - sorry, but I got nothing :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:31, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support Couldn’t see anything wrong with it. Good job! QuicoleJR (talk) 20:22, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- Looks good, I just think reference 24 was archived incorrectly as the URL doesn't match the archived link. But other than that looks good. Support! Idiosincrático (talk) 03:27, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
List of The Sopranos episodes
- Nominator(s): Newtothisedit (talk) 04:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
With its unique blend of drama and humor, The Sopranos is considered by some to be the greatest TV show of all time and paved the way for the current TV landscape. A former featured list, I have rewritten much of the lead and archived every source in order to bring this list back to its former glory. Note: I have another FLC, but I'm nominating this list now so that it can (hopefully) earn its gold star before the 16th anniversary of the series finale in June. I will be increasing my reviewing to make up for having two outstanding nominations. Newtothisedit (talk) 04:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "Italian-American mobster Tony Soprano (James Gandolfini) as he struggles" - writing it as "Tony Soprano (James Gandolfini), an Italian-American mobster, as he struggles" would slightly break up the sea of blue
- Can you wikilink Broadcast syndication, as I for one had to look this up to find out what it means
- "Unlike most shows at the time, which typically took a four-month hiatus between seasons" - maybe specify unlike most US shows? A four-month break between seasons has never been the norm at all in my part of the world
- Links to main articles have the show title in normal type and the season in italics - shouldn't that be the other way round?
- I will leave looking exhaustively through the refs to someone else, but one thing that I did notice is that number 71 is missing a publisher -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:08, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- All fixed Newtothisedit (talk) 15:00, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:06, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by RunningTiger123
- "James Gandolfini is the only cast member to appear in all 86 episodes of the series." – citation needed
- Added citations
- Ref. 12: Italicize "The Sopranos"
- Done
- Source 16 is a Google Drive link to a copy of a newspaper; my instincts tell me this is some sort of copyvio. Just cite the issue and don't link it, or find a new link.
- Done
- Quotenmeter (used twice) seems to be a blog with no clear reliability; I'd find better sources.
- Replaced both usages with better sources.
- Since episode 3x12 used households for ratings, don't put it into the chart at the bottom (it implies a false dropoff).
- Done
- More ratings for season 1 would be nice – maybe try searching databases at WP:TWL if you have time?
- I've been scouring the internet and old newspaper articles for a few weeks now trying to find ratings for these episodes but have been unsuccessful. Unfortunately it appears that at the time Nielsen only published viewing data for the Top 10 Cable series and the Sopranos did not qualify for much of its first season.
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:10, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- @RunningTiger123 I have addressed all comments. Newtothisedit (talk) 21:13, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Only remaining update is that The Sopranos still needs to be italicized at the start of what's now source 13. I'll assume that will get done and will support. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:21, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed, thought I had earlier but I guess not. Newtothisedit (talk) 23:21, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Only remaining update is that The Sopranos still needs to be italicized at the start of what's now source 13. I'll assume that will get done and will support. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:21, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
List of awards and nominations received by Anjelica Huston
- Nominator(s): Leo Mercury (talk) 11:25, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
With the success of Wednesday, I felt like it would be appropriate to nominate this for feature list status.Thankfully, the User:InternetArchiveBot started working again. Leo Mercury (talk) 11:25, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "For her Woody Allen-directed performances in the films" - "For her performances in the Woody Allen-directed films" would be slightly better IMO
- "Lonesome Dove (1989), The Mists of Avalon (2001), and Medium (2008–2009), all of which were nominated at the Primetime Emmy Awards." => "Lonesome Dove (1989), The Mists of Avalon (2001), and Medium (2008–2009), for all of which she was nominated at the Primetime Emmy Awards."
- Think that's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- All done! --Leo Mercury (talk) 09:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- All done! --Leo Mercury (talk) 09:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
List of Nansen Refugee Award laureates
I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria, and I think this is a list of fantastic people from all around the world and makes for interesting content. CT55555(talk) 15:42, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Nomader
- Oppose for now until concerns are addressed. The criteria the list currently fails are 1 (Prose), 2 (Lead), and 4 (Structure). I'll address the points below -- I think this is a great start, but it needs some serious work to reach FL level.
- 1. Prose: The article includes thoughts that are a bit off on formatting, particularly in the "award ceremony" section (the "In 2012" sentence as an example doesn't include a verb and isn't actually a sentence). This leads into the lead issues in the next bullet.
- 2. Lead: FLs should have well-developed lead sections that clearly define the scope and inclusion criteria. An example of an award article that I think could be a good direction to emulate would be the Richard Dawkins Award or the Gabor Medal, both of which clearly give the criteria (or lack thereof) for the award in the lead and give context around its history and creation.
- A list like this should really not have those other sections of prose -- I think they could be easily merged into the lead in an engaging way that would summarize the list nicely.
- 4. Structure: The lists are unfortunately not sortable (see Help:Sorting or copy a format from another similar award list to see how to do it best). The regional laureates and annual laureates lists contain different columns for no seemingly particular reason -- I think consistency would work better here (although I think the headers make sense). It might make sense to borrow from those other examples that I showed which included a citation or summary of their work or why they were awarded (I just found an example for the 2021 laureate with a little searching here: [2]).
Just a note that I'm also submitting my review to the Wikicup. I think there's a lot of work to be done -- it's doable, but it'll be a bit of a lift. Ping me if you have any questions and I'll be happy to help answer them! Nomader (talk) 16:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. I appreciate the way you've delivered the feedback, because that is actionable and gives me a path forward to improving the article further. I will try to make the improvements and if I do so, I will ping you again and ask you to reconsider the improved version. CT55555(talk) 16:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Of course, please do! I once accidentally swapped all of my references in a list with over 50 of them and had to do a comprehensive spotcheck of them in an FLC, having issues that can be resolved happens all the time. Let me know if you have any questions as you're going through the page again. Nomader (talk) 17:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- I have taken action regarding each piece of helpful feedback that you have provided and I wonder if you would be willing to reappraise the list now? CT55555(talk) 21:48, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm coming back to this based on @CT55555:'s response above. This is definitely an improvement in a number of ways, but it still needs some work. I've listed below where I think it can be improved still:
- 2. Lead:
- Although it's great that the prose has been condensed into a summary style in the lead, I think there's still a lot of context missing that I mentioned above. Why was the award initially established? Again, I think examples like the Richard Dawkins Award and to a lesser extent, the Gabor Medal show examples of how to approach this.
- I think that the sentences appear a bit out of order -- maybe the nomenclature of the award could be added after the lead sentence somewhere along with an expansion of the award's history?
- 3. Comprehensiveness:
- I didn't bring this up specifically as a criteria that needed improvement before, but there's no context on why certain people received the award -- and I think that the list should include it (other similar awards like the Buchanan Medal, Crafoord Prize, and the Foot in Mouth Award all include this context). I've done some research and found press releases about each award member through Google (e.g., [3]), but I haven't found official citations that have gone along with it. I like the way the Richard Dawkins Award has a notes section which clarifies in a footnote that "This column broadly outlines the work and views of the recipient" because there is no official citation, and I think that style could be emulated here broadly.\
- 4: Structure:
- The lists are *much* better overall in terms of structure, thanks for adding sorting to it. Could you also make the images a larger size, similar to the other lists I've cited above? From a WP:ACCESS perspective, I'm concerned that they may not be viewable for the average person.
- Images should also include ALT text per WP:ALT.
It's on the right track, but still has a good amount of work ahead of it so I'm still an oppose !vote for now. Ping me when you'd like me to take another look and I'll be happy to review! Nomader (talk) 18:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the actionable feedback. I've improved the lead, I've made the images larger, I've started adding rationales, have more to do, including the alt text. I'll ping you once I finish those tasks. CT55555(talk) 02:26, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
List of accolades received by 24 Oras
- Nominator(s): Chompy Ace 13:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
I am nominating this list because I reworked the accolades table from the 24 Oras page, added more sources and archives, and reached above the 50k size. Chompy Ace 13:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "It enjoyed consistently high viewership" - past tense? Does it not enjoy such viewership any more?
- Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:51, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Issues fixed. Chompy Ace 09:29, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support - that was easy :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:36, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by RunningTiger123
- Infobox total for nominations seems to be one off
- "English: 24 Hours" → "English: 24 Hours"
- "to be accessed in the online video platform" – This sentence feels clunky to me. If it was the first to be streamed on TikTok, just say that instead of using awkward synonyms.
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- RunningTiger123 Issues fixed. Chompy Ace 20:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- The infobox total is now off by two – I think you went in the wrong direction. But that's small and I'm good to support now assuming that will be fixed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- RunningTiger123 Issues fixed. Chompy Ace 20:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table.
- 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
- 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
- 3b. The UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but I'll check back after the source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
- 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
- 4. It is navigable.
- 5. It meets style requirements.
- 6. It is stable.
- Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 04:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Support - as per above. Idiosincrático (talk) 00:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
List of Music Bank Chart winners (2017)
- Nominator(s): EN-Jungwon (talk) and Jal11497 (talk) 16:14, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
This is the 5th article from the music bank series winners that I am nominating at FLC. As always, any feedback is very much appreciated. -- EN-Jungwon 16:14, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- ""Plz Don't Be Sad" earned boy group Highlight their first Music Bank award since leaving Cube Entertainment and re-debuting with Around Us Entertainment under their rebranded name." - source? Also a bit odd to refer to their "rebranded name" with no explanation
- Added source. Would ""Plz Don't Be Sad" earned boy group Highlight (formerly Beast) their first Music Bank award since leaving Cube Entertainment and re-debuting with Around Us Entertainment." be better?
- That would work for me :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- Added source. Would ""Plz Don't Be Sad" earned boy group Highlight (formerly Beast) their first Music Bank award since leaving Cube Entertainment and re-debuting with Around Us Entertainment." be better?
- "In April, girl group Laboum achieved their first music show award with "Hwi Hwi" from their second mini album." - source?
- Done
- "Boy group Wanna One achieved their first number one on Music Bank with their debut single "Energetic"and" - there's a space missing between two words. Also the "and" should probably be "which"
- Done
- "Yoon achieved his first number one over 27 years after debut" => "Yoon achieved his first number one over 27 years after his debut"
- Done
- "their first ever music show trophies for "Pretend," "A Daily Song" and "Like It," respectively." => "their first ever music show trophies for "Pretend", "A Daily Song" and "Like It" respectively."
- Done
- "Epik High (pictured) won Music Bank for the first time for "Love Story."" => "Epik High (pictured) won Music Bank for the first time for "Love Story"."
- Done
- Think that's it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:00, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- All done. Thanks again. -- EN-Jungwon 08:12, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:53, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
List of dasyuromorphs
We continue our journey through the thousands of animal species in mammalia with number 24 in our ongoing journey of animal list FLCs (10 lists for Carnivora, 4 for Artiodactyla, 3 lists for Lagomorpha, and 1 each for Perissodactyla, Cingulata, Didelphimorphia, Scandentia, Macroscelidea, and Afrosoricida). For this one we go to Australia with a single-order list for Dasyuromorphia, aka most of the carnivorous marsupials of that continent. Most of these 72 species are small insect-eaters, except for the two big ones: the Tasmanian devil, and the extinct thylacine, but all of them will eat pretty much any creatures they can get their mouths around. The science is up to date and the formatting reflects prior FLCs, so hopefully it should be all good to go. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 23:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "while the thylacine ate larger mammals and livestock" - I would change this to "and the thylacine ate larger mammals and livestock"
- No need to relink thylacine in the last para of the lead
- Think that's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:30, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Both done, thanks! --PresN 18:36, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:36, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. There are no sortable columns. I sampled the links in the table.
- 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
- 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
- 3b. The list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
- 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
- 4. It is navigable.
- 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
- 6. It is stable.
- Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 18:06, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Other reviews
- Support - Always a good read 10/10 Idiosincrático (talk) 12:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- SupportGood Job - 金色黎明 (talk) 11:52, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- My only comment is that the cladogram is also being pushed below the number of species list in the classification section, creating massive whitespace. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 16:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hey, now it's doing the same for me (I use monobook), but only at zooms of 120% or higher. - Dank (push to talk) 16:51, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm using the Vector 2010 at regular width. There was a similar problem with List of afrosoricids, but not with List of macropodiformes, weirdly. SilverTiger12 (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank and SilverTiger12: Fixed, I think. --PresN 19:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Much better, thank you! Support. SilverTiger12 (talk) 19:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Actually, I just noticed- the section headings for this list seem to be different from other orders i.e. List of carnivorans, where the order is the main header with the suborders as sub-headers, and then families as sub-sub-headers- shouldn't here also have the Dasyumorphs as the section header, with the families as subsections and subfamilies as sub-subsections? SilverTiger12 (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @SilverTiger12: You are correct- the family headers should be one level down, below the existing Dasyuromorphs header. Now fixed. --PresN 20:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Actually, I just noticed- the section headings for this list seem to be different from other orders i.e. List of carnivorans, where the order is the main header with the suborders as sub-headers, and then families as sub-sub-headers- shouldn't here also have the Dasyumorphs as the section header, with the families as subsections and subfamilies as sub-subsections? SilverTiger12 (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, it works for me now at 120%. - Dank (push to talk) 19:58, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Much better, thank you! Support. SilverTiger12 (talk) 19:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank and SilverTiger12: Fixed, I think. --PresN 19:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm using the Vector 2010 at regular width. There was a similar problem with List of afrosoricids, but not with List of macropodiformes, weirdly. SilverTiger12 (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hey, now it's doing the same for me (I use monobook), but only at zooms of 120% or higher. - Dank (push to talk) 16:51, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
12th Politburo of the Communist Party of Vietnam
I am nominating this for featured list because Vietnamese politics is exciting! Hopefully, you find this list as exciting as I do. I nominated this list by happenstance—I was planning to start work on the 20th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party—but I saw that Wikipedia was missing some very basic articles on the CPV. I didn't create this article, but I modelled it on another FL. I, however, made some changes of my own to improve referencing and style.
I know that communist politics, and Vietnamese politics more generally, is not the sexiest topic in the world, but I hope some of you will take your time to review it. TheUzbek (talk) 14:28, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Airship
I'll give this a shot. I don't know Vietnamese, so my comments will naturally focus on the prose (which is where they tend to go anyway).
- The lead is very lengthy: five pretty massive paragraphs. Per MOS:LEAD, it shouldn't be more than four unless the article is that unsummarisable.
- What this does, in effect, is make the lead unengaging and difficult to follow, especially for those unfamiliar with the topic.
- The fourth paragraph seems generally unconcerned with the article subject, and would be more suited for Politics of Vietnam or something.
- Removed, I agree with you!
- You should also try to streamline the prose better. Take the second paragraph, for example. The ending sentences of "This anti-corruption campaign ... Or, as former United States diplomat ..." would be better served coming after the first two sentences outline the anti-corruption campaign.
- Fixed
- On the note of streamlining, "anti-corruption" is written five times in one paragraph.
- Fixed
Other comments:
- Is the length column of the meetings section really necessary? I feel that it's fairly self-explanatory.
- I would say yes, some people might want to sort according to length of meetings.. The other columns don't allow for that.
- I find the linking of the items in the Type section somewhat unnecessary. It would be better if there was a glossary above or below the list explaining what each type actually meant, rather than linking to generic Regulation or Decision-making articles.
- I don't have any sources that explain what these terms mean to the CPV so that I'm unable to do sadly.
I hope you find my comments useful, TheUzbek. You might want to take a look at my current FLC nomination—any comments at all would be very welcome. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:05, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29: Do you have any more comments or do you feel I failed to respond to them? :) --TheUzbek (talk) 13:34, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
- I want to try cutting the lead down, but I'm quite busy at the moment. If I haven't responded by Sunday 26th, ping me. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:38, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
THe problem with this list is two-fold. First, Vietnam and its Communist Party are not transparent about the work of the Politburo. Therefore this article has to be a little bit of both: during its electoral term - what it did - and its composition - who are members. I'm currently working (here) on the 12th Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam. I can write a text - an article on that topic - since the CPV is at the very least way more transparent on the CPVCC's meetings.. The plan then is to create two to three separate articles on the following: Apparatus of the 12th Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam, Members of the 12th Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam and Alternates of the 12th Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam (or just Composition of the 12th Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam).
- One cannot to that with the Politburo or its Secretariat or the Central Military Commission... But maybe we can do it with the CIC... --TheUzbek (talk) 09:38, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Communist Party of Vietnam should be linked, and shouldn't be used in acronym form immediately
- Fixed
- "the Politburo is between the party congresses convocations and the Central Committee's plenary sessions, the highest decision-making institution in the CPV and Vietnam." what does "in between" mean?
- Fixed -- is it understandable now?
- "The total number of meetings the 12th Politburo convened has not been publicly disclosed to the media. Still, some have been publicly reported and are listed below (see "Meetings" section)." Are these sentences necessary?
- I would say yes... It showcases the lack of transparency and our lack of knowledge on Vietnamese politics. Its as if the United States Federal Government didn't disclose the number of cabinet meetings or what the cabinet discussed.
- "The 12th National Congress adopted a resolution ..." does this need to be a lengthy quote, or can it be removed/paraphrased?
- Fixed
- "The 5th Plenary Session ... on 22 January 2018" can be one sentence at most. How about "Đinh La Thăng was removed from the Politburo in May 2017 when the 12th Central Inspection Commission started investigating him for mismanaging the state-owned enterprise PetroVietnam, resulting in a loss of 800 billion Vietnamese dong; he was arrested in December 2017 and sentenced to thirteen years in prison in January 2018."
- Fixed
- Is it politburo or Politburo?
- Fixed
- "Institutionally, the campaign was strengthened by ... cases drawing public attention". are two long quotes really needed? Why not "In tandem with the anti-corruption drive, Prime Minister Nguyễn Xuân Phúc began to streamline the government by cutting the number of deputy prime ministers from five to four and ministries from 26 to 22; in addition, six Politburo members were appointed to serve in the Central Steering Committee on Anti-corruption, the Central Inspection Commission was given auditing and supervisory powers, and seven teams were set up to detect and investigate public corruption cases."
- Fixed, but not as suggested.. What do you think of the present sentence?
- Is the David Brown quote necessary?
- Fixed, removed.
- I got lost in the third paragraph. I don't get why regulation 90-QĐ/TW is important, and it seems to contradict itself: "only Trọng and Đinh Thế Huynh did not meet the criteria to be elected General Secretary ... Nguyễn Phú Trọng was indeed elected for a third term".
- Fixed, rewrote and shortened quote. More understandable now?
I'll leave those here for your inspection. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:54, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29: I've responded to you're comments. --TheUzbek (talk) 13:14, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29: So?? --TheUzbek (talk) 07:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29: I've responded to you're comments. --TheUzbek (talk) 13:14, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
74th Primetime Emmy Awards
- Nominator(s): RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
With the 2022 Creative Arts ceremony at multiple supports at FLC, here's the main ceremony from that year. This ceremony could feel like more of the same, though there were some pleasant surprises. The list is modeled off the 72nd and 73rd ceremonies, both FLs. As always, any feedback is much appreciated. RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- "than any other network/platform": per MOS:SLASH, if "than any other network or platform" would work, use that (unless there's something going on here that I don't know about).
- "but only won 26 this year": "this" becomes a MOS:CURRENT problem when you're talking about 2022 in 2023 (because it would be natural for many readers to assume you literally mean "this year"). Reword.
- I have no idea what's going on with the license for File:210305 이정재.jpg since I don't read Korean. I don't know if it's a problem or not.
- I'm assuming you are referring to the link, which has been fixed. If not, let me know.
- For this, I'll ping a coord (below). - Dank (push to talk) 03:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm assuming you are referring to the link, which has been fixed. If not, let me know.
- I don't have any preference on where to sort "The 64th Annual Grammy Awards" ... you've got it under "G". That's not usually what I see at WP:FLC.
- I was copying them based on how the sources order them, and they seem to sort by "Grammy" (same with the Tonys, Golden Globes, etc.).
- Okay, now I see "DEFAULTSORT:Grammy Awards" at the bottom of the page. Works for me. - Dank (push to talk) 03:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- I was copying them based on how the sources order them, and they seem to sort by "Grammy" (same with the Tonys, Golden Globes, etc.).
- "The Beatles: Get Back": Sort it under "B".
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. By the time you see this, I may have done a little copyediting ... if so, feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table.
- 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
- 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
- 3b. The list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
- 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
- 4. It is navigable.
- 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine (except as mentioned above).
- 6. It is stable.
- Close enough for a support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 22:08, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: I left a few comments to clarify; thanks as always for your review! RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:06, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- @PresN: I can't tell if File:210305 이정재.jpg would normally pass an image review, in part since I don't read Korean but also because of the image source (YouTube). I don't know if it's a problem or not, and I'm not even sure who to ask about this. - Dank (push to talk) 03:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: YouTube screenshots are allowed as long as the video where it was taken from was released under Creative Commons. In this case, the video source has a CC license. According to YouTube's help page, videos will be marked under a CC BY 3.0 license, which is allowed per Commons:Licensing. Harushiga (talk) 04:15, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure what an FLC-level image review is supposed to be ... I just know that, in harder cases, whatever it is, it's above my pay grade, and I need to yell for help, as I did here. I'm sure RunningTiger knows image rules better than I do. - Dank (push to talk) 15:28, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: YouTube screenshots are allowed as long as the video where it was taken from was released under Creative Commons. In this case, the video source has a CC license. According to YouTube's help page, videos will be marked under a CC BY 3.0 license, which is allowed per Commons:Licensing. Harushiga (talk) 04:15, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- @PresN: I can't tell if File:210305 이정재.jpg would normally pass an image review, in part since I don't read Korean but also because of the image source (YouTube). I don't know if it's a problem or not, and I'm not even sure who to ask about this. - Dank (push to talk) 03:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: I left a few comments to clarify; thanks as always for your review! RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:06, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support - all good -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:46, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Documentary
- Nominator(s): PanagiotisZois (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because... I can >:(. Just kidding. I'm nominating because I have been working on it on and off for some time now, and I believe it is on par with the other articles. Documentaries are often ignored when it comes to media, but they can be very helpful in informing oneself, especially for people who may not have time to read books. A cross-medium category that includes both film and television documentaries, the only one from this list I've actually seen is The Celluloid Closet, which I'd definitely recommend to anyone interested in the history of Hollywood and portrayal of LGBT characters and themes. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "1996 marks the only...." - to avoid starting a sentence with a number, which probably isn't 100% a no-no but (IMO) doesn't look great, how about changing this to something "The award has been shared on [N] occasions; it was given to two documentaries in [year] and [year] and three in 1996, when [X], [Y] and [Z] were all recognized"
- "within two years after completion" => "within two years on completion"
- "The Real World winning for its third season The Real World: San Francisco in 1995, while True Life won for the episode "I'm Gay and I'm Getting Married" in 2005" => "The Real World won for its third season The Real World: San Francisco in 1995, while True Life won for the episode "I'm Gay and I'm Getting Married" in 2005" (not grammatically correct as it stands. If you don't want to repeat "won", maybe replace one with "was recognized")
- Wow, being British it feels really unnatural repeatedly typing "recognized" :-D
- Honestly, it's of the spelling differences in English where I actually prefer the American version over the British one. :P
- Think that's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:19, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Made the changes. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 22:40, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:35, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by RunningTiger123
- The contrast between the green backgrounds and blue links is insufficient for accessibility purposes in Vector 2022 per this website (using #3366CC for the text and #9F9 for the background) – see MOS:COLOR. It was fine in Vector 2010, but the new link colors don't work.
- The navboxes at the bottom have similar issues, and I suspect the other FLs you've worked on in this field have the same issue now.
- @RunningTiger123: I'm not that experienced with this colour thing. Should I change the green colour to something like #EEDD82 or #FAEB86? The former colour is used in the Oscar, Emmy, and Annie Award articles, including their nav boxes. Other awards like the Hugos or Gaylactic Spectrum Awards use that blue colour. Which one do you recommend I use for here? --PanagiotisZois (talk) 22:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- I realized after I started that the new link colors are causing the same issue elsewhere (see discussion), so for now, I would just leave it alone until a wider solution can be reached. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- The link to 1st GLAAD Media Awards in the first table should omit parentheses.
- Done.
- It might be useful to insert rows for 1991 and 1993 to make it clearer when no awards were presented.
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- Looks like the only remaining change is the 1991 and 1993 rows, which isn't critical, so I'll support. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Critical Role (campaign two)
- Nominator(s): Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Critical Role has become a big cultural phenomenon, the channel is among the highest earners on Twitch, and the show has propelled the actual play genre forward. I'm nominating this article specifically because it is a nearly complete work (ex: it has plot summaries for its 141 episodes unlike other Critical Role episode lists) with work done by multiple editors. I've just finished addressing points of improvement raised during a Guild of Copy Editors review. This is my first time nominating an article & I look forward to your reviews! Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comments from Nomader
Oppose until the plot section and other minor comments are dealt with.
Prose (1):
- In the lead, there's a citation after the phrase "four months after the conclusion of the first campaign." Per WP:CITEFOOT, "If a word or phrase is particularly contentious, an inline citation may be added next to that word or phrase within the sentence, but it is usually sufficient to add the citation to the end of the clause, sentence, or paragraph, so long as it's clear which source supports which part of the text." I think this isn't a contentious citation here and would be fine at the end of the sentence instead.
- Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- I think that the upcoming Amazon adaptation could be merged into the end of the previous paragraph but could also see the argument for keeping them separate. Defer to you here.
- Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not sure why there's a use of a direct quote with the Collider article in the beginning of the "Production and format" section. I think it could say something along the lines of (please put this into the right words but I think you'll see where I'm going with this): "Collider reported that the second campaign had aired for over 530 hours, including 100 hours dedicated to battles, and previewed that the finale would be seven hours long."
- Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- The reception section isn't really grouped by theme, and is instead kind of grouped by reviewer. Take a look at The Simpsons (season_10)#Critical reception to see a good example of how a reception section can be better at giving information based on themes for the reader.
- I regrouped it and brought in a few more sources; P1 is on the recommendation of this campaign as the Critical Role starting point, P2 is the viewership (which is fairly limited compared to something like Nielsen ratings), P3 is the criticism of the show's length (both individual episodes & as a series), and P4 is on the plot points critics covered (mostly Molly's death & his body returning as an antagonist). Let me know if that wasn't conveyed or if there are any other places of improvement. Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Comprehensiveness (3):
- (a) I think that the plot section is far too broad here. For comparison, MOS:TVPLOT recommends that whole seasons of television shows use *either* episode tables that limit descriptions to 200 words, or to a prose summary of the entire season of no more than 500 words -- not both. I know this isn't a television show, but it's the closest guide that I could think of here (a serial series with hours of content). Examples of Featured Lists that I think do a good job of showcasing how this split works are listed here: The Simpsons (season 10), Desperate Housewives (season 1), Degrassi: The Next Generation (season 4), Bleach (season 9). In this case, it's obviously not exactly a 1:1 comparison -- I would keep the setting section (which is important context for the detail found in the episode summaries) but then would cut the entire rest of the plot section and allow the episode listings to do the heavy lifting here.
- Removed the plot section. Do you think that's something that should be moved to List of Critical Role episodes#Campaign two (2018–2021)? Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Honestly, good question -- my gut based on other FL examples of long-running television shows (again the closest thing I can think of in comparison to this situation) like Avatar episodes and other series would be that you would actually just not have it at all. I'd keep the description to extremely broad strokes with details of settings, and maybe small highlights of particularly poignant moments -- but the episode descriptions will tell the story in more detail in a "summary style" (per MOS:SUMMARY) in the Season article, and then the full list should just include the setting. You already have a plot section that gets told through each of the episode descriptions.
- In my own personal editing example, I think back to when I gave a super-detailed plot summary of the play Hamlet for the game Elsinore that I collaborated on with a user from the Shakespeare WikiProject, and when I was going through the GA process, the reviewer (rightfully) cut it down to like, a quarter of the size (see this diff: [4]). And it felt a bit weird to me to cut it out because we'd spent so much time with them tweaking it and sourcing it and figuring it out... just to realize that it was way too much detail. In this case, I think it's an incredible effort of highlighting and focusing 550 hours (!!!) of content but it's redundant to the descriptions. Nomader (talk) 08:39, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- That makes sense! It was an original holdover as the really long plot summary was what led to the individual campaigns being split off from the Critical Role article. Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- (b) There should be a citation for Ashley Johnson in the main cast section (you can probably just use #11 which is above it).
- Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Style (5):
- Per 5b in the criteria, there should be media appropriate to the topic with succinct captions. I think you could include one of the photos of the actors -- maybe in the reception area, a photo of Taliesin Jaffe could be included with context about Molly's death?
- Done. Another potential image to go along with Jaffe's is the cover of Critical Role: The Mighty Nein – The Nine Eyes of Lucien, however, I'm unsure if that would meet WP:NFCI. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
A spot check of citations was all good to go. This is unbelievably thorough work, and although it needs some large changes (mostly the removal of the "Plot" section of the synposis along with a full re-working of the reception section), the level of work to summarize all of those episodes is extraordinary. Please ping me once you're finished with edits and I'll be happy to strike my oppose -- this review is also being submitted for the Wikicup. Nomader (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your review Nomader! I'll start addressing some of the points you listed above and ping you when I'm done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:01, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Perfect, sounds good! Just a heads up that I'll be on vacation from tomorrow, Thursday February 16, to Tuesday February 21st -- in case I don't get back to you right away, I'll only be checking sporadically during that time. Nomader (talk) 08:24, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Nomader: Just wrapped the last point (notes on the reception sections above). I hope you have a good holiday! Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Sariel Xilo: Luckily you caught me 24 hours early! The reception section is an incredible improvement and reads much, much better. I'm happy to support now that all of my concerns have been addressed. Really impressive work to everyone involved (especially on the summary plot notes for each episode which I haven't talked that much about here). Thanks for being so prompt! Nomader (talk) 02:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks again for all your feedback! I've also dropped a request for a fair-use map at the Graphics Lab; they have a queue but the list might end up with a map for the setting section down the line. Sariel Xilo (talk) 03:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Sariel Xilo: Luckily you caught me 24 hours early! The reception section is an incredible improvement and reads much, much better. I'm happy to support now that all of my concerns have been addressed. Really impressive work to everyone involved (especially on the summary plot notes for each episode which I haven't talked that much about here). Thanks for being so prompt! Nomader (talk) 02:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Nomader: Just wrapped the last point (notes on the reception sections above). I hope you have a good holiday! Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Perfect, sounds good! Just a heads up that I'll be on vacation from tomorrow, Thursday February 16, to Tuesday February 21st -- in case I don't get back to you right away, I'll only be checking sporadically during that time. Nomader (talk) 08:24, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
List of World Heritage Sites in South Korea
- Nominator(s): Tone 17:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
South Korea has 15 World Heritage Sites, among them there are several temples, palaces, castles, as well as natural features. Standard style for WHS lists. The other nomination currently open, the list for Malaysia, is already seeing some support, so I am adding a new one. Tone 17:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "It was burned down during the Japanese invasion in the 16th century, soon after reconstructed" => "It was burned down during the Japanese invasion in the 16th century, but reconstructed soon afterwards"
- "The fortress has remained largely intact to present day" => "The fortress has remained largely intact to the present day"
- "The excavations of the tombs produces rich gold" => "The excavation of the tombs produced rich gold"
- "It contains a lake-filled crater, waterfalls, and exhibits" => "It contains a lake-filled crater and waterfalls, and exhibits"
- "The ancestor worship rituals were held regularly" => "Ancestor worship rituals were held regularly"
- "The setting of the villages in the mountainous setting" - can we avoid saying "setting" twice? Suggest replacing the second one with "location"
- "Over 400 kilns have operated in the area, some of them have been preserved" => "Over 400 kilns have operated in the area, some of which have been preserved"
- "It is important stop" => "It is an important stop"
- "Even if they shared similar culture" => "Although they shared similar culture"
- "Even if it fell into disrepair" => "Although it fell into disrepair" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:23, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed all, thanks for checking! Tone 20:57, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:36, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments by RunningTiger123
- "Two sites are natural, these are Getbol and the Jeju Volcanic Island and Lava Tubes." – comma splice
- Still a comma splice
- "80 000 wooden printing blocks" – per MOS:DIGITS, if you use spaces to group numbers, use
{{val}}
or{{gaps}}
- Template not used correctly (see documentation)
- "South North" – I'm guessing the linked words got messed up on this one?
- Link for South Jeolla actually points to North Jeolla now
- IABot missed a few sources when archiving
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:38, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Good catch, thanks! Fixed. The bot is currently not responding, I will try later. Not sure why it did not archive all sources, I think it sometimes does that. Tone 08:14, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Replies above. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:04, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oops, not sure what I was doing yesterday :) Second try, please check. Tone 12:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- The comma splice still wasn't fixed, but I took care of it. Everything else is good; happy to support now. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:23, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oops, not sure what I was doing yesterday :) Second try, please check. Tone 12:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- Replies above. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:04, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support, 10/10 good stuff. Idiosincrático (talk) 01:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
List of basal asterid families
- Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 03:23, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Many of Wikipedia's science-y articles are a bit overwhelming to people who are intelligent and interested in the material, but lack the necessary background. This is what attracted me to WP:FLC many years ago ... I saw a lot of lists that served very nicely as readable introductions to a subject, without sacrificing accuracy, dumbing the subject down or talking down to people. My hope is that this list series will eventually succeed in some of the same ways. We'll see. Thanks as (almost) always to Johnboddie for selecting the images and doing some of the work on "description and uses". - Dank (push to talk) 03:23, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- I promise, this is the last time I'm pinging everyone who's
commented inreviewed any of the previous lists in this series (except Aza, ChrisTheDude, Giants and PresN): @AryKun, CaptainEek, Casliber, Ceoil, Eewilson, HAL333, RunningTiger123, The ed17, and Umimmak: Thanks all for your reviews. Now that you folks have helped me work out the bugs in this list series, it shouldn't be too hard for me to keep getting reviews (it usually works to review other people's stuff at FLC), but I don't want to invite people to review until they've got two nominations to look at, and per FLC rules, I need one more support on this one before I can nominate the next one, if anyone's got some time to spare. (The four lists that have been promoted so far are linked in the "See also" section of this list, if that helps.) Any drive-by comments are also welcome, of course. - Dank (push to talk) 03:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC) - Well, that was fast, thx Ceoil. FWIW, everyone, two of the next three lists in the series (basal eudicots and Saxifragales) are going to be very short, 15 and 16 rows, if anyone wants to take a look. - Dank (push to talk) 11:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Not an image review
I can't do an image review for my own nomination, but since the only table images I selected were for Actinidia, I'm verifying here that I've checked everything. Licensing:
- 45 are "own work" or equivalent with no indication at all that they aren't. 6 licenses were verified by the Flickr bot and 4 by the iNaturalist bot.
- The two illustrations are very old; no copyright problems.
- Image composition is generally excellent. Alt text is (now) always present, and spare but acceptable.
- Happy to do more research if needed. - Dank (push to talk) 04:31, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Other reviews
- Support - I got nothing :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:41, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
- I never get tired of hearing that :) - Dank (push to talk) 16:45, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Ceoil
Always happy to be pinged for these noms.
- don't like that we start with "since 2019" rather than a general definition. Its pacey, but sort of off-centering. That said, you prob know your target audience and their dept of knowledge better than me.
- related....find the "Glossary" very helpful
- The basal asterids are highly diverse, but there are a few visible traits that can be linked to many of the families - "The basal asterids are highly diverse, but do not have many visible traits linking the families"?
- I would punctuate a lot more in the list itself, eg at the end of Mushroom-like parasites without chlorophyll that feed on tree roots should have a full stop/period.
- Some of the paired images are out of sync...eg when one is landscape and one is portrait and thus much longer.
- Leaning support Ceoil (talk) 06:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Great ideas. All done except the final full stops/periods ... I don't have a preference, you can add or subtract, whatever looks right to you. - Dank (push to talk) 11:25, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, was watching (& since added a few full stops). Support; another visually stunning and informative page from the series. Ceoil (talk) 11:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Very kind, and John says thanks too. - Dank (push to talk) 16:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Elizabeth (Eewilson)
Minor thing:
...ring-like nectaries, and cymes, inflorescences in which each lateral stalk either terminates in a flower or branches itself.
That last part, where it expands on the meaning of cymes, is a bit confusing because it almost looks like another item in the list. Maybe adding "which are" right before "inflorescences"?
That's all. There could be other things, but I'll leave them to others if there are. Being on a mostly-Wikibreak right now makes my eyes gloss over. :) Great job! Support, with that clarification. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 14:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Wikibreaks are important, but I'm always happy for your input :) - Dank (push to talk) 16:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
Staking out a spot for when I can review tomorrow. ~ HAL333 22:58, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- @HAL333: ? - Dank (push to talk) 17:04, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay. I've been AWOL on Wikipedia due to "real"-life demands. Here's what I got:
- "Heathlands, a typical habitat for some species in Ericaceae, the heather family." isn't a sentence.
- MOS:CAPFRAG says "If any complete sentence occurs in a caption, then all sentences, and any sentence fragments, in that caption should end with a period or full stop." Does that cover this case?
- Is "from the others" redundant?
- Happy to go with whatever you decide.
- Could the lead be expanded? If you have to fluff it up, dont bother. :)
- Look at what I did with List of Saxifragales families ... I moved the existing second paragraph down to the Glossary section, and created a new paragraph with "highlights" of some of the families. If that's the kind of expansion you're looking for, that works for me.
- Back. Okay, yes, I'll get to work on this after breakfast. Good idea.
- @HAL333: I've made the same changes to this list that I made in List of Saxifragales families, adding a list of relevant plants to the intro that many readers are familiar with, and moving part of the intro down into the first section. (Per a request over at the other FLC, I also merged the Legend info into the main table.) See if this works for you. - Dank (push to talk) 22:09, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- The Oxford comma is used in some places and not in others.
- I never mind being asked, since I miss these sometimes, but I don't see any of them in the table. The last sentence in the
leadGlossary section includes: "as well as anthers attached at their base, ring-like nectaries, and cymes, which are inflorescences ...". If I left off the comma before "and cymes", then the "which" would become ambiguous (it might refer to the "ring-like nectaries and cymes"). - If the comma is a problem, I can break this into two sentences.
- I never mind being asked, since I miss these sometimes, but I don't see any of them in the table. The last sentence in the
- The nationalities and/or occupations of human namesakes are only sometimes listed. I would try to do so every time, if possible.
- It's late, so I might not be thinking this through, but I'd rather not. The relevant note says "Some plants were named for naturalists (unless otherwise noted)" ... I can make that more prominent if that would help. What I'd rather not do is try to describe what someone was in one or a few words (beyond what the note says) ... it's generally more complicated than that, which the reader will find out if they click on the biography link and get the full story. I struggled with how to handle this for all the etymology lists, too, and discussed it, and wound up with this compromise ... I'd prefer to be consistent, so if I change it here, that's going to mean a lot of changes and judgment calls and mind-reading for a bunch of very long lists. But I'm open to suggestions.
- Turns out I was right, I wasn't thinking it through :) I can put "naturalist" in front of the names rather than after. Doing that now. - Dank (push to talk) 13:50, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, I just undid this edit, after noticing that this change didn't entirely work here and won't work at all for most of these lists. The problem is that adding the word "naturalist" for each of these people invites an argument in each case over the best way to describe them. That's going to fail in a big way, eventually. Most of the one-word descriptions would be inadequate ... even one-sentence descriptions are going to be misinterpreted by many readers, without further explanation. They're all naturalists, and it's not misleading to say that ... further details can be found at the links for each human namesake. - Dank (push to talk) 11:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- The references are very clean.
That's all I noticed. Solid work. ~ HAL333 04:28, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, good comments. Let me know if I can help with anything. - Dank (push to talk) 05:19, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- @HAL333: Was there anything else? - Dank (push to talk) 18:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
List of British armies in World War II
- Nominator(s): EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 13:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
This list has been overhauled to provide a complete list of all British armies raised (real and fictional) that were formed during the Second World War. A member of the Guild of Copyeditors has also given the list the once over.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 13:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- Link Battle of the Bulge
- Link addedEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- The articles on the Third Army and Fifth Army don't cover these imaginary army at all - should they even be linked?
- Personally, I think so. Prior to the list being overhauled, only the Fourth Army was included and I would guess that was because its deception efforts were best known. The others are kind of sidenotes in the literature. I have added a small note to both articles.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Half way down the page, the notes column changes from centre-aligned to left and then back again
- I have left aligned this entire column now. If you think it should be centred, I can do that too.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- "The Imperial War Museum wrote the insignia" => "The Imperial War Museum wrote that the insignia"
- "The museum noted versions of this initial design exist" => "The museum noted that versions of this initial design exist"
- "It was intended the Fourteenth Army would" => "It was intended that the Fourteenth Army would"
- "See below list for complete breakdown." looks weird below the list in question. I would be tempted to just lose these words.
- "as each division completed its [singular] training and were [plural] fully equipped"
- "It was envisioned the final territorial division" => "It was envisioned that the final territorial division"
- I have made changes to hopefully address the above various points.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:11, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your time, review, and comments. I have attempted to address all and welcome any further feedback.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:57, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Support by Nick-D
This article is in good shape. I have the following comments:
- Can a link to the 13 June 1945 edition of The Times be provided?
- Not sure if the link would work in the article citation, but if you have access to Gale, it is located here: link. It talks about the Second Army becoming part of the occupation force.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'd suggest removing the Third and Fifth Armies from the list and lead given they didn't even exist as deception formations. This might warrant an end note or short section on other armies attributed to the British Army during the war? The article is a bit confused at the moment with these non-existant formations being included in the table. The Germans believed all kinds of weird things about the Allied order of battle due to their dysfunctional intelligence services and Allied deception campaigns.
- Fair point. I have amended the lede and removed the two armies from the list. I have moved their mention into the note that also includes the British Indian armies.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- "It was intended that the Fourteenth Army would be used to land in and liberate British Malaya, but the war ended before that occurred." - the landings did actually occur, just after the Japanese surrender (see Operation Zipper) as it was considered easiest to use the forces assembled for the operation and the prepared plans than to develop new plans at short notice.
- I have tweaked the wording to include a combat landing (which I believe was the point I was trying to convey) and also noted their peaceful arrival instead (IWM mentions that, so no need for additional sourcing).EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Was Malaya Command considered an Army? It was led by a Lieutenant-General and was of equivalent size and structure. Nick-D (talk) 00:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- So, I am not an expert in this area (Far East and army terminology), but the OH War Against Japan describes the command as one that was "designed for the control of a small garrison" and not "adjusted to enable it to cope efficiently with the changed and increased load placed upon it" (acknowledgement that it was not? and that it became one?). It also uses language similar to how Middle East Command (MEC) is discussed, such as exercising authority over multiple geographical locations (at least British Malaya, Thailand, and Borneo - although all its troops were in Malaya) and the RN and RAF linking their commands for the defense of the area. MEC, for example, saw the establishment of a triumvirate of the three branches and oversaw operations from Egypt to Aden etc. I was unable to find mention in the OH of an attempt to form a field army.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your time reviewing the article and providing the above comments.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Timeline of the Warren G. Harding presidency
- Nominator(s): Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:33, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Last spring, I read thousands of archived newspaper stories, searching for every major story about President Warren G. Harding. I was an inexperienced user at the time, so I was wary of the FLC process. I've now ensured that all items are cited and that the timeline has a suitable lead. I believe that the timeline accurately lists all major events involving the presidency of Warren G. Harding, and I'm nominating this as my first FLC. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:33, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Cool list, great work! At least the short presidency made this more manageable! Some comments:
- The first sentence is a little awkward by making "presidency" the subject, I'd suggest something like "Warren G. Harding was inaugurated as the 29th president of the United States on March 4, 1921, and he died on August 2, 1923, 881 days later. During Harding's presidency, he organized..."
- Even though presidents didn't travel much yet, it's not that particular that a president would meet with international figures - that listing doesn't need to be in the first paragraph
- "He declined to participate actively in the 1922 United States elections, opting to write letters of endorsement" Don't know that history of midterms, but was that unusual not to campaign in them?
- June 30 1921 - is an appropriations act that major? Before congress became dysfunctional, they signed like 12 of those every year, link unlikely to have an article
- September 20 - redlink is not needed
- Nov 14 - I don't think the Victory Memorial mentioned in the cite is actually related to National World War I Memorial (Washington, D.C.); that article and [5] say there were buildings there until demolished in 1930
- June 21 1922 – lowercase is inconsistent with May 15
- Feb 27 and 28, 1923 both include Hubert Work and Harry New
- June 20 - italics for newspaper
- Aug 2 - should say where he died
Reywas92Talk 03:23, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- All comments have now been addressed. And yes, starting with Harding over the other presidencies of that era was completely intentional. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:05, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- Will do a full review later, but for now will leave you with this drive-by: image captions which are not complete sentences, eg "Harding with Marie Curie. May 20, 1921." should not have full stops -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:38, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
More comments
- "Warren G. Harding was inaugurated as the 29th president of the United States on March 4, 1921, and he served as president until his death" - minor, but the word "he" is probably redundant
- Could you add a few words to give context to some of the other people mentioned, eg "Harding attends the funeral of Edward Douglass White" => "Harding attends the funeral of Supreme Court judge Edward Douglass White" (or whatever is appropriate)
- "Harding loosens a Wilson-era rule" - who's Wilson?
- "France's insistence of maintain" - not grammatically correct. Suggest "France's insistence on maintaining"
- "The Wall Street Journal breaks the story that Secretary of the Interior had leased" => "The Wall Street Journal breaks the story that the Secretary of the Interior had leased"
- "for the 100th centennial" - the 100th centennial would mark 10,000 years and I am fairly sure Grant didn't live that long :-) Either "the centennial" or "the 100th birthday"
- That's what I got as far as the end of May 1922, but I need to drop off now. I'll do the rest later this evening...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:12, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Even more comments
- "Harding expresses his support for cabinet secretaries to express" - any way to change one of the two verbs to avoid repetition?
- "The Senate votes to give Harding authority over flexible tariffs rates" => "The Senate votes to give Harding authority over flexible tariff rates"
- "Harding meets with veteran's organization leaders" => "Harding meets with veterans' organization leaders" (more than one veteran in each organisation)
- "Harding meets with Former Prime Minister of France" => "Harding meets with former Prime Minister of France" (there isn't an official position of "Former Prime Minister of France")
- Think that's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- I believe I've addressed all of your comments, including context for all names where it's not evident who they are from context. (And for what it's worth, I've never seen a source that says Grant isn't an ethereal being from the dawn of civilization.) Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:38, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:27, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
List of LGBT Olympians and Paralympians
This is now one of the largest lists by size on Wikipedia. I suppose it's really a few lists that add up to one subject. I have put a lot of work into it this year, basing the appearance on a comparable list I found at the Hebrew Wikipedia, taking some poor bullet lists from related articles, and altogether adding the hundreds of missing entries for completion. I nominate it as a candidate for FL because I think it is quite a neat complete work - though, more on that - and for advice on further improvements, of course. Given its size, I sure am expecting some! I am currently in the process of migrating its many references to a more user-readable harvref format, since there are also hundreds of those. The only concern I have to it becoming FL is that it is a dynamic list; former Olympians can come out at any time, and there are more predictable periods in the run-up to Games when already-out athletes are announced to be competing. However, we have other dynamic lists at FL, and while they may be less prone to change, I think the somewhat predictability here makes it manageable. Happy to answer any questions, and thanks for looking it over! Kingsif (talk) 01:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Technical considerations
Before getting too far into this nomination, I want to note that this page is really long. Right now, the post-expand include size is 1790806/2097152 bytes, or about 85.4% of the maximum page size (2 MiB per WP:LENGTH). I think it would be prudent to consider either splitting the page or reducing the page size – otherwise, there will likely be serious technical issues within a few years. (Removing images from the table might help, though I don't know how much the HTML code to display the images actually contributes.) I'm open to suggestions here. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:16, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, I second this. This is a great list, and the pictures and notes are instrumental to it, despite making up so much of the length - a list of names alone wouldn't be as interesting. But the fact is that the athletes added for the 2020 and 2022 games alone are 20% of the incredibly long list, which means we can safely assume another massive addition for the 2024 games. As RunningTiger123 notes, it's already 85% of the way to the point where the page will literally stop rendering partway through- as in it will just cut off in the middle of the table and not display anything further down. This means that, very likely, in 1.5 years the page will be unreadable by anyone, and it's frankly already unreadable for anyone who is on a slower internet connection, which is a good chunk of the reading populace. It's nice to have it all in one page, but this is, unfortunately, a problem that a lot of longer lists like this face, which then reach the same unfortunate conclusion: you have to break it up into sublists. I'd recommend breaking it up into at least 3 or 4 lists by year of Olympic debut, though alphabetically is also sometimes done. It's up to you, but something has to be done, I'm afraid. --PresN 03:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- @RunningTiger123 and PresN: Thank you both, these are exactly the kind of comments I was hoping for on that side - as well as table accessibility notes (which would presumably make the code longer if not up to scratch). As for resolving it, the longer notes take up quite a bit, even the shorter notes get long with references; the images are around 100 characters per entry, which is a lot with this many, but not as much as the notes. I think I agree that splitting is the better solution; the LGBT issues at the Olympic and Paralympic Games article (which needs work, but) has some rough historical periods - would these be beneficial to breaking it up?. Kingsif (talk) 03:51, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- Another thought for splits: Summer athletes, Summer artists, intersex athletes, Winter athletes, and Paralympians getting lists at separate articles. The Summer athletes at least could do with splits, too, I fear. Kingsif (talk) 03:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not a technical guy, like, at all, but my lists all have a lot of images ... and I don't know if they've done something in the last two years to fix the problem, but a few reviewers were telling me that some of the images stopped loading for them when I got up to roughly 100 images. You have a lot of SVG pictograms on top of a lot of photos, too ... I don't know if that's a problem, but it might be. Personally, I haven't had the problem of images not loading for my own lists, so I can't test the problem I'm talking about. - Dank (push to talk) 17:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- I think splitting by type of athlete is fine, but I agree that the same issue will still arise with summer athletes. If I had to pick a non-arbitrary cutoff, maybe start a new list from 2004 onwards, as transgender athletes were first allowed to compete at those games? I could also see the list being split from 2020 onwards since those were described as the "Rainbow Olympics", though I think it's probably too soon to determine if that's a meaningful nickname that will stand the test of time. I would also be fine with a somewhat arbitrary cutoff from 2000 onwards (i.e., pre-21st century in the first list), or really at any point in the last 20 years. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ideas - I think 2004 is a good suggestion. I'll probably start with 2004-present to see how long the resulting lists are, in case the pre-2004 needs to be split further. Kingsif (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Kingsif: Okay, since you're splitting this, would you prefer to close this nomination, or do you think you'll have a nominate-able chunk that can take the whole list's place in short order? Up to you. Since you asked, I'll give you an accessibility review for this list in a second in any case. --PresN 04:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the accessibility review, and the input so far. I think that splitting this means splitting everything out and, maybe (and which I've prepared for), leaving a boring old plain text list at the List of LGBT Olympians and Paralympians article/title (essentially to serve as a hub and to preserve history) - I think I will leave this open because a variety of cut-pastes and scraping the names shouldn't take too long. The process can then decide if the plain list is suitable, right? And I'm sure the process will come up with suggestions to, I suppose, "highlight" some of the more prominent athletes of each type. Of course, I trust your judgment on if this nomination should be closed and, perhaps, one of the split articles to be nominated once all cleaned up. Kingsif (talk) 04:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- The current list at the title of this nomination should be suitable now, to begin review. There are only the summary tables now present at this list, and I think I have made these accessible with this edit. Thanks again for this. Kingsif (talk) 01:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Kingsif: Okay, since you're splitting this, would you prefer to close this nomination, or do you think you'll have a nominate-able chunk that can take the whole list's place in short order? Up to you. Since you asked, I'll give you an accessibility review for this list in a second in any case. --PresN 04:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ideas - I think 2004 is a good suggestion. I'll probably start with 2004-present to see how long the resulting lists are, in case the pre-2004 needs to be split further. Kingsif (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Another thought for splits: Summer athletes, Summer artists, intersex athletes, Winter athletes, and Paralympians getting lists at separate articles. The Summer athletes at least could do with splits, too, I fear. Kingsif (talk) 03:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- @RunningTiger123: For future reference, how are you able to see the post-expand size? ~ HAL333 20:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- @HAL333: You have to open the page source and scroll to the bottom of the HTML code; close to the bottom, there's a comment with various page stats. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- Unless otherwise specified, these apply to both the main table as well as the summary ones in {{LGBT Olympians overview}}
- 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 have captions for the tables at LGBT Olympians overview, but not the main one. - Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! Country
becomes!scope=col | Country
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. - 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.| [[Robert de Montesquiou]]
becomes!scope=row | [[Robert de Montesquiou]]
. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use!scope=rowgroup
instead. Note that the "primary" column of cells doesn't have to be the first column, but it usually makes more sense for it to be so. Right now, you have the name and picture as two separate columns, with a grouped header cell and some sorting magic so that readers can sort by the picture column and actually sort by the name, but it may be cleaner overall to just have the first column be a combined "name <br/> picture", or else swap the name and picture columns. It is fine to leave the name column as the primary and the second column if you don't want to change it, though. - This would also fix a second issue: none of your images have alt text, which is needed for non- or poorly-sighted readers. It's fine to skip the alt text if you have a caption that explains what the picture is (e.g. the name of the person) in the same cell (or rather to have a generic "|alt=athlete" or something, since otherwise the alt is the image url which is a mess), but right now you don't have it in the same cell, so the images don't have explanatory text right alongside them as far as screen reader software is concerned, and would need an alt text of the person's name at minimum.
- Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. --PresN 04:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Drive-by comment
- What's actually sourcing the "by sport" table at the top? The other tables I can see summarise data already displayed in the big table so I guess fall under WP:CALC, but the level of detail in the "by sport" table isn't displayed in the big table. If I want to know who, say, the one intersex judoka is, how can I confirm that? Do I have to check the references against all the judo entries (none of the judo entries mention intersex in the notes column)......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: For that particular one, the list of intersex Olympians just got split out. More generally, yes, it is looking through all the entries. When the list was much less formal, some of the entries had the person's sexuality/gender identity, and I think the list of LGBT sportspeople is still like that. The issue with having such a column has increasingly been people not labelling themselves, or having identities that don't neatly fit one word — and it's obviously not something we want to mislabel. Of course, as comes to gender identity and intersex people, this is a bit more cut and dry than with sexuality, so if you have ideas on how to incorporate the information in the tables, I would love to hear them. Kingsif (talk) 18:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Kingsif, in the by country tables may I suggest that link point the relevant country at the Olympics article, or where is exist, the country at the Summer/Winter Olympics article rather than just the country article, eg. Argentina at the Olympics and Australia at the Winter Olympics. – Ianblair23 (talk) 23:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Ianblair23: great suggestion, thanks! Kingsif (talk) 00:23, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
List of commanders of the British 4th Division
- Nominator(s): EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 20:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
The 4th Division was initially raised in 1809 for service in the Napoleonic Wars, and then formed again for service in the Crimean and the Second Boer Wars. In the early 1900s, new 4th Divisions were formed, renumbered, and formed again. It served in the First World War and the Second World Wars, and was raised, disbanded, and renamed a whole bunch of times through to its final disbanding. Three of the individuals listed were killed in action, five were wounded, and one was captured. This was previously nominated although the process stalled as I ended up on a wikibreak. Back in action and looking to finalize this one. The points raised in the previously nomination have hopefully all been addressed. Look forward to any feedback to whip this into shape as needed.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 20:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- Galbraith Lowry Cole sorts under L, suggesting that Lowry was part of his surname, yet in the notes column you refer to him as just Cole, suggesting that Lowry was in fact a forename. Which is correct?
- After taking a look at his article and family articles, it should just be Cole. I have updated so it should search correctly now.
- "Lambton was incapacitated on 12 September 1917" - complete sentence so needs a full stop
- "Lipsett was killed in action on 14 October 1918" - and this one
- "The division was reformed in England" - this one too :-)
- The above all addressed
- "On 13 December 1934, Brind was temporary assigned" - temporarily, surely?
- Quite, and fixed.
- "On 1 January 1978, the formation was redesignated as the 4th Armoured Division" - another note that needs a full stop
- "The division was reformed in England" - this one likewise :-)
- Added for both
- Think that's all I got - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:06, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your review and comments. I have attempted to address them all.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 22:47, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:43, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- The first FLC for this was archived in May; I've checked the diff since then, and everything I said there still goes, so ...
- Support. Please consider reviewing my FLC nomination, or if there's some issue that is getting in the way of that, please tell me what it is. - Dank (push to talk) 17:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC) P.S. I'm running a 102 degree fever at the moment ... you should have seen me trying to write correct regex, it was a hoot ... so if that question came across as pointed, please ignore it, that's not what I was feeling. I just wonder sometimes why I don't get more reviews than I get ... it may be something simple that I'm missing. - Dank (push to talk) 02:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your review and comments. No worries about wording, and I am hoping you are feeling much better! Re: reviews, I use to try and do them but stopped many years ago as I never felt comfortable doing them.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 18:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Not a problem. - Dank (push to talk) 18:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your review and comments. No worries about wording, and I am hoping you are feeling much better! Re: reviews, I use to try and do them but stopped many years ago as I never felt comfortable doing them.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 18:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
List of World Heritage Sites in Malaysia
- Nominator(s): Tone 10:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Malaysia has four sites on the World Heritage Sites list and six on the tentative list. Standard style and formatting. The list for Sri Lanka is already seeing support so I am adding a new nomination. Tone 10:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "Other sites date to different periods of Paleolithic and Neolithic" => "Other sites date to the Paleolithic and Neolithic periods"
- "dated to be about 10 000 years old" => "dated to be about 10,000 years old"
- "Many animal and plan species" - is that a typo for "plant"?
- "with over 2 400 patients at its peak" => "with over 2,400 patients at its peak"
- "to live as close as normal as possible" => "to live as close to normal as possible"
- "between 35 000 and 40 000 years old" => "between 35,000 and 40,000 years old"
- Think that's it from me :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:56, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed all, thanks! Tone 21:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
- The second lead paragraph seems a little sparse.
- Should
Historic Cities of the Straits of Malacca
be singular? (as it is in its own article) The two sites listed in 2000 are natural, the other two are cultural
Two independent clauses can't be linked with just a commaat least one of the criteria
--> "at least one criterion" (moreso a suggestion - it's up to you ofc)the oldest most complete human skeleton
I don't know what this means... Is it supposed to be "oldest and most complete" or "oldest mostly complete" or something else?remains of continuous human occupation
maybe change to "evidence of..." to avoid repetition of "remains"
That's all. ~ HAL333 21:07, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks! Tone 21:23, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Reywas92
- Your first sentence is different from others. "...which have been nominated by countries which are signatories..." is a bit awkward; the second "which" should be "that", but maybe go back to a simpler wording like before.
- The second and third sentences should be parallel: "Cultural heritage consists of..." and then "Natural heritage [includes][consists of]..." instead of the latter being reversed.
- "As of 2022" isn't necessary, this isn't something likely to be out of date soon.
- "while the most recent one" -> "and". These statements are complimentary, not contrasting.
- "Malaysia has served" -> "Malaysia served"
- "in the years 2011–2015" -> "from 2011 to 2015", we can tell they're years.
- Kinabalu Park: point out that it's Malaysia's tallest mountain
- Having written many descriptions in my national park lists I know it's hard to summarize a place's diversity comprehensively and concisely, but "In addition to diverse flora, the area is also home to several species of mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles" is awfully vague. Maybe point out the orchids or other specific plant or animal types, or tie the vegetation zones to the diversity.
- Mulu: "both due its" -> "due to both its"
- Malacca: in the early 16th century -> starting in
- 1.83 million year old" needs hyphens
Nice work again! Reywas92Talk 04:47, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed all, thanks for checking! Tone 09:08, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
List of Indianapolis 500 winners
- Nominator(s): EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 09:23, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
The Indianapolis 500 is a 500 mile auto race held at the fabled Indianapolis Motor Speedway during the month of May and part of the informal Triple Crown of Motorsport. Many famous drivers such as Hélio Castroneves, A. J. Foyt, Rick Mears, Al Unser, Dario Franchitti, Mario Andretti, Johnny Rutherford, Juan Pablo Montoya, Bobby Unser and Jacques Villeneuve have been winners of this event. I look forward to all the comments on this review. EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 09:23, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "reverting to International 500-Mile Sweepstakes Race from 1920 until 1980" - and since then.......?
- Clarified EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- "The American Automobile Association were the governing body" => "The American Automobile Association was the governing body"
- Done slightly differently EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- "between its inception until 1955" => "from its inception until 1955"
- Done EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- "then United States Auto Club from 1956 to 1997" => "then the United States Auto Club from 1956 to 1997"
- Done EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- "which sees a bas-relief sculpture of the winning driver's face added to the base" - would probably be better as "and a bas-relief sculpture of the winning driver's face is added to the base of the trophy itself"
- Done EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- The "is" before added is missing -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- "The driver receives a laurel wreath made of 33 ivory-colored Cymbidium orchids featuring burgundy tips and 33 miniature flags interwoven with blue, red and white ribbons in victory lane each year since 1960" => "Since 1960 the driver receives a laurel wreath made of 33 ivory-colored Cymbidium orchids featuring burgundy tips and 33 miniature flags interwoven with blue, red and white ribbons in the victory lane"
- Done, although in American English, the spelling "Victory Lane" is common EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- The issue was not the spelling but the missing word "the" before "victory" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done, although in American English, the spelling "Victory Lane" is common EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- In the key what's a rookie in this context? A driver in his first year of competitive racing? A driver driving in this particular race for the first time? Or something else?
- A driver who is competing for the first time at the Indianapolis 500 EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- "Indicates winning driver was a Indianapolis 500 rookie" should be "Indicates winning driver was an Indianapolis 500 rookie" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- A driver who is competing for the first time at the Indianapolis 500 EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's probably too much detail for the lead to mention that the 2020 race was held in August due (I presume) to COVID, but it might merit a footnote
- Added EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Note d is not a complete sentence so doesn't need a full stop
- Done EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Think that's all I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Have taken action on the points raised above EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Further comments above -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done on all three additional points EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Further comments above -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Have taken action on the points raised above EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Prose review from Airship — OPPOSE
- "200 lap, 500 mi (800 km)" should be a separate sentence, to avoid number overload.
- The lead doesn't specify when the inception of the event was.
- "before becoming the 300-Mile Liberty Sweepstakes in 1919" I can't help but notice that the 1919 race in the table was contested over 500 miles? Is something wrong here?
- "The American Automobile Association governed the event" the sentence would work better as passive clauses.
- "is presented"--> "has been presented"
- link some combination of "art deco sterling silver"; the "art deco" should definitely be capitalised
- "the base of the trophy itself" make it clear that this is the original trophy; furthermore, they have only moved onto the base relatively recently.
- "Since 1960, the driver receives...and drinks a bottle of milk, a tradition started after the 1936 event." This sentence is a mess: tenses, meaning, clarity is all lacking.
- "from a prize pool" unnecessary
- "a hand-made quilt from Jeanetta Holder at the winners' photo shoot the day following the race" ??? this convoluted sentence provides absolutely no clarification
- "his last, a span of two decades. He won his" --> "his last, winning his"
- "his last (to date)" MOS:RELTIME
- "Juan Pablo Montoya had to wait the longest time between his maiden victory at the 2000 race, and his second win followed 15 years later at the 2015 event" between distinguishes two items; only one (the maiden victory) is provided.
- "Troy Ruttman is the youngest winner of the Indianapolis 500; he was 22 years and 80 days old when he won the 1952 event. Al Unser is the oldest winner of the Indianapolis 500; he was 47 years and 360 days old when he won the 1987 race." Unnecessary repetition: can be combined into one sentence (e.g. "TR and AU are the youngest and oldest 500 winners, triumphing at the age of 22 years and 80 days and 47 years and 360 days respectively")
- "It has been won by 52 American drivers in 74 editions of the race" --> "52 American drivers have won 74 editions of the race"
- " followed by British and Brazilian racers who have each achieved victory eight times amongst five and four drivers, respectively." convoluted, please rephrase.
- "There have been seven countries who have produced only one winner" --> "Seven countries have produced only one winner"
- "There have been two editions, the 1924 and 1941 races, where two drivers sharing a car ..." --> "In the 1924 and 1941 races, two drivers sharing a car..."
The tables themselves look good. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29: Made changes based on your points. What else needs addressing? EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 09:23, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- Not very many changes, and what you have done seems to have decreased the quality of the prose. I would suggest a rethink. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- Further changes to the prose have been made EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 09:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29: Have made more changes to the prose and have put the former names of the race into a note EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 20:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- Further changes to the prose have been made EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 09:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- Regreful oppose on lead prose quality, thus violating criteria 1) and 2). Half a dozen issues remain from the first pass, and the first paragraph has only gotten more convoluted and stilted since then, with repetition and trivia taking up space useful information could use. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:46, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29: I have made more changes to the article but am not sure whether they are improvements or not EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 19:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29: Have worked on the lead and removed much of the existing trivia EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 20:24, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not very many changes, and what you have done seems to have decreased the quality of the prose. I would suggest a rethink. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. You have colscopes for a few of the cells (Laps through KPH), but not the rest- add
!scope=col
to the other header cells as well. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 01:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
List of birds of Wallis and Futuna
Another Oceanian bird list, did this a while ago but nominating now. AryKun (talk) 08:30, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- The thing that's the hardest to get for my plant FLCs is the image review, so:
- Image review: the correct licenses are present, and I can't find any reason to distrust them (which is kind of what image reviewing comes down to). Correct coding (including alt text) is present, and image quality is good. They do a good job of illustrating the list. Pass.
- Please consider reviewing the very short List of Saxifragales families when it hits FLC (coming soon). Thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 02:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- Well ... I better not ask for help with a specific list because I don't know how fast things are going to move (if at all). If you're interested in reviewing any of these, keep an eye out for "List of ... families". - Dank (push to talk) 05:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
- Continuing:
- First: I'm really impressed. I think a lot of people don't understand how hard it is to condense biological descriptions this much, while still including critical details and the right amount of interesting details as well. Well done. Better than anything I could do, I think.
- There's no requirement to put this stuff in a table; that's up to your discretion, and personally, I think what you've got works fine without a table. But be aware that people generally only review what they feel comfortable with, and I've found that FLC reviewers are generaly more comfortable with tables.
- Most "List of birds by country" lists aren't in tables, since the checklist for birds for any country that isn't a small archipelago is hundreds of species and managing these in a table would be absolutely ridiculous. I guess the lists for the smaller countries could be changed to tables, but I'd like to maintain consistency across the lists.
- Makes sense. - Dank (push to talk) 15:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- Most "List of birds by country" lists aren't in tables, since the checklist for birds for any country that isn't a small archipelago is hundreds of species and managing these in a table would be absolutely ridiculous. I guess the lists for the smaller countries could be changed to tables, but I'd like to maintain consistency across the lists.
- "a unique mound or burrow nests": I'm sympathetic ... you don't want to devote a disproportionate amount of text to any one bird, and that can make it really difficult to make yourself understood. Having said that ... I didn't understand this at all, until I went to the article and saw "a unique strategy of egg incubation in which it relies on environmental heat sources". I think you need to say a little more here.
- Added some detail.
- "short thick but pointed bills": "short thick-but-pointed bills" would be better, but I think I prefer something like "short thick bills ending in a sharp point".
- Reworded.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss.
- 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
- 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
- 3b. The list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
- 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
- 4. It is navigable.
- 5. It meets style requirements. My image review is above.
- 6. It is stable.
- Close enough for a support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 03:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
List of Australia One Day International cricket records
- Nominator(s): – Ianblair23 (talk) 07:52, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi all, it has been a little while but I am to glad to present this list to you for review. Similar to the Australia Test and the England Test cricket records lists, the one is on the middle child of game – One Day Internationals. As always I look forward to your feedback. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 07:52, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- 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. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 01:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
List of UEFA European Championship winning managers
With the World Cup list gaining some support, I'm now nominating the equivalent list for the European Championships, the primary international tournament on the continent. NapHit (talk) 12:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Comments
- "Since then, no manager has won the title on more than one occasion" - that kinda reads like Kachalin did win it more than once. Just say "No manager has won the title on more than one occasion"
- "Schön, along with Vicente del Bosque, are the only managers" - not grammatically correct. Should be simply "Schön and Vicente del Bosque are the only managers"
- "Joachim Löw, along with Lars Lagerbäck, holds the record" - this makes it sound like Low somehow has the primary claim to the record and Lagerback is secondary. Just say "Joachim Löw and Lars Lagerbäck jointly hold the record"
- Image caption: "Helmut Schön of Germany (left) and Vicente del Bosque of Spain (middle) are the only two managers to have won the European Championships and the FIFA World Cup" - Championships has suddenly become plural whereas it's singular everywhere else
- Also image caption: "Roberto Mancini of Italy (right), is the most recent manager to have won the tournament." - no reason for that comma
- "and all winning managers have won it with their native countries, with the exception of German coach Otto Rehhagel leading Greece to victory in 2004" - the ref against the sentence does not confirm this. Similarly it's used as a source for the whole table but does not confirm the managers' nationalities
- The source states, "Otto Rehhagel is the only coach to have won a EURO with a foreign team..." which I would consider confirming the above. I can try and find another source if it's still an issue. The source does provide the nationalities for the managers, it lists them next to the manager in the list of winning coaches. I've added another ref that confirms the teams they managed. NapHit (talk) 19:35, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Presumably Slovakia is in the "by nationality" table because of Václav Ježek? But he was born in what is now Czech Republic, not Slovakia.
- Article states he was born in Zloven and clicking through to that article it says it's in central Slovakia. I was a bit conflicted with how to represent this though. I think it's standard practice to list current countries in the by nationality table and the countries they represented at the time in the by year table. NapHit (talk) 19:35, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments @ChrisTheDude:, I've addressed your comments and left a few points above for two of them. NapHit (talk) 19:35, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support - apologies, I misread Ježek's place of death as being his place of birth - d'oh! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support, really nice Idiosincrático (talk) 12:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi NapHit, please find my comments below:
- Lead
José Villalonga is the youngest manager
→ correct link José Villalonga
- Winning managers table
- 2016 row → correct link to Fernando Santos (footballer, born 1954)
- References
- Ref 8 → The BBC Sport articles cites that Villalonga was the youngest manager to win the European Cup / Champions League but does not state that specifically mention that he the youngest manager win the European Championship.
- That is referenced by ref 5 that precedes ref 8. I'm using the BBC link as it confirms he managed Spain during the tournament which I'm not sure the UEFA source explicitly states. NapHit (talk) 20:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Refs needs archive links per WP:DEADREF and works to be linked eg The New York Times
- Images
- All images are free to use and have alt text. All good
Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 01:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments @Ianblair23:, I've addressed them all with the exception of the links for works as I was always under the impression whether they were linked or not was down to personal preference. Is there a specific guideline that says this needs to be done? NapHit (talk) 20:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Support Can't find anything to critique, great list.--Newtothisedit (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Municipalities of Oaxaca
After a long pause, I'm continuing my goal to bring all lists of municipalities in North America up to a consistent, high standard. I tried to incorporate changes from previous nominations but I'm sure I've missed some and there can always be improvements. Thanks for your reviews! Mattximus (talk) 15:39, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Comments
- "more than any other state" - source?
- Added the link to census which has a button to see the number of municipalities per state.
- "although they may not currently function as per their intended purpose" - don't get this bit. Does the constitution say this? That they can't function as intended? Huh?
- This was added by Coyatoc who is more of an expert than I am, based on a spanish language text. I'm not sure if this user is still active but hopefully they will respond to this ping and provide a better answer than I can. They did try to explain it in the talk page. Mattximus (talk) 16:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- "It's the only entity" => "It is the only entity"
- Done
- "Merged with Miahuatlán in 1891-1942" - this would be better as "Merged with Miahuatlán from 1891 to 1942" (and same for all other such notes)
- This is another wording issue from the original text, it is perhaps not known which date the merger took place but somewhere between those dates? Otherwise I don't know why the source includes a range, will as Coyatoc about this as well.
- Think that's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
- "more than any other state" in Mexico? Or globally?
- clarified
- Why is the American date format used?
- "La Reforma" should sort with "R". Check the rest.
That's all I got. ~ HAL333 21:21, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Dank
- Your work on lists of municipalities (shown on your userpage) is exemplary. I don't understand how this one got stalled ... let's un-stall it if we can.
- Thanks!
- "although they may not currently function as per their intended purpose": I don't know what that means. How do they function, then? If you'd rather not say how at this point, then it would be better to omit this phrase here, and bring it up at the point where you want to explain it.
- This was added by Coyatoc who I'm certain can explain what this means however in their absence I will remove this phrase as I agree that it makes no sense without context.
- "It is the only entity in Mexico with this particular organization.": I don't know that that means. It's the only one with this many districts? With tax districts? With autonomous districts? With any districts at all?
- Clarified wording.
- "According to the 2020 Mexican Census, it is the tenth most populated state with 4,132,148 inhabitants": One option: "The 2020 Mexican Census reported it as the tenth most populated state, with 4,132,148 inhabitants." "recorded" or "listed" are possible ... present tense is also acceptable, but wouldn't be my choice.
- Changed wording to an active voice: "Oaxaca is the tenth most populated state with 4,132,148 inhabitants as of the 2020 Mexican census and the 5th largest by land area"
- Agreed with Chris about the "merged with" wording in some of the notes ... there are options, but the current wording doesn't work, for instance in "Yutanduchi merged with San Pedro Teozacalco in 1937-1955". It's not clear what that's trying to say. "some time between 1937 and 1955" might work ... but perhaps that needs some explanation.
- "tenth most ... 5th largest": Maybe there's a reason it's written this way, but I don't know why it's not "10th ... 5th" or "tenth ... fifth".
- Easy fix. Both written out as per MOS.
- "Municipalities in Oaxaca are administratively autonomous of the state according to the 115th article of the 1917 Constitution of Mexico.[5] Every three years, citizens elect ...": Just a suggestion ... the rest of the paragraph is clearer than the first sentence (and perhaps easier to back up with sources, I don't know). If I were writing it, I'd probaby just drop most of the first sentence, and start with something like "As established by the 115th article of the 1917 Constitution of Mexico, citizens elect ... every three years ...".
- I changed it to "have some administrative autonomy from the state". - Dank (push to talk) 04:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- "The largest municipality by population is Oaxaca City, with 270,955 residents (6.55% of the state's total), while the smallest is Santa Magdalena Jicotlán with 81 residents": Maybe "The census [you probably don't need "The 2020 census"] lists Oaxaca City as the largest municipality by population with 270,955 residents (6.55% of the state's total), while the smallest is". I think once you've established that this is what the census said, then it's not jarring to say "the smallest is" ... the readers will get what that means.
- I added "listed in the census". - Dank (push to talk) 04:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- Just made a little tweak here.
- I added "listed in the census". - Dank (push to talk) 04:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- That's most of what I saw. Again, fine work, on this one and all the others. - Dank (push to talk) 00:47, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- When I try to edit the page, I get "Script warning: One or more {{cite book}} templates have errors". I generally like to support as early in the process as I can, but I can't support with a template error ... see if you can find it. (One way to find which one it is: copy the references into userspace, and then toss them out one by one until you don't get the warning.) - Dank (push to talk) 01:34, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- Nevermind ... I fixed it. - Dank (push to talk) 03:41, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, all of that looks good. I've just got a few more tweaks to make; I don't see any barrier to supporting now. - Dank (push to talk) 04:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm aware there's been some disagreement over the captions in the gallery; I have a proposed solution, but it was a little too complicated to talk about it, so I just made the edit. Feel free to change or revert it ... but I think, if you revert my edit, you're going to continue to get pushback from reviewers until there's some kind of change to make it less wordy. I think it would be a good idea to at least keep the images in their own section, as I did, or create a subsection or draw a box around the images. After this edit, you probably don't need that "<onlyinclude>" code now, but I didn't remove it because I don't know what it's for. - Dank (push to talk) 17:31, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- Btw, I don't recommend this, but I wouldn't be offended if you want to add back "fifth largest" or something to the fifth image caption. (Actually, I'm not offended by anything at FLC! It's just FLC.) But if the first caption says "largest" and the fifth caption says "fifth largest", there's no reason (that I can think of) to add "second largest" etc. to the other captions, and lots of reasons not to. - Dank (push to talk) 18:40, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- This final form looks good to me, I'm not super attached to these captions, but it is the standard of the other lists, so I'm happy leaving this as is.
- Btw, I don't recommend this, but I wouldn't be offended if you want to add back "fifth largest" or something to the fifth image caption. (Actually, I'm not offended by anything at FLC! It's just FLC.) But if the first caption says "largest" and the fifth caption says "fifth largest", there's no reason (that I can think of) to add "second largest" etc. to the other captions, and lots of reasons not to. - Dank (push to talk) 18:40, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- Looking at the sort order in the second column, the only one that jumped out at me is Ixtepec, Oaxaca, with the official name "Ciudad Ixtepec". That should probably sort under "I" instead of "C".
- I agree for entries like "la reforma" should sort as "R" not "L", but I can't seem to get the syntax to work! I tried using data-sort-value="Reforma, La" which has worked in the past but I don't know why it isn't working here. Any ideas what I got wrong? Below you seem ok with it, and I am too, but another editor requested this change.
- The links I checked were all fine except for one: La Compañía is linking to a Chilean town. You might want to check some of the other links.
- I checked List of cities in Mexico and a few other places to try to figure out how to sort, for instance, La Compañía ... so far, everything I'm seeing points to sorting this under "L". Works for me, but if I'm wrong, let me know.
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table.
- 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
- 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
- 3b. The UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review, and I'll check back after a source review is done). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
- 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
- 4. It is navigable.
- 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
- 6. It is stable.
- Close enough for a support. Well done. You might have comments on my current FLC nomination ... it's shorter than my other lists, and even drive-by comments are welcome. - Dank (push to talk) 21:36, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude and HAL333: ... Mattximus and I have both done some work on this one, you might want to check back to see if these changes work for you. This one was stalled for a while, it looks like. - Dank (push to talk) 20:00, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- One change: I added "or create a subsection or draw a box around the images" above. - Dank (push to talk) 14:11, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
- Actually ... now that I'm not committed to any one solution, it's probably better for me to self-revert the "Images" section, so I did. I still recommend picking one or more of those options. - Dank (push to talk) 13:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- I just came across all your edits to this page and the rest of your comments, and I want to give you a big thank you, they are excellent. I might make a few tweaks but overall you've improved this list significantly. Please allow me some time to go through your remaining suggestions. Thanks again. I will try to review your list next. Mattximus (talk) 18:19, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ok I went through the comments, I think I've resolved or commented on everything. Please let me know if I missed anything! Thanks again!
- I think you'll get pushback some day on the captions with "second largest", "third largest", etc., but we can work on that another day. I just changed "merged" to "was merged" in 5 rows. The link to the disambiguation page (La Compañía) will probably get fixed soon. I haven't examined the sources; I'll check back in after that gets done in the source review. Otherwise, you're good to go! - Dank (push to talk) 19:20, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, you were asking about "data-sort" ... I used that a lot in, for instance, List of plant family names with etymologies ... check it out. - Dank (push to talk) 19:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
- And, thx for the offer to review, much appreciated. - Dank (push to talk) 17:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ok I went through the comments, I think I've resolved or commented on everything. Please let me know if I missed anything! Thanks again!
- I just came across all your edits to this page and the rest of your comments, and I want to give you a big thank you, they are excellent. I might make a few tweaks but overall you've improved this list significantly. Please allow me some time to go through your remaining suggestions. Thanks again. I will try to review your list next. Mattximus (talk) 18:19, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Morogris
- ...more than any other state in Mexico - I saw the source you added and it is one of those where you have to manually choose what data to pull. To facilitate fact-checking for absolute statements of fact, could we perhaps use another source that explicitly mentions this? This one from FENAMM seems reliable. No need to delete the source you already have. My suggestion is this second one would strengthen the statement.
- Agree with your suggestion, added the reference you mentioned, thanks!.
- Several of the sources you use (the PDF ones) have tens of dozens of pages, yet you only cite the source as standalone. Could you please specify which pages in specific you used for the statements it is citing? Ref #2 has 183 pages, Ref #3 has 381, etc. I'm particularly concerned with "Estado de Oaxaca División Territorial de 1810 a 1995 (PDF)", which you used heavily. Are most facts concentrated on a few pages or are they spread out through the entire 145 pages? I'm happy to help with adding the hyperlinks for multiple pages if you need assistance.
- Ref #3 should have the parameter via=Biblioteca Legislativa de la Cámara de Diputados.
- Done
- Mexico Company Laws and Regulations Handbook. International Business Publications. 2009. p. 42. ISBN 978-1-4330-7030-3. - Maybe it is me, but the source is broken on my end. I get an Error 404. Not a requirement to FA status but if you have an alternative link that would be nice.
- Date formats. I advise you fix the dates formats from "2021-01-27" (for example) to "January 27, 2021" for consistency. There are instances where you vary.
That is it for me. Amazing job putting this together! Morogris (✉ • ✎) 05:11, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Werner Herzog filmography
Many will recognize Werner Herzog as the secondary villain from The Mandalorian, but he is much, much more. A prolific filmmaker, he is unlike any other. Watch him analyze a nihilistic penguin and observe firefighters in Kuwait as an alien visitor would. Or watch him get shot and barely react. Viewed by about 300,000 people yearly, this list and Herzog himself deserve featured-level quality. Cheers ~ HAL333 20:33, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- I'm not experienced with image copyright issues, but I think at least an additional tag of some kind is needed for File:WERNER HERZOG star.jpg. Also, I can't tell for certain what's going on with the license for File:WernerAndGalen.jpg; has Lena Herzog contacted anyone about this image?
- "The Wild Blue Yonder" should sort under "Wild".
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table.
- 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
- 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
- 3b. The list is well-sourced to apparently reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
- 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
- 4. It is navigable.
- 5. It meets style requirements. Except as above, the images seem fine.
- 6. It is stable.
- And just for you, I'll add number 7: you might or might not want to take a look at my current FLC. :) - Dank (push to talk) 21:22, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Dank: I removed both of the images and added one new one with a better license. Thanks for the comments. ~ HAL333 02:58, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support. I see you put a lot of effort into this one, and it paid off. - Dank (push to talk) 03:04, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Dank: I removed both of the images and added one new one with a better license. Thanks for the comments. ~ HAL333 02:58, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support. A great list, well-researched and well-written. I checked the formatting details and all looks fine. Excellent work! --Tone 09:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Kingsif
A nice looking list, my only comments are:
- I think the refs could be improved. I'll take Letterboxd as a good source and that was my only concern there, but I mean in terms of the parameters. Could archive links be introduced; could wikilinks be introduced for the works (RogerEbert.com, Empire, etc.) as well as some authors (Roger Ebert, A. O. Scott, Peter Bradshaw at first glance, there's probably others); where it seems a film is being sourced to the work itself, I assume it is being sourced to an online directory, could this be made clearer?
- Sorry, but I'll have to push back on all of these. I really dislike work and author links (except for books). Although they technically aren't, I regard them as duplicate links and of dubious help -- as a reader I never clicked on them. I don't really know what I can do for the sources with titles identical to the films. FLC reviewers were fine with them on all of my previous filmographies. However, I am a stickler for archiving refs but the archive bot isn't working for me.... which is very annoying. ~ HAL333 17:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- You have a separate "works cited" section, which is fine, I just wonder that due to the number of Rotten Tomatoes and Letterboxd citations, it might be simpler to just add the Herzog RT and Letterboxd filmographies to this section? I'd also like some clarity on what Prager is being generally cited for, or if it is just that one citation (at which point, for consistency in ref formatting, the "works cited" needs to go and the Prager ref needs to be made a citation like the rest).
- Based on the notes for the fiction short films table, would it be worth adding editor and sound columns, and checking them off like D/W/P?
- Good point. Done.
- The documentary short films table has the note "As himself" for Portrait Werner Herzog; this is presumably referring to his narration role? If so, can there be a note added for the other works marked as narration, as to whether he is narrating as himself or a character. If not referring to his narration role, there needs to be some better description - perhaps archive footage of Herzog is what you're referring to?
- For the 2000 Years of Christianity entry, I think "of" should take the lowercase "o". Also, episode titles are typically in quotation marks and not italic. (i.e.
"Christ and Demons in New Spain"
)
- Done
- Lowercase "e" for the "episodes" of the On Death Row entry
- Done
- Similar to the "As himself" comment above: the other work, film table has five actor entries with the note "As himself", and one "Cameo" - we must assume that the other 15 actor/narrator roles are not as himself and not cameos, but we should know what they are (character names? Should also get a character for the cameo, too) if possible
- Ditto for the other work, television table - what are Herzog's characters for the four shows this goes unnoted. And are there any notes for Parks and Rec?
List of Kentucky Wildcats men's basketball head coaches
- Nominator(s): Newtothisedit (talk) 05:48, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Kentucky has had 5 different coaches win national championships, the most of any college basketball program. I have improved this list to (hopefully) match the excellence of the coaches that have led Big Blue Nation. This article is modeled on List of North Carolina Tar Heels men's basketball head coaches, with a few improvements such as link fixes and the removal of defunct and/or minor coaching awards in an attempt to limit the page size. I look forward to any improvements you may have! Note: I have another FLC however said list has support already, all existing comments have been addressed and no new comments have been made in two months. Newtothisedit (talk) 05:48, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Comments
- Probably should mention somewhere that the team relates to the University of Kentucky
- "In 1921 they would join" - why not just "In 1921 they joined"
- "11 years later" - always better not to start a sentence with a number written in digits if possible
- " from the program's inaugural 1903–1904 season to the current year, 2022–23" - any reason why the formats of the two seasons are different?
- "a retroactive national championships" - a (singular) championships (plural) doesn't sound right to me, unless it's an Americanism of which I am not aware......?
- "Eklund is the teams all-time leader" => "Eklund is the team's all-time leader"
- "he has had held" - grammar's a bit mangled here
- Names of coaches in the table should sort based on surname, not forename
- Image captions which are complete sentences need a full stop (currently some have one but some don't)
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:23, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Resolved all comments--Newtothisedit (talk) 16:56, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:17, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- These apply to both the 'key' tables and the main one:
- 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. - Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! Name
becomes!scope=col | Name
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. - 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.| align="center" | {{nts|1}}
becomes!scope=row align="center" | {{nts|1}}
. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use!scope=rowgroup
instead. - Something is messed up with the images on the side- for me there's the key tables with white space next to them, then the line of images with a huge white space on the left of them, then the table. At no resolution can I get the images to be next to either table.
- Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 18:06, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- I believe I have fixed all of the issues present Newtothisedit (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Snooker world rankings 1979/1980
- Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 17:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I am nominating this as a featured list in the hope that it will join its three predecessors with the status. The list itself is fairly straightforward (although its lower reaches are shrouded in mystery), and I've tried to summarise the near-farcial changes to rankings and seedings proposed and reverted by the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association. Thanks for all improvement suggestions. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 17:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Comments
- "the WPBSA voted to seed only two players into the last 16" - seeding them "into" the last 16 makes it sound like they got a bye to that round, is that the case? If so, that isn't my understanding of what seeding usually means......
- "and the players ranked nine to 16 would each be seeded the first round" - should that be "and the players ranked nine to 16 would each be seeded in the first round".....?
- Think that's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Many thanks, ChrisTheDude. I've reworded, to hopefully make it clear that the players were exempted to certain rounds; let me know if it needs further work. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:44, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Comments by Lee Vilenski
I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.
- Lede
- Before this, the defending champion was seeded first, and the previous year's runner-up second, for each tournament.[1][2][3 - maybe flip to "before this, for each tournament the defe..." As it reads a bit easier to me. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Changed. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- Players' performances in the previous three World Snooker Championships (1977, 1978 and 1979) - we've gone from speaking about 1977, we should prefix this para that we are talking about 79/80. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- Professional Snooker Association - is a link appropriate? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- Potentially, but such an article would be close to a permastub. Seems to have been a fairly short-lived thing, which wasn't heard of after leading players got their way. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- were exempted - such a weird word for recieving a bye. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- I hadn't really thought about it before, but to me a bye seems to be about a specific round, when there aren't enough players to fill all the slots. The Guardian source used has "the traditional eight exemptions ... revised the number of exemption to 16, number 1-8 to have byes and numbers 9-16 to meet eight qualifiers in the first round". I looked for other examples of "exemption", and found a few, e.g. "[Hallet was] exempted until the seventh qualifying round of the world championship" (The Guardian, 21 Jan 1997, p.22); "This year the top 16 'world ranked players, from an entry of 103, are exempted until the Sheffield stage" (The Daily Telegraph, 17 January 1985, p.33); "he succumbed to Rosa, whose world ranking of 119 exempted him to the ninth round" (The Independent, January 11, 1998). So I think I prefer to keep the current text, but could easily be persuaded otherwise. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- Prose
- The table seems wierdly sorted - what makes certainly players higher than others for when they are the same points? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's a mystery. It would seem logical to sort players on the same number of points based on their most recent performances, but this doesn't look to be the case for the ordering of Spencer and Thorburn, for example. No further details in sources as far as I'm aware. (In later years, of course, it got much more complicated, with merit points, half-points, A points, and frames won taken into account.) BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- Why do we have a player who didn't play in any of the three events (in 24 and 26)? Also, why are they above players who did take part? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's a mystery. Snooker Scene only listed players with points, so I have no idea where Turner would have got the details for lower places from. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- The succession box is in a weird place. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- this has been the case for earlier season articles, following a comment that "I've never seen an article where a "preceded by/succeeded by" template was placed centrally at the top, it looks odd to me. I would put it at the bottom as is by far the norm." at the 1976/1977 discussion - or is the issue that I've placed it oddly in a different way? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- Additional comments
Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:21, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Wild edible plants of Israel and Palestine
This article is about Food and drink.Davidbena (talk) 02:11, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- I haven't the time to do a full review at the moment, but I was struck by the title, and had a couple of questions. First, would it not be more usual to take this to FLC? Second, what is the precise geographical scope here? Your lead links to Land of Israel and Palestine (region), which are distinct and also not precisely defined. Is the scope a specific administrative unit? Or a biologically coherent region? Vanamonde (Talk) 02:45, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, The Land of Israel (broadly construed) is the exact same geographical region known as Palestine (region). The use of one term over the other has more to do with era, or time-frame, in which the country is mentioned. The scope of the country stretches from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, that is to say, width-wise. Lengthwise, it stretches from Upper Galilee and the Golan to the Negev. We're not talking here about modern political boundaries, but rather of an ancient, geographically-known area, straddling between Syria and Lebanon in the north, to Egypt in the south. Another reason why we mention both names (Palestine / Israel) is because an author writing during Ottoman control over Palestine in the early 1900s, and who describes the edible plants of the country, does so by calling the country Palestine. Other authors of the 21st century who describe these edible plants will often refer to the country as Israel. Still, it is one and the same country.
- Is there anyone here who wishes to review the page submitted to FLC?Davidbena (talk) 21:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Drive-by comments (semi-source review) from PanagiotisZois
Interesting article. Hopefully I'll have more time to read through it in the near-future. I made a small change in one of your sources. To make the sourcing easier, I recommend you do the same thing with all your sources using this "template": [1]. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- ^ Author's Name & Year of Publication, p. X or pages=XX.
Also, I have to ask. Is there a specific reason as to why the Arabic names of these edible plants are present? And alongside that, why is it Arabic and not Hebrew? I'm not implying that it should use the Hebrew names rather than the Arabic ones, but if you're going to include one, it'd make sense to also include the other. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:48, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- The simple reason why we have used the Arabic names instead of the Hebrew names is because the Arabic names used for most of these plants are names that have been used for hundreds of years, in most places, whereas the Hebrew names, for the most part, are only Modern Hebrew names invented by botanists in the last 70 years or so. In fact, the Old Hebrew names used for most of these plants are no longer known, as we have no ancient recorded history for the names of the vast majority of these plants (save for the common plants named in the Hebrew Bible and in the Mishnah, such as for barley, lettuce, asparagus, wild cress, etc.). Another reason is because the Arabic names have actually been used by Israeli botanists to help identify certain plants merely described in ancient Jewish writings, since Arabic is a cognate language of Hebrew. That is to say, medieval Jewish commentators often will write the Arabic name when explaining to their readers the identification of a certain plant mentioned in 2nd-century Hebrew manuscripts, and which modern-day botanists quickly make note of. A third reason is because all the Hebrew sources cited in this article mention the Arabic names for these plants, alongside their Modern Hebrew name. A fourth reason is because the other non-Jewish sources used in this article, particularly Gustaf Dalman who investigated these plants in Palestine, only mention their Arabic names.Davidbena (talk) 02:58, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- All right, that makes sense. I would make one recommendation; given the inclusion of the Arabic names, there should be a separate column just for them. Probably between the "Common name" and "Observations" columns, because the way the Arabic names are placed within a parenthesis in the "Observations" section look a bit off. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Comments about the use of the slash
I have opened an RM because of concerns that this article, including its title, fails MOS:/. Israel / Palestine is ambiguous and most likely means Israel and Palestine. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- By a consensus, the article's name has already been changed to: "Wild edible plants of Israel and Palestine." @Vanamonde93:, if you can find the time to make a complete review of the page and suggest ways to improve the article, I will do my best to comply to your suggestions.Davidbena (talk) 21:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- 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. - Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! Species
becomes!scope=col | Species
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. - 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.| ''[[Aizoon canariense]]''
becomes!scope=row | ''[[Aizoon canariense]]''
. 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. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 01:25, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- @PresN:, Thanks. I will try and work on all these improvements at the first available opportunity. At my first try, I was unsuccessful in using that template. I must be doing something wrong, so I will just read the instructions in MOS:DTAB. If I should have any questions, I'll get back to you.Davidbena (talk) 08:54, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- @PresN: I read the MOS:DTAB instructions and, while it made matters a little easier for me to understand, I am still not 100% certain that I am doing things correctly. Meanwhile, to the best of my ability, I have used the prescribed format for the first 23 entries in the list of "Herbs, grasses, fungi and shrubs." I'd appreciate it if you could just check for a moment to see that I'm doing things correctly before I should proceed further on, and if I should be doing something differently, how I should proceed. Thanks!Davidbena (talk) 10:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Dudley
- A lot of work has obviously gone into this article, but according to tehcnical Wikipedia criteria it looks a long way from being of FLC standard. 1. There are many unreferenced statements. They should all be referenced. 2. The criteria for inclusion are not stated. Presuambly a full list would not be possible, but are they the ones in a particular source or ones selected by the nominator? 3. The 'Further reading' section should be after the bibliography. 4. Ref 31 has an error message 'Cite journal requires |journal=' 5. All or almost all sources have an error message of the form 'Harv warning: There is no link pointing to this citation. The anchor is named CITEREFKrispil2000.' You can suppress this by adding a field "|ref = none". (This stops it searching for a non-existent harv ref). 6. See Template:Cite book for a list of available fields. You can use orig-year instead of putting the original publication of Zohary outside the template. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:46, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- I have begun to work on some of these problems, to fix them.Davidbena (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Dudley Miles: With respect to your instruction to add the field "|ref= none", I was uncertain where exactly it should be added. I added the field to the "Bibliography" section, after the uppermost template {{refbegin|30em|ref= none}}, but I am still uncertain if I did the right thing. As a precaution, I also added the field after the sources named for Krispil. Should I go through all the sources and do the same? Please advise.Davidbena (talk) 13:52, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- I am afraid it has to be added to each source, e.g. * {{cite book|last1=Amar|first1=Z.|author-link1=Zohar Amar|last2=Serri|first2=Yaron|year=2004|title=The Land of Israel and Syria as Described by al-Tamimi – Jerusalem Physician of the 10th Century|location=Ramat-Gan|language=he|isbn=965-226-252-8 |oclc=607157392|ref=none}}. Dudley Miles (talk) 23:56, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! I'll do that now.Davidbena (talk) 02:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
DoneDavidbena (talk) 02:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ref 8 now has an error message. That is because it is the one harv ref and 'ref=none' stops it connecting to the source. I realise now that you got all the error messages because you had one harv ref and if there is one the bot looks for harv refs on all citations. If there had been no harv refs there would have been no error messages. I hope this is clear. The easiest way of dealing with the problem is probably to convert ref 8 to a non-harv ref (which would also make all the ref=none fields unnecessary). Dudley Miles (talk) 10:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- I am afraid it has to be added to each source, e.g. * {{cite book|last1=Amar|first1=Z.|author-link1=Zohar Amar|last2=Serri|first2=Yaron|year=2004|title=The Land of Israel and Syria as Described by al-Tamimi – Jerusalem Physician of the 10th Century|location=Ramat-Gan|language=he|isbn=965-226-252-8 |oclc=607157392|ref=none}}. Dudley Miles (talk) 23:56, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
List of Lebanon international footballers born outside Lebanon
With more Lebanese living outside of Lebanon than inside, the national football team has reflected this statistic by increasingly using more foreign-born players in their roster. From the Armenian diaspora to today, I managed to gather quite a bit of interesing information. Nehme1499 00:12, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- 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. - Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.!Country of birth [...]
becomes!scope=col | Country of birth
, with each header cell on its own wikitext line. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. - 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.|{{BRA}}
becomes!scope=row |{{BRA}}
, again with the header cells on their 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. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 16:54, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @PresN: Thanks for the review, I think I've taken care of everything (dif). Nehme1499 20:43, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
Comments
- "At the 2000 AFC Asian Cup, the LFA naturalised" - I doubt they did this literally at the tournament
- "as of 2021, Lebanon is" - 2021 will soon be two years ago, so better to say "was"
- "Armenian player Vardan Ghazaryan was the Lebanon national team's leading goalscorer" - full stop missing
- "After Homenetmen and Homenmen were relegated to the lower divisions in the early 2000s, Armenian presence in the national team fell" => "After Homenetmen and Homenmen were relegated to the lower divisions in the early 2000s, he Armenian presence in the national team fell"
- No need to link Lebanese diaspora twice in consecutive sentences
- "This is a list of football players" - don't bold that last part
- I think it would add to the article if the number of caps and goals was shown against each player, rather than it just being a list of names
- I could do that, though how do you suggest formatting it? Nehme1499 16:02, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'd suggest a fairly simple table of country > player name > caps > goals. Maybe date range of international career? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:24, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Done. Do you think the two tables should be kept under a single subheading? Nehme1499 17:42, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- I think it looks OK right now. One point, though - the list of players should sort based on surname, not forename -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Done. Nehme1499 00:44, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- I think it looks OK right now. One point, though - the list of players should sort based on surname, not forename -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Done. Do you think the two tables should be kept under a single subheading? Nehme1499 17:42, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'd suggest a fairly simple table of country > player name > caps > goals. Maybe date range of international career? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:24, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- I could do that, though how do you suggest formatting it? Nehme1499 16:02, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- That's what I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:57, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thanks for the review! I've taken care of everything (bar the caps+goals request). Nehme1499 16:02, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- One final thing - now that the caps and goals figures have been added to the first table, the figure for Antar is different to both the second table and his image caption.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Hmm, not sure how that slipped through. I've fixed that as well. Nehme1499 11:30, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:39, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Nehme1499. I was just wondering if it be more factually in tune to list the Armenian players as being born in the Soviet Union instead of the Republic of Armenia, and instead note something like... "Apart of present day
Armenia" or "Born in the
Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic, in present day
Armenia." I just think this because it lists 'country of birth', and these players were born in the Soviet Union. Just a consequence of the 'Empire like' nature of the Union. Feel free to disagree as its just my opinion, but either way I support as its a good list :) Idiosincrático (talk) 03:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Esmée Denters discography
This is the discography of Esmée Denters, who came to prominence after posting song covers on YouTube. After working on this discography for a few months, I believe it is now up to FL standards. Looking forward to your comments! Sebbirrrr (talk) 20:30, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Comments
- "who signed her with his record label" => "who signed her to his record label"
- "The song received a gold certification in New Zealand and a silver one in the United Kingdom" => "The song was certified gold in New Zealand and silver in the United Kingdom"
- "She was also a featuring artist" => "She was also a featured artist"
- "Under the mononym Esmée, 3 Beat Records released in the same year her single "It's Summer Because We Say So"" = > "In the same year, 3 Beat Records released her single "It's Summer Because We Say So", credited under the mononym Esmée"
- Think that's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:11, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thanks for reviewing! I believe I addressed everything. Sebbirrrr (talk) 15:27, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:10, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
EN-Jungwon
Basshunter videography
- Nominator(s): Eurohunter (talk) 18:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Basshunter videograhy was previously nominated after successful nomination of Basshunter discography. It previously passed GOCE. Structure is after similar featured lists. Since previous nomination a lot of primary sources to YouTube were replaced with a secondary sources. Eurohunter (talk) 18:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Comments from PresN
- Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! width="230" rowspan="2"| Title
becomes!scope=col width="230" rowspan="2"| Title
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. Right now you have on for the "Peak chart positions" cell, but none of the others - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 15:42, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @PresN: Thanks. Added
scope="col"
.Done Eurohunter (talk) 16:52, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @PresN: Thanks. Added
Comments by FrB.TG
- "Series of music videos with Aylar Lie received media attention" - when were these released and why did they receive media attention?
Comment: Mainly 2008-2009. Music videos received media attention due to she was a model and music videos had commercial success like high number of views. Eurohunter (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- "Basshunter has appeared in television, including involvement in the ninth episode" - "involvement" is redundant.
Done. Removed: "Basshunter has appeared in television, including the ninth episode (...)". Eurohunter (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- "a Rock and Pop episode of Weakest Link." - what's a "Rock and Pop" episode?
Done. It was episode attended by celebrities. "attended by celebrities" added at the end. Eurohunter (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- "Rendition shows a Basshunter singing about playing Dota 2" - which rendition are we talking about?
Done. It was supposed to mean trailer Basshunter Dota Revival. I have changed it to "Trailer shows a Basshunter singing about playing Dota 2 (...)". Eurohunter (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- What makes CelebMix a high-quality reliable source? Zickma?
Comment:. Zickma was just added to replace reference to YouTube music video uploaded officially by artist so there is published news than just original source. Zickma is a French media website and has few thousands of followers on Facebook and Twitter and it exists atleast since 2012. They has own editors. British CelebMix was established in 2015 and as non-profit organisation is widely used as reference in ENWP and not only [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. It has dozen thousands followers in social media and its Twitter profile was verified. Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin. According to Linkedin Jason Warner from CelebMix works also for BBC. They has its own editors like Jonathan Currinn, Randy Radic, Toby Bryant, Kelly McFarland, Philip Logan or Emily Severn. Eurohunter (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- The number of followers of a website doesn't determine their reliability (Daily Mail has over 16m followers on Facebook and it is one of the worst sources you can use on Wikipedia). Nor does its usage in other Wikipedias or articles, see WP:OSE. What does make a source reliable is if they have a proper fact-checking process, are owned by a reputable publication or are mentioned in news articles that say the website is noteworthy/reliable. FrB.TG (talk) 08:05, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- 1. @FrB.TG: How to determine if Retuers, BBC, CNN or The Guardian has a proper fact-checking process? Seems to not be easy in case of The Guardian as there is no obvious confirmation. How to find news articles that say the website is noteworthy/reliable? Do such articles even exist? Probably I can remember such articles but they are random. There is no articles about every reliable news media. Eurohunter (talk) 10:50, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- 2. These published articles were added to support original references. For example Apple Music, Spotify or Netflix releases etc. so I added Zickma and CelebMix to include published article with link to Apple Music release insteaad of just pure link to Apple Music release. Eurohunter (talk) 10:50, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- 1. Reuters, BBC, CNN etc. are well-established, reputed publications and their reliability has been discussed in great details on Wikipedia, see their listings at WP:RSP. For such sources, it is very easy to find other third-party sources confirming their reputability (e.g. see Irish Independent saying "Reuters is a reputable agency and rarely gets these things wrong").
- 2. The point of third-party sources mentioning the music video is to establish its notability but if the sources in question are not reliable to begin with, you are better off sticking with the YouTube links for such videos. FrB.TG (talk) 20:22, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- I replaced Zickma with YouTube for now. Eurohunter (talk) 17:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I still stand by my statement that CelebMix is an unreliable source. For starters, they don't even have an "About us" page where one puts basic information like what the website does, when it was founded and how they gather their information. FrB.TG (talk) 09:21, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Done. References to CelebMix were removed. @FrB.TG: Eurohunter (talk) 20:43, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I still stand by my statement that CelebMix is an unreliable source. For starters, they don't even have an "About us" page where one puts basic information like what the website does, when it was founded and how they gather their information. FrB.TG (talk) 09:21, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
- I replaced Zickma with YouTube for now. Eurohunter (talk) 17:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- The number of followers of a website doesn't determine their reliability (Daily Mail has over 16m followers on Facebook and it is one of the worst sources you can use on Wikipedia). Nor does its usage in other Wikipedias or articles, see WP:OSE. What does make a source reliable is if they have a proper fact-checking process, are owned by a reputable publication or are mentioned in news articles that say the website is noteworthy/reliable. FrB.TG (talk) 08:05, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Ping me once these concerns are addressed. FrB.TG (talk) 21:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- @FrB.TG: Your comments have been taken into account. I need further comments from you, regarding the above points. Eurohunter (talk) 21:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments by ChrisTheDude
- What the heck is a "second version"?
Comment: If you release music video for a track - it's music video. If you release the second music video for the same track - this is the second version or? Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- It's still a music video. Not sure there's any need to separate them out -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- "17 music videos [....] two remix videos" - videos for remixes are still music videos, I see no reason to mention them separately?
Comment: It's kind of release so that's why they are included. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- It's still a music video. Not sure there's any need to separate them out -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- "Basshunter released the music video for "Every Morning" and "I Promised Myself"" => "Basshunter released the music videos for "Every Morning" and "I Promised Myself""
Done Changed to "Basshunter released the music videos for "Every Morning" and "I Promised Myself"". Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Comment: Constructions such as "Michael Jackson released", "Alan Walker released" or "Basshunter released" actually sounds like he released them personally (self-release) but these videos were released by music label. I don't know if it's characteristics of English or a widespread error that no one pays attention to. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- "A series of music videos with Aylar Lie received media attention" - when? Any why?
Comment: Mainly 2008-2009. Music videos received media attention due to she was a model and music videos had commercial success like high number of views. Eurohunter (talk) 11:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Then say that in the article -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- ""Now You're Gone" became the most-viewed from the British YouTube videos in 2008" - what does this mean? It wasn't a British video if he is Swedish
Comment: Yes but it was uploaded to channel of Hard2BeatRecords which was British label and due to was classified as British video. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- "He appeared on Maspalomas Pride 2012 box-set" => "He appeared on the Maspalomas Pride 2012 box-set"
Done Added "the". Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- "Basshunter has appeared in television" - in English you appear on television, not in it
Done Changed "in television" to "on television". Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- "a Rock and Pop episode of Weakest Link attended by celebrities" - not good English at all. Just say "a Rock and Pop celebrity episode of Weakest Link"
Done Great idea. Added "a Rock and Pop celebrity episode of Weakest Link". Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- "In 2021 he appeared in Basshunter Dota Revival Netflix's trailer for Dota: Dragon's Blood." => "In 2021 he appeared in Basshunter Dota Revival, Netflix's trailer for Dota: Dragon's Blood."
Done Added coma after Basshunter Dota Revival. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Why does the table say the director for the DotA video is unknown? The footnote says who it was
Comment: Luna Square is a company credited as director but this is field for directors (persons). Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- "Music video for "Melody" was assembled by Farbod Khoshtinat" - what does this mean? How do you "assemble" a music video?
Comment: It's actually credited as "assembled by". This music video consist of unspecified number of short videos which were edited. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- "Special version of album released in New Zealand and Poland contains DVD with nine Basshunter music videos." - this doesn't need a full stop
Comment: I don't think so. In this case it's standard sentence which should end with full stop. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- "Box set contains live recordings of various artists." - this also doesn't need a full stop
Comment: Same case as above. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Note f - "Also censored version of "Dream on the Dancefloor" music video was released (uncredited)." should be "Censored version of "Dream on the Dancefloor" music video was also released (uncredited)."
Done Changed to "Censored version of "Dream on the Dancefloor" music video was also released (uncredited).". Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Same with the note g
Done Changed in both cases. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- In those last two, what does "(uncredited)" mean?
Comment: The censored version doesn't appear in the description or title, just like in cases of film credits where actor appears in film but is not mentioned in credits. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:10, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thanks for your review. Your comments have been taken into account. Further comments on the above points are required. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: What do you think? Eurohunter (talk) 14:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thanks for your review. Your comments have been taken into account. Further comments on the above points are required. Eurohunter (talk) 11:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Rita Ora discography
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets criteria and is well written as well as reliable. I'm looking forward to the comments. Iaof2017 (talk) 12:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Drive-by comment
- Why does a table which claims to show "List of other charted songs, with selected chart positions" include songs which did not chart....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:29, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
- My mistake, fixed.
Done Iaof2017 (talk) 19:22, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
- How is this article even being considered for a featured list in its current state?! ChrisTheDude, please review the quality of the previous version of this article and the version that laof2017 is pushing after basically ruining parts of the article. I'll list some of the issues. The lead section is now filled with unnecessary information and strange wording. The user arbitrarily removed the Dutch chart and certification from the albums section, and randomly added a Japan chart. In the extended plays section, the exact chart (the Dance/Electronic Albums chart) on which an EP charted was removed and BB 200 was added instead. In the singles section, the user split the singles into decades, as if her career was spanning 30 years. In the newly formed 2010s singles section, an 11th chart was added, the CIS one and the user even added positions such as 245 and 710. Since the discography was unnecessarily split into two parts, the user removed three charts from the "2020s" section. The user then reduced the featured singles charts as well, reducing them to seven, despite one of the singles listed charting on all ten of the previous charts. The user also inexplicably removed the "Latin" part from a US certification. The user then also removed charts from the "promotional singles" and "other charted songs" (which is now renamed as just "other songs"), and added new charts and new songs. The section "other appearances" was completely removed. The user added FALSE chart positions for "After the Afterparty", completely ignoring the fact that the version of the song that Ora featured on was just a remix that didn't chart anywhere.--Helptottt (talk) 22:25, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: In regards to this, you may wish to peruse the article history (it is currently fully protected) and the ANI (permalink) which resulted in two editors being blocked as socks. Black Kite (talk) 07:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- To add to my initial reply, only the lead section of this article required a more detailed editing, but certainly not in the way it was done. Re: the charts, only the Scottish chart was supposed to be removed since it doesn't exist anymore. All the other removals and additions in the charts sections look ridiculous. The user laof2017 has pretty much debased this article. Helptottt (talk) 12:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: In regards to this, you may wish to peruse the article history (it is currently fully protected) and the ANI (permalink) which resulted in two editors being blocked as socks. Black Kite (talk) 07:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- How is this article even being considered for a featured list in its current state?! ChrisTheDude, please review the quality of the previous version of this article and the version that laof2017 is pushing after basically ruining parts of the article. I'll list some of the issues. The lead section is now filled with unnecessary information and strange wording. The user arbitrarily removed the Dutch chart and certification from the albums section, and randomly added a Japan chart. In the extended plays section, the exact chart (the Dance/Electronic Albums chart) on which an EP charted was removed and BB 200 was added instead. In the singles section, the user split the singles into decades, as if her career was spanning 30 years. In the newly formed 2010s singles section, an 11th chart was added, the CIS one and the user even added positions such as 245 and 710. Since the discography was unnecessarily split into two parts, the user removed three charts from the "2020s" section. The user then reduced the featured singles charts as well, reducing them to seven, despite one of the singles listed charting on all ten of the previous charts. The user also inexplicably removed the "Latin" part from a US certification. The user then also removed charts from the "promotional singles" and "other charted songs" (which is now renamed as just "other songs"), and added new charts and new songs. The section "other appearances" was completely removed. The user added FALSE chart positions for "After the Afterparty", completely ignoring the fact that the version of the song that Ora featured on was just a remix that didn't chart anywhere.--Helptottt (talk) 22:25, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
- My mistake, fixed.
- Helptottt join the ongoing discussion. It's getting annoying, enough! Iaof2017 (talk) 13:43, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- Further comments
- "In February 2012, Ora began her career" - according to our article on her, her career began as early as 2008
- All charts should be linked in each table, not just the first one
- I would lose the Scottish charts, as Scotland is part of the UK and you already have the UK charts. It would be like showing the charts for the US and also for Texas.
- Songs in the "promotional singles" and "other songs" tables which did not chart need sources to confirm they exist
- There are singles listed in the template at the bottom which don't seem to be included anywhere on this discography.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:27, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- The column scopes are close but not quite right; every column header cell needs the
!scope=col
, including the album chart ones, so e.g.! style="width:3em; font-size:85%;" | [[UK Albums Chart|{{abbr|UK|United Kingdom}}]]...
becomes!scope=col style="width:3em; font-size:85%;" | [[UK Albums Chart|{{abbr|UK|United Kingdom}}]]...
. For the cell that spans multiple columns with a colspan, use!scope=colgroup
instead. Repeat for all tables. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 00:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Songwriting credits
She is not solely writer of "Invisible Girl", I don't know about "Shy". Eurohunter (talk) 11:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Iaof2017: I forgot to ping you. Eurohunter (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments from PerfectSoundWhatever
Resolved comments
|
---|
Sorry if I say / do anything stupid— I have little experience with quality content reviews :).
That's what I've got for now! — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 02:31, 25 November 2022 (UTC) |
- Thank you @PerfectSoundWhatever:! Iaof2017 (talk) 12:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
- Had another look, and did some prose edits for things I may have misunderstood the first time. Hope you don't mind. Can now Support on prose :) — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 17:41, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you @PerfectSoundWhatever:! Iaof2017 (talk) 12:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Drive-by comments
- "English singer and songwriter" I would stick with only "English singer" as Ora doesn't seem to be known for writing songs.
- Looking at this version, why were the US Dance peak for "Bang Bang" and the other appearances section removed?
- You don't need to have a ref for every single/song that has an article. The refs for the other charted songs seem to be redundant as well. Sebbirrrr (talk) 21:22, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Context
Since nomination, the article has undergone this all-out battle. I do not know whether a comprehensive edit war during nomination, albeit a month in the past, would lessen the article's chances of promotion. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- As long as Helptottt continues to occasionally edit this page, and considering their past of having heated disagreements with Iaof2017 (Jakubik.v included), I don't support this becoming a featured article until we have some assurance from both sides that this edit war/"I have more right to edit this page in accordance with the FLC" or whatever it is will not continue. Ss112 11:18, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- As Helptottt has just pointed this silent revert out again, I want to make it clear I definitely don't support this becoming a featured list when this continues to happen without explanation. Iaof2017, I hope you realise this is not acceptable and an editor does not own an article just because they're trying to make it a featured one. Unless you are reverting vandalism (which you were not) or the context of your edits is very clear, you should always explain yourself in reverts, manual or otherwise. Even if an article does become featured, other editors are allowed to contribute and improve it. You are supposed to be working in collaboration with editors, not repeatedly reverting them without explanation, especially during the FLC process. You will not succeed in this becoming featured if you continue to edit war. Ss112 02:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments by FrB.TG
- "Four of Ora's singles have reached number one on the UK Singles Chart, while 13 of her singles have reached the top 10" - while is ambiguous. Did they reach the top at the same time when the four singles topped the Singles Chart? If not, I suggest just opting for and.
- "The album reached number one" - the link to "number one" is a little too WP:EASTEREGG-y. I thought it would link to number one. Suggest extending the link to "reached".
- "Of the four singles from the album, "How We Do (Party)" (2012) and "R.I.P." (2012) reached number one on the UK Singles Chart, while "Shine Ya Light" (2012) and "Radioactive" (2013) reached the top 10 and top 20 on the chart, respectively." See my point above about "while".
- "Five singles preceded the album, "Your Song" (2017), "Anywhere" (2017), "For You" (2018), "Let You Love Me" (2018) and "Only Want You" (2018), with four of them reaching the top 10 on the UK Singles Chart." Maybe specify which four they were. Perhaps just leaving out the non-top-10 single; something like "Five singles preceded the album, including the UK top 10..."
- What makes Zobbel a high-quality reliable source? AuspOp?
Ping me once these are addressed. 21:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- If Auspop, an Australian music news website, is found to not be considered "high quality" or "reliable", then the peaks can very easily be attributed to the specific issue of the ARIA Report itself. Ss112 07:22, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
The editing disagreement/discussion seems to have died down, but FrB.TG's comments have gone unaddressed for over a month. @Iaof2017: are you still pursuing this nomination? --PresN 01:31, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Nominations for removal
List of Black Mirror episodes
- Notified: Bilorv, WikiProject Science Fiction, WikiProject Television
This was about to run as Today's Featured List on the mainpage. Three days ago, the following was posted at Errors, with the part in quotation marks from the TFL blurb (which in turn is taken from the article's lead): "Episodes vary in length between 41 and 89 minutes and can be watched in any order" There are three sources cited for this in the article. This one from 2016 supports that a season 3 episode was the longest to that point at 89 minutes, but what about season 4 and 5? Where is the shortest episode length sourced?
Lack of Wikipedia:Verifiability is of course an issue. As this didn't get resolved through Errors, I've pulled it and are thus nominating it for featured list removal. Hopefully, it will be easy to provide sources for those claims. Schwede66 04:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Schwede66
- I've replaced the Collider article with these: [11] and [12] Covers longest and shortest episodes. Lankyant (talk) 18:14, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- A ping would have been nice as the FL nominator. I had no idea about the WP:ERRORS post and I've not formally been notified of this FLRC, which is an extreme choice of action for an issue with the verifiability of a single sentence that has not been raised on the talk page.The content in question (and much of the surrounding content) does not need a secondary source because it is routine calculation from the primary sources. The lead provided a number of redundant citations in an abundance of caution. Nonetheless, the sources added by Lankyant verify that "Metalhead" is the shortest episode yet and "Hated in the Nation" is the longest episode yet. Their lengths of 41 and 89 minutes, respectively, are listed in the primary source (which is not cited explicitly per conventions on television and film). — Bilorv (talk) 18:56, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- I agree about the ping from Errors. It’s such a high-traffic page that you would not want to have it on your watchlist unless you had a particular interest; it can swamp your watchlist. The only way for that to work would be to have a bot. We’ve just implemented a bot for DYK post-promotion hook changes; it posts to the nomination talk page. For Errors, the tricky bit for the bot will be to identify the target article that is being reported on.
- Regarding not having been notified of this FLRC, that’s entirely my fault. I missed the last nomination step. My apologies. Schwede66 19:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, guidance (at least at DYK) is for the nominator to watchlist WP:ERRORS but I agree that it's too high-traffic to do that. I think it would be simplest for ERRORS instructions to add that you should leave a note at the relevant article/list talk page, but a bot solution might be the ideal.In any case, I guess we should ask Dumelow if they think the issue has been solved. — Bilorv (talk) 19:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hi all, I was surprised to see this at FLC on the basis of my Errors post. I would agree that citations are not necessary where the information is sourced to the film or TV show itself; however in this instance the run times are not listed in the article so the reader cannot make the "routine calculation" without additional knowledge. We should try to make it as easy as possible for the reader to verify the information we provide and the new sources have allowed this - Dumelow (talk) 06:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, guidance (at least at DYK) is for the nominator to watchlist WP:ERRORS but I agree that it's too high-traffic to do that. I think it would be simplest for ERRORS instructions to add that you should leave a note at the relevant article/list talk page, but a bot solution might be the ideal.In any case, I guess we should ask Dumelow if they think the issue has been solved. — Bilorv (talk) 19:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
- Since the sole issue seems to be the specificity of the runtimes, I propose we replace
Episodes vary in length between 41 and 89 minutes and can be watched in any order.
withEpisodes vary in length and can be watched in any order.
and close this FLRC (which seemed a bit extreme in the first place). RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)- I do not believe there is anybody currently objecting to the present text, with sources added by Lankyant. The FLRC can be closed regardless as the talk page would be the right place to continue discussion, if any is needed. — Bilorv (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I agree that the current text is probably fine, but wasn't quite sure if everyone who had been involved in the discussion agreed (particularly Schwede66) and thought the rewording was a simple way to fix it. Regardless, this should be closed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:36, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I do not believe there is anybody currently objecting to the present text, with sources added by Lankyant. The FLRC can be closed regardless as the talk page would be the right place to continue discussion, if any is needed. — Bilorv (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
BBC Young Sports Personality of the Year
- Notified: Rambo's Revenge, WikiProjects Sports, Awards, BBC, Lists
I am nominating this for featured list removal because it has not been significantly updated since 2009, and has several inherent problems, including:
- Tables are using flags to describe people's place of birth, not their sporting nationality, in violation of MOS:SPORTFLAG. This has been mentioned at the talkpage and WT:SPORTS with no response at either location
It is awarded to the sportsperson aged 17 or under as of 1 January of that year
- unsourced, as the source [13] from 2008 says it's for 16 or under. If the rules have been updated, newer sources are neededAll winners to date have been British
- unsourced and contradicts the fact that the table lists Sky Brown as Japanese. Not clear how British is being defined hereThe only two non-English recipients to win the award are Scottish tennis player Andy Murray, who won in 2004, and British-Japanese skateboarder Sky Brown, who won in 2021, and represents Great Britain whilst living in both Japan and the United States.
- unsourced, Murray isn't mentioned anywhere, and the source doesn't describe Brown as non-British. This also contradicts the text highlighted in the point above- Judging criteria- source is from 2008, if it's still the same criteria, can a newer source be used for this?
- Rationale of all people seems to violate MOS:QUOTE, as they're all excessive quotes
- Why are only the winners listed? BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award has the top three, which seems better (and more encyclopedic than listing the rationale)
All in all, this list is now way short of the standard for a featured list, unless significant improvements are made. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:10, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support - I agree with everything here, taking most concern with Brown's nationality issue, outdated sources and the availability of second and third-place nominations. Usually I'm not a fan of listing 2nd and 3rd's for awards as it can ruin lists like Liverpool POTY and The FA England Awards, but in this case the information seems freely available to make a complete 'encyclopaedic' list including the other nominees. Idiosincrático (talk) 12:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)