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 peramelemorphs
We've finished off the kangaroos, so now with #28 in our series of animal FLCs we have one last order of Australian marsupials. Peramelemorphia contains the bandicoots and bilbies, with 19 extant species and 3 extinct ones. They're all relatively small, shrewish looking animals, and like with previous Australian lists the extinct species were made extinct in the early to mid 1900s, while a bunch of the species from New Guinea are missing (free) pictures. This is the last list of marsupials or Australian mammals, and the second-to-last single-order list, and it follows the same pattern as the dozen or so single-order lists that have come through here before. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 16:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Comments from SilverTiger
- "... and pig-footed bandicoot were made extinct by the mid-1900s." I suggest rewording to "... and pig-footed bandicoot were driven extinct by the mid-1900s." as the "made extinct" phrase reads a little awkward in my opinion. If all three went extinct during the mid-1900s, perhaps rephrase to "... and pig-footed bandicoot were driven extinct in the mid-1900s."
- The rest of the lede is lovely, the Classification and Conventions sections are clean and the cladogram is behaving. It's a shame that so many of the species are missing pictures and other data, but that is out of our hands. Happy editing, and thank you for your continued work on these lists. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 23:37, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- @SilverTiger12: Switched to "driven" and "in"; sometimes with extinct species it's "last seen in 1910, considered extinct in 1950", which makes it hard to specify, but these three were all last seen in the mid-1900s and then considered extinct in the same time period. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 00:43, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- And with that correction, Support. SilverTiger12 (talk) 00:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- My only query is "Habitat: None" - how can it have no habitat? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Whoops, fixed. --PresN 12:44, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- AK
- "peramelemorphs, and" comma seems superfluous
- "1,000 to 100,000" might want to add "adults" or "mature individuals" after, since most people will assume this includes young
- "are categorized as endangered species" → just "are endangered" would be fine
- "were driven extinct" this sounds a bit jarring after the last clause; the previous clause used present tense, so the past here sounds weird.
- "between the three" → "between three"
- "driven extinct" → I think "driven to extinction" would sound better. Also maybe for the use in the lead.
- Our articles on Chaeropus split it into two species, not one as in the list. The split seems pretty widely accepted in the literature; in any case, even if you keep the genus monotypic in the list, you need to change all the Pig-footed bandicoot links to Chaeropus instead of southern pig-footed bandicoot.
- The rest of the list seems fine. AryKun (talk) 07:32, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
List of Best Selling Rhythm & Blues Singles number ones of 1968
- Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:10, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Here's my latest nomination in this series and we carry on through the late 1960s. In this particular year, different versions of the same song were at number one at the start and end of the year, but the one that was number one at the start of the year was recorded after the one that was number one at the end of the year. Confused? Read on...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:10, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Pseud 14
- Aretha Franklin should sort under F for the Chain of Fools entry.
- I think you may have missed 'sronly' for the non-visual screen reader.
- That's it from me. Great work, and a very interesting year indeed. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:21, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Pseud 14: - done :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:32, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 12:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
NØ
- "which spent three weeks in the top spot" - I'd go for "three weeks at the top spot" but you're typically more grmmatically correct than me so maybe it should be "in"...
- "Redding had died in a plane crash in December of the previous year just days after recording the track,[5] and as well as topping the R&B listing the song became the first posthumous number one on the all-genre Hot 100 chart." - There seems to be something slightly off about this sentence. How about "Redding had died in a plane crash in December of the previous year just days after recording the track, which topped the R&B listing as well and became the first posthumous number one on the all-genre Hot 100 chart."?
- That's all, and I really had to scratch my head to even come up with two things to nitpick about. If you can, I'd appreciate any comments at my current FAC :) --NØ 07:25, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: - point 2 done, point 1 not done as "in the top spot" is the usual way of expressing it eg the first sentence of this..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:32, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- "The Dells have been inducted": "have been" strikes me as odd, since (according to our article on the group) they were inducted in 2004.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I've skimmed the prose; nothing else caught my attention. I checked sorting on all sortable nonnumeric 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.
- 6. It is stable.
- Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 16:04, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
List of awards and nominations received by Modern Family
- Nominator(s): RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:04, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Modern Family was one of the most acclaimed shows on television during its run (and for good reason, at least in my opinion). It's been a little while since I've worked on an FLC for a TV show awards list, but this one is modeled off those lists, especially the lists for The Office and Friends. This is the longest list I've done, but I'm happy with how it turned out. Quick shoutout to Chompy Ace for adding in a few citations along the way. As always, any and all feedback is appreciated. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:04, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
List of accolades received by Dune (2021 film)
- Nominator(s): Birdienest81talk 08:54, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Dune is a 2021 American epic science fiction film directed by Denis Villeneuve and written by Villeneuve, Jon Spaihts, and Eric Roth. Based on mostly the first half of Frank Herbert's novel of the same name, the film stars Timothée Chalamet as Paul Atreides, a Mentat living in the distant future from House Atreides, who is thrust into a war for the deadly and inhospitable desert planet Arrakis. This is my ninth film accolades list to be nominated for featured list status, and I largely based the format off of the accolades lists for The Artist, The Big Short, CODA, Dunkirk, If Beale Street Could Talk, 1917, The Shape of Water, and Slumdog Millionaire. I will gladly accept your comments to improve this list. Birdienest81talk 08:54, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Comments by RunningTiger123
Disclosure: I did work a little on this list, especially before it was split from Dune (2021 film), but it has been significantly updated since I worked on it.
- Infobox is missing Grande Prêmio do Cinema Brasileiro
- "worlwide" is a typo
- "proudction design" is a typo
- "...the 94th Academy Awards including Best Picture and..." → "...the 94th Academy Awards, including Best Picture, and..."
- Also, maybe mention that Dune was the most-recognized film at that year's Oscars? Could be as simple as saying "went on to win a leading six awards".
- "...the 79th Golden Globe Awards winning one..." → "...the 79th Golden Globe Awards, winning one..."
- Link text for AARP Movies for Grownups Award for Best Director should only read "Best Director"
- Lists of names use inconsistent formatting – compare "Jon Spaihts, Denis Villeneuve and Eric Roth" (no serial comma), "Jon Spaihts, Denis Villeneuve, and Eric Roth" (includes serial comma), and "Jon Spaihts, Denis Villeneuve, Eric Roth" (doesn't use "and"). Pick one format and use it consistently.
- For the Academy Award for makeup/hairstyling, add a comma after Mowat
- For the Make-Up Artists Guild, remove the space between Mowat and the comma
- Assuming the SBIFF award is sponsored by Variety, use italics for "Variety Artisans Award"
- Use an en dash for "Best Adapted Screenplay – Film" at the USC Scripter Awards
- For the WGA Awards, don't use an ampersand
- "Clint Bennett, Ryan Rubin, Peter Myles" does not sort correctly
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:55, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- @RunningTiger123: Done: I have read all your comments and have made corrections based off of them. I also found that the International Film Music Critics Association Awards were missing on the table and have added them onto it. If you could kindly maybe do a rewrite of the Andrea Risenborough section of the 95th Academy Awards since that is the next list I will be working on (submitting it for FLC on July 18, hopefully). I would greatly appreciate since you probably could handle such subject more objectively than I could. I will try to look over your nominations for Modern Family accolades list around Wednesday when I have more time.
- --Birdienest81talk 09:25, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:44, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- "At the 75th British Academy Film Awards, the film received eleven nominations and received five for" - think the words "awards" is missing after "five"
- Think that's it! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Done: I have read all your comments and have made corrections based off of them.
- --Birdienest81talk 07:28, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:34, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Support for tidying up the list to an FL-esque one. Also, If you have time would you care for reviewing the List of accolades received by Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 regarding its featured list nomination? Chompy Ace 07:46, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
List of international goals scored by Amber Hearn
- Nominator(s): Idiosincrático (talk) 10:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi all, I am nominating Amber Hearn's list of international goals as I think I've thoroughly covered just about every aspect of the topic. The article has a good lead, encompassing but detailed stats section, solid archived match reports for each goal and an organised/simplistic list of goals. The full list of international matches by the NZ national team was sourced from The Ultimate NZ Soccer Website. Despite its name, it is endorsed by the RSSSF.
Hearn is a New Zealand international who last played for the NZ national team in 2018, she is the country's all time top scorer and often considered the best player from the country. She still plays club football, despite announcing her international retirement in 2020. Idiosincrático (talk) 10:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose as a 3c failure. As the parent article, Amber Hearn, is barely more than a stub, this seems to fall foul of the content-forking guidelines, as this content could better be placed in that parent article as things stand. Harrias (he/him) • talk 20:41, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
List of Colorado ballot measures
- Nominator(s): ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 02:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
One year and one month ago today, my nomination of List of Washington (state) ballot measures was successful. I've finally reached a point where I'm happy with this follow-up and, after a productive peer review and a final copy-edit, I think this is in good shape. I'm looking forward to hearing y'all's feedback! ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 02:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Drive-by comment
- Headings which are a date range should use an ndash, not a hyphen -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 16:53, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
List of accolades received by Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2
- Nominator(s): Chompy Ace 00:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
After List of accolades received by Avengers: Endgame was promoted to featured list and appeared on the Main Page on January 18, 2021, I will do the same as this page. It is the another send-off to any franchise/series I wish to appear in the Main Page also. Chompy Ace 00:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Drive-by comment
- "It went on to win two awards, including Best Sound and Best Makeup." - you can't say "it won N awards, including...." and then list all N. "Including" by definition indicates that what follows isn't the entire list -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:24, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- ChrisTheDude, done. Chompy Ace 21:05, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Are you there? Chompy Ace 10:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- I am now (briefly).....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:40, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Yes. What about now? Chompy Ace 13:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- I am now (briefly).....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:40, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Are you there? Chompy Ace 10:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- ChrisTheDude, done. Chompy Ace 21:05, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:52, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
List of UK Open Billiards Championship winners
- Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:34, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
This is probably the most complete list of UK Open Billiards Championship winners and finals available. The Championship used to attract decent amounts of press in the 1930s, but, like the game of English billiards itself, it has never again reached those giddy heights in terms of popularity. Extracts from the offline sources can be provided to any reviewers enthusiastic enough to want them. Thanks in advance for any comments to help improve this list. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:34, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- Is there an appropriate wikilink to cover what "150-up" (and similar in the notes) is?
- I've added slightly to the intro text, and reworded the notes. Hopefully an improvement. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- If I sort the table on any other column and then re-sort on date, January 1988 comes after November 1988 for some reason
- I think I've fixed the sorting now, but let me know if not. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Think that's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks, ChrisTheDude; I've responded above. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
List of awards and nominations received by John Oliver
- Nominator(s): MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:52, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Oliver's work on Last Week Tonight has influenced US culture, law, and sewer plants; so, he's received many awards. My first FLC, and look forward to everyone's comments! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:52, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Oppose: gotta say I'm confused by this article. First off, I randomly doublechecked its claim that Last Week Tonight with John Oliver won the 2015 Critics' Choice Television Award for Best Talk Show. It didn't, the Daily Show won. Second, even if that were a mistake, the cited source doesn't credit John Oliver the person at all for the nomination, so why is it listed here. Picking another random example: the Daily Show in 2012. Why is Oliver credited with a WGA nom not a Critics' Choice nom?
The article was completely overhauled yesterday, and has been submitted to FLC too hastily. The Critics Choice error above, for example, didn't exist in yesterday's version of the article.—indopug (talk) 19:51, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Indopug: I did not notice the error regarding the Critics Choice Awards, must've been lost when I converted it to a table. I've spotchecked the whole article to ensure everything is good, and fixed things appropriately- it seems the only change to wins had to be regarding the Critics Choice Awards.
- To address the criteria for listing: any award received by just Last Week Tonight or The Daily Show during his involvement with it is listed on his page, but awards received by specific directors/producers are not listed.
- As for the last comment on crediting, I'm not completely sure what you mean, I apologize. If you're referring to the 2016 WGA nom for The Daily Show, Oliver's name is listed in the source. Lastly, the reason for the haste is because most of the overhaul was completed in my sandbox, and I just pasted it into the article. Thank you for your interest in the article! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:37, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with Indopug about the nominations. This isn't a list of awards for Last Week Tonight; it's a list of awards for Oliver. (I raised the issues at an earlier FLC, and even with the rules being cited for the Golden Globes in that case, I wasn't super convinced the award should have been included. These cases seem even weaker.) If he's not being recognized specifically in the nomination, I would exclude him per WP:OR. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:17, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- "any award received by just Last Week Tonight or The Daily Show during his involvement with it is listed on his page"—Shouldn't you include The Daily Show for 2015 Critics Choice because (1) he was involved and (2) the source says it was given to the show and not to a specific person. Similarly, why not list the "best comedy" noms season 1 and 2 of Community received? He was once a guest on Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee, should he be credited here with any awards that season won?
- I'm asking these questions to say what RunningTiger123 has already said: you criteria is too vague as to which of his work is included here.—indopug (talk) 05:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Indopug and RunningTiger123: I see your points, and thanks for clarifying that for me. I've pruned the table of any awards for shows, unless Oliver's name is specifically credited in the source. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Indopug, I've implemented the changes suggested; would you consider re-reviewing? I would be very grateful, and I greatly appreciate your comments! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:24, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Indopug and RunningTiger123: I see your points, and thanks for clarifying that for me. I've pruned the table of any awards for shows, unless Oliver's name is specifically credited in the source. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Comments by RunningTiger123
- Infobox totals need to be updated. Also, note that all wins should be counted as nominations – for instance, Oliver has 1 win and 1 nomination for the Grammy Awards.
- All cases of "The Daily Show..." should sort by "Daily", not "The"
- For "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart Presents Earth (The Audiobook)", don't capitalize "with"
- Heading for "Notes and References" should be "Notes and references"
- Per MOS:LAYOUTEL, use a bullet for the external link
- Awards from the Producers Guild of America have specific nominees and should be included for Oliver
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:12, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hey @RunningTiger123, thanks for your comments! I think I've addressed everything- just to note, for your second bullet point, I acknowledge that but didn't see anywhere on the article where that needed to be fixed other than the 'See also' section; was there a specific spot you were referring to? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:23, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
- Since the table is sortable, the cells for The Daily Show need a different sort key. You can set a sort key using
data-sort-value="<insert sort key here>"
. See WP:SORT for more. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)- @RunningTiger123 Ah, I see then- it's been fixed! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:51, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- Since the table is sortable, the cells for The Daily Show need a different sort key. You can set a sort key using
Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:07, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- "John Oliver is an British" - "an British"....?
- Think that's it :=) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude, fixed, thanks for your comment! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:11, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:21, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
List of diprotodonts
At number 27 in our series of animal FLCs, we now cap off the trilogy of Australian marsupials with a list for the whole order Diprotodontia. Recently closed were FLCs for two of the suborders in Diprotodontia, the list of macropodiformes (kangaroos) and list of phalangeriformes (cuscus, etc.), and this list capstones them as well as the too-short-for-a-species-list suborder Vombatiformes, containing the koala and wombats. It's been over a year since the last one of these, but these capstone lists go up a level from the species lists to be a list of genera instead, for orders that are too large to be a single list of species. This one follows the pattern of the last three genera lists (carnivorans, artiodactyls, and lagomorphs), and lists 39 genera representing 140 extant species; if you saw the last two FLCs, these animals should look pretty familiar. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 00:35, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Review by SilverTiger
- "They are found in Australia, New Guinea, and Indonesia in forests, shrublands, grasslands, and savannas, though some species can also be found in deserts and rocky areas." - this sentence feels a little clunky. A comma after Indonesia might help, and are the species found in forests really also found in deserts? I'd suggest rephrasing that to "though some species are found in deserts and rocky areas".
- Done.
- "and includes cuscus and brushtail, ringtail, and gliding possums." Suggest rephrasing to "and includes cuscus and the brushtail, ringtail, and gliding possums." to better indicate that it is brushtail possums, ringtail possums, and gliding possums.
- Done.
- "two families: Phascolarctidae, or the koala, and Vombatidae, or the wombats." Suggest rephrasing to "two families: Phascolarctidae, the koala, and Vombatidae, the wombats."
- Done.
- "The organization of the order is not fixed, with many recent proposals made based on molecular phylogenetic analysis; additionally, the present trio of suborders by splitting the former suborder Phalangerida into Macropodiformes and Phalangeriformes based on research beginning in 1997, with further reorganizations proposed." - I'm not quite sure what this is saying (organization of the order? As in the internal organization of the suborders or families?) and the second half makes even less sense IMO.
- Whoops, that one got away from me. Fixed.
- "Dozens of extinct prehistoric Diprotodont species..." - perhaps put a comma after extinct?
- Done.
- Conventions section is good. Classification paragraph is good.
- But something seems off about the cladogram, like it is squishing into the text instead of being aligned to right? Could the cladogram be moved over to the right a little, and the max width of the text-list increased a bit?
- These cladograms are a continual headache, as the wider ones have problems on narrower screens with overlapping the text. I've switched up how I'm doing it so now it's not below the regular text but just hangs out like an image; does that look better?
- Right under the subheading "Hypsiprymnodontidae", the table says "not assigned to a named subfamily", but a subfamily is given on the genus article.
- Yeah, it's annoying, but the standard on Wikipedia as per WP:MAMMAL is to use the classification of species of Mammal Species of the World 3rd ed. (2005), and then any adjustments since that are supported by both the American Society of Mammologists and the IUCN. And... MSW3 and ASM both don't give any subfamilies for Hypsiprymnodon. So, even though the species/genus/family articles disagree, this list doesn't list a subfamily.
- On my first go-through I don't see any other obvious mistakes, but there is a sad dearth of range maps, especially for the macropodines and Lasiorhinus (which I consider especially sad because there is no suborder list to see species range maps at).
- Yeah, some orders have decent per-genus maps, but this one really doesn't. I don't make the maps, as I haven't sorted out how to take IUCN shapefiles and turn them into maps, so we're a bit empty here.
- Nice to see this list at FLC, those are incredibly informative and I hope to see still more after this one! --SilverTiger12 (talk) 20:39, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- @SilverTiger12: Thanks, that's good to hear! Thanks for reviewing, replied inline. --PresN 23:02, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- All my concerns have been addressed, the cladogram looks better, thank you. Full Support. SilverTiger12 (talk) 05:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- @SilverTiger12: Thanks, that's good to hear! Thanks for reviewing, replied inline. --PresN 23:02, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- The diet of dendrolagus lists bark twice
- that's it! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: They really like bark! Fixed, thanks. --PresN 16:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
- Very minor, but you used the singular and then the plural for "the koala, and Vombatidae, the wombats". If it flows better as is, disregard as well of course.
- It's on purpose, there's only one koala species, but two wombat species.
- That checks out.
- Should "southern Australia" be capitalized, as it is in its subarticle? The same goes for similar cases, eg "western Australia".
- I didn't, because I'm not identifying them as being in a specific, named region, but just in e.g. the "the southern part of Australia". For pretty much all species in these lists the area they are found in is too complex to accurately describe with words, so for the caption I just give a general area and not nail down specific named regions. For the Australian lists, since the continent is mostly contiguous with the country, you end up with some of these collisions, but it's the same thing I do with e.g. "western South America" in other lists rather than naming parts of countries.
That's all I could find. They're interesting little fellows. And the article is well polished. ~ HAL333 17:35, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- @HAL333: Thanks for reviewing; I responded inline, though I didn't make any changes. --PresN 13:16, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
List of Music Bank Chart winners (2018)
- Nominator(s): EN-Jungwon (talk) and Jal11497 (talk) 07:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Another Music Bank winners list. This is the 6th FLC nomination from the Music Bank series. -- EN-Jungwon 07:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- "Laboum member Ahn Sol-bin" - link the group
- Done.
- "For the next four weeks after his departure, VIXX member N, Highlight member Son Dong-woon, Shinee member Taemin and BTS member Kim Seok-jin appeared as guest hosts alongside Solbin. On June 15, Lovelyz member Kei and actor Choi Won-myeong became the new hosts of the show." - sources for all of this?
- Done. I would like some help with the first sentence here. The current sentence makes it sound like the five people hosted the show for 4 weeks when that not the case. Each of them appeared alongside Solbin for 1 week (N hosted the show with Solbin on May 18, Son Dong-woon on May 25, Taemin on June 1 and Kim Seok-jin on June 8.) How can I mention this in the article. I couldn't think of any clean way to do it. -- EN-Jungwon 17:09, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- How about "For the next four weeks after his departure, VIXX member N, Highlight member Son Dong-woon, Shinee member Taemin and BTS member Kim Seok-jin each appeared on one show as a guest host alongside Solbin"....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:00, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- Done. I would like some help with the first sentence here. The current sentence makes it sound like the five people hosted the show for 4 weeks when that not the case. Each of them appeared alongside Solbin for 1 week (N hosted the show with Solbin on May 18, Son Dong-woon on May 25, Taemin on June 1 and Kim Seok-jin on June 8.) How can I mention this in the article. I couldn't think of any clean way to do it. -- EN-Jungwon 17:09, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- "Three acts had three number one singles on the chart in 2018;" - semi-colon should be a colon
- Done.
- "Wanna One with "Boomerang", "Light" and "Spring Breeze"" => "and Wanna One with "Boomerang", "Light" and "Spring Breeze""
- Done.
- "Soloist Sunmi achieved her first number one on the chart with "Siren" on the September 21 broadcast. Infinite member Kim Sung-kyu won for the first time on Music Bank with "True Love" after it debut at number one on the March 9 broadcast." - sources?
- Done.
- Sources for the entire last paragraph of the lead? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:57, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude, all done. I have rewritten the last paragraph a little bit. -- EN-Jungwon 17:21, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- Most of that last para is about acts having their first number one, but in the middle there's a bit about IKon that doesn't mention this. Was "Love Scenario" their first number one? If so, mention that. Also, I notice that their name is written with a capital I in the prose but a lower-case i in the table......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude, "Love Scenario" is their first number one on Music Bank but I couldn't find any reliable source mentioning that. Should I move it to the second paragraph? -- EN-Jungwon 07:49, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, it reads oddly having it in the middle of a section about "first number ones". It would fit in the second para, maybe after the bit about acts with three number ones.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:59, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Most of that last para is about acts having their first number one, but in the middle there's a bit about IKon that doesn't mention this. Was "Love Scenario" their first number one? If so, mention that. Also, I notice that their name is written with a capital I in the prose but a lower-case i in the table......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- "Laboum member Ahn Sol-bin, who had been hosting the show since July 2016, continued to do so until June 8, 2018": I'm not sure what's going on here ... maybe this was first written in June 2018, and if so, then it sounded perfectly sensible back then. But IMO, 5 years later, the usual way to say this would be "Laboum member Ahn Sol-bin hosted the show from July 2016 until June 8, 2018." (For the next sentence, there's an argument that you need the extra words because of the clause that follows ... I don't have an opinion on that.) - Dank (push to talk) 15:19, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- "after it debut at number one": debuted?
- File:160919 INFINITE ONLY 쇼케이스 성규 2.jpg has a box that says "has not yet been reviewed".
- Most (or all) images need alt text of some kind.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I've skimmed the prose; nothing big jumps out at me. I checked sorting on all sortable nonnumeric 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). None of the sources jump out at me as unreliable, but I can't read Korean. 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 above).
- 6. It is stable.
Close enough for aSupport. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 17:21, 11 May 2023 (UTC)- You might be interested in reviewing (when this link turns blue) WP:Featured list candidates/List of malvid families/archive1. - Dank (push to talk) 17:26, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank all done. I have added alt text to all the images and replaced the image with one of the artist in 2018. I would note the image was uploaded by an enwiki and commons admin so could we AGF and keep that image? Also, the source page for the image says that it is available under CC BY 4.0. Almost all the portrait images of the artist I found are unreviewed but they have acceptable licenses. The new image is also unreviewed at the moment. Should I ask an image reviewer on Commons to review it? -- EN-Jungwon 13:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- It wouldn't hurt. It doesn't change my support. - Dank (push to talk) 14:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank all done. I have added alt text to all the images and replaced the image with one of the artist in 2018. I would note the image was uploaded by an enwiki and commons admin so could we AGF and keep that image? Also, the source page for the image says that it is available under CC BY 4.0. Almost all the portrait images of the artist I found are unreviewed but they have acceptable licenses. The new image is also unreviewed at the moment. Should I ask an image reviewer on Commons to review it? -- EN-Jungwon 13:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
List of Coldplay live performances
- Nominator(s): GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 01:23, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
After extensive research and inclusion of nearly all shows Setlist FM have provided, I believe this list have reached a level of maturity and quality which warrants being featured. Coldplay's career as live performers is extensive, prolific and worthy of celebration. As a fan of the band, my bigger project here is making information about them accessible and reliable (i.e. List of awards and nominations received by Coldplay and Coldplay videography), furthermore, promoting this list would be a validation of such efforts. Review it kindly. Thank you. GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 01:23, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- P.S. Just to make it clear, I used Setlist FM as a starting point but not for sourcing the list's material. GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 01:25, 4 May 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. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! style="width:13em;" |Date
becomes!scope=col style="width:13em;" |Date
. 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 20:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Just gave a look into it. Can you check if I fixed this correctly? GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 20:37, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
List of Top Selling R&B Singles number ones of 1967
- Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Here's my latest (#25) nomination in this series. In this particular year it was all about Aretha, the Queen of Soul. Feedback as ever gratefully received and quickly acted upon.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Pseud 14
- The most successful artist of the year in chart terms was Aretha Franklin -- perhaps we can remove in chart terms, since the article is about chart performances that year and is also followed by the number of weeks she spent on it.
- Later in the year, Franklin gained her third chart-topper of the year -- perhaps the second mention of year can be removed - as 1967 is also mentioned in the latter sentence.
- That's all from me. Great work as usual. Pseud 14 (talk) 14:09, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Pseud 14: - done. Thanks for your kind words! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:41, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- "She is regarded by some as one of the greatest singers of all time and nicknamed the "Queen of Soul"": The main problem I have with any sentence equivalent to "X is the best" is that you can generally find a source that likes "X" for any "X", so sentences like this are usually nonfalsifiable and ambiguous. Can you say something about what set her apart, or mention some "best of" list that she's on that carried some weight? Also: I think I'd start the sentence with "Nicknamed the "Queen of Soul", she ...".
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. Otherwise, the writing looks good. 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.
- 6. It is stable.
Close enough for aSupport. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 02:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)- @Dank: - thanks for your review, I have addressed the Aretha point -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- Excellent choice. - Dank (push to talk) 12:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: - thanks for your review, I have addressed the Aretha point -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Aoba47
- For File:Aaron Neville.jpg, why is the caption "in later life" rather than a specific date? The description places him at a 1999 event, and I think that year would be more beneficial as the current wording limits room for ambiguity as "in later life" could mean a number of different dates.
- Link David Browne (journalist) and Douglas Wolk in their citation.
Everything looks good to me. I only have two minor comments. Once they are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this FLC on the basis of its prose. If you have the time and energy, I would appreciate any feedback on my current peer review, which is about a more contemporary R&B song. However, if that is not possible, I completely understand. Best of luck with this FLC! Aoba47 (talk) 23:58, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Aoba47: - done! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
Source and image reviews, and support, from BennyOnTheLoose
Images
- Licencing all OK.
- Images are elevant, adequately clear, suitably positioned, with alt text.
- Appropriate captions supported either with inline citations in the text or by the table.
- Pass for image review. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
Sources
- No issues with suitablity of sources.
- No formatting issues to be resolved as far as I can see.
one of the biggest stars not only in black music but across all genres
- what part of the source supports this? (Source does say, e.g. "one of the biggest international recording stars in all of pop", but I don't think that's quite the same)- @BennyOnTheLoose: - reworded -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:43, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Nothing alarming found from reviewing the top matches found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. No other questions from the sources I looked at; they all supported the content without plagiarism or paraphrasing issues.
- Pass for source review. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:13, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
General comments
first and only chart-topper
- "first and" is redundant, but could be kept for flow of prose.In 1967, Billboard published a chart ranking
- is it worth adding that this was weekly?- Added "weekly" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:18, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- I made a couple of really minor script-suggested tweaks, please revert any that are objectionable.
- Nice work, ChrisTheDude. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:13, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
List of birds of Tokelau
Another Oceanian bird list, pretty short, with the standard style. AryKun (talk) 04:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Nice work! Some comments, all of them optional:
- A separate map of Tokelau could help the reader, as the one with the location on the globe is just a tiny circle.
- Replaced the map with one of Oceania that slightly magnifies the view to show three distinct atolls.
- The introduced species, does it refer to the chicken or to the actually wild red junglefowl? I'd perhaps also mention it in the intro, where you say 33 species, one introduced.
- They're feral chickens, but I've kept it as "feral red junglefowl" because the list mentions only Gallus gallus and chickens are a subspecies anyway.
- An information about since when the owl has been locally extinct - as you mention some other birds present before the human contact.
- I can't find another source mentioning the owl and Tokelau; only the list, which doesn't provide a date. This is probably because of the lack of proper surveys of Tokelau.
And also thank you for checking my nomination. --Tone 13:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Tone, I've replied to all of your comments above. AryKun (talk) 05:42, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Tone 07:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
EN-Jungwon
- Add url access to ref 18.
- Done.
- Move categories and defaultsort to the bottom.
- Done.
- Is there a reason why
<references />
instead of{{Reflist}}
- Not really, it was just what was in the article originally. Replaced.
- Link authors in the references if they have an article.
- Done; I think only Steadman and Clements have articles.
Thats all. -- EN-Jungwon 09:34, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- EN-Jungwon, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 13:10, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support. If you are interested, could you review Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Music Bank Chart winners (2018)/archive1, thanks. -- EN-Jungwon 16:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- As I mentioned in the last review of these bird lists, I really like the approach here.
- "Additionally, Anas ducks are also": You don't need both.
- Reworded.
- "with other tropical trees like ... also being present.": You don't need both. "Along with other tropical trees like" works, and "X, Y and Z are also present" works.
- reworded.
- "with medium nasal septum": Nothing wrong with this in isolation, but since you're making an effort to avoid similar jargon in the rest of the article (for instance, you say "with the head", not "with head"), "with medium nasal septa" or "with a medium nasal septum" would be more consistent.
- Reworded.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. Otherwise, the prose checks out. There are no tables.
- 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. - Dank (push to talk) 12:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Dank, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 13:11, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Well done. You might be interested in reviewing (when this link turns blue) WP:Featured list candidates/List of malvid families/archive1. - Dank (push to talk) 13:12, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Dank, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 13:11, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
- "One of the species" --> "One species" would be more concise
- Done.
- "which consists of quails, partridges, snowcocks, francolins" --> "that consists of quails, partridges, snowcocks, francolins"
- Also, if the family is itself plural here (hence "are"), should that be
- Done.
- The Oxford comma is sometimes used and sometimes not.
- Added the Oxford comma throughout.
That's all. ~ HAL333 17:44, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
- HAL333, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 02:12, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
List of World Heritage Sites in Pakistan
- Nominator(s): Tone 15:29, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
Pakistan has six World Heritage Sites and 26 sites on the tentative list. The style is standard. The current nomination about the WHS in the US is already seeing some support, so I am adding a new nomination. Tone 15:29, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
AK
- "accepted the convention" ratified instead?
- Ratified reads fine, indeed. I was using both formulations in the previous articles.
- Our article on the IVC seems to capitalize "Civilisation".
- "steep hill it remained" → "steep hill, it remained "
- Link Isa Khan.
- The article leads to another person, the tomb belongs to Isa Khan Hussain who does not have an article.
- "during its history, the extant monuments" missing a conjunction.
- Link gunpowder era.
- "The mosque" → "This mosque", also for next entry.
- "built in" → "built from"?
- I think this is fine.
- That's all I can find. If you have the time, I would appreciate a review of my FLC nom. AryKun (talk) 11:59, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- @AryKun: Fixed, thanks! Will have a look at the birds article now. --Tone 13:44, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- "with about one third of the city being explored so far" => "with about one third of the city having been explored so far"
- "Taxila, which was inhabited already in the Neolithic" => "Taxila, which was already inhabited in the Neolithic"
- "The site was already abandoned in the mid-3rd millennium BCE, before the urbanised phase of the Indus Valley civilisation" - "civilisation" had a capital C earlier.......?
- "It was a centre of a thriving Jain community who was active" => "It was a centre of a thriving Jain community which was active"
- Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:08, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed all, thanks! Tone 16:49, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:58, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
List of COM-clade families
- Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 21:43, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Incas chewing coca leaves, tapioca, pansies, and a plant that's 80,000 years old ... what else could you ask for in a plant list? Comments are welcome. Basic licensing information for the images is on the list talk page. The sidebar at the upper right of the list page will help you look for other lists in this series, if that helps. Comments are welcome. We're almost done with the series. - Dank (push to talk) 21:43, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support - couldn't find anything to quibble about :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:01, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks much for looking. - Dank (push to talk) 12:03, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Pseud 14
- Agree with Chris, everything is in good order. Another solid work on this series. Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 19:02, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. Very happy to see that you've been so active at FLC lately. - Dank (push to talk) 19:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
EN-Jungwon
- I recommend linking to the author's article in the references. Other than that I don't see any major issues with this list. -- EN-Jungwon 13:44, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Done in this edit. Thanks for reviewing. - Dank (push to talk) 14:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- EN-Jungwon 14:58, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Older nominations
Angel Aquino on screen and stage
After recently expanding the main article of Filipina actress Angel Aquino, here's a list of her performances in film, television and stage which I've compiled and tailored to other filmography FLs. Happy to address your comments and thanks to all who take the time to review the list. Pseud 14 (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- "she again played the antagonistic part of a vindictive ex-wife": Had she played a vindictive ex-wife before? If not, then maybe: "She again played a vindictive antagonist, this time as the ex-wife ..." (Done)
- "A Lullaby to the Sorrowful Mystery" needs to sort under "L". I don't think it makes much difference, but I'd sort "Rich Woman" under R.
- In ref #62, things are italicized that shouldn't be.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I've skimmed the prose and made minor edits; feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the tables.
- 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 one image seems fine.
- 6. It is stable.
- Close enough for a support. Well done. You might be interested in reviewing List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families. - Dank (push to talk) 02:05, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking this review and for your support Dank. I have actioned all your comments. I'd be happy to have a look at your FLC as well. Pseud 14 (talk) 02:43, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks much. Actually ... if you could hold off, I might be restructuring that list soon. If I do, I'll post here. - Dank (push to talk) 02:56, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Sure thing. Ping me when it’s ready. Pseud 14 (talk) 03:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Pseud 14, it's ready, I didn't make any changes. (There will be a minor change to my next nomination instead.) - Dank (push to talk) 12:20, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Sure thing. Ping me when it’s ready. Pseud 14 (talk) 03:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks much. Actually ... if you could hold off, I might be restructuring that list soon. If I do, I'll post here. - Dank (push to talk) 02:56, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking this review and for your support Dank. I have actioned all your comments. I'd be happy to have a look at your FLC as well. Pseud 14 (talk) 02:43, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- "She made her screen debut with a minor role in the action drama Mumbaki (1996).[1] She went on to appear...." - I would join these two short sentences together
- "Her first television appearance was as a presenter in the lifestyle show" => "Her first television appearance was as a presenter of the lifestyle show"
- "Also in 2013, she returned on stage" => "Also in 2013, she returned to the stage"
- Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your review ChrisTheDude. All comments have been actioned. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:59, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Aoba47
- I have a question about this part, "who has appeared extensively in film, television, and stage productions". Why is the "extensively" part necessary? I can see that she has starred in a lot of films, but it seems like a good portion of her television work is guest spots and she has only appeared in two stage productions. Is she notable for appearing in abnormally high amount of productions?
- I have a question about this part, "and starred with Isabelle Huppert in the psychological thriller Captive". Why is it necessary to point out one of her co-stars? It is not done (unless I missed something) in any other areas of the lead, and I do not see why her appearing in a film with Huppert is notable enough to highlight and give weight in the lead.
- Filipino actors very seldom collaborate with foreign and multi-awarded actors such as the likes of Isabelle Huppert. I think collaborations with thespians such as Huppert is, to a certain extent, notable for Aquino's profile and would somehow be worthy of mentioning.
- Her appearance in the Swan Dive music video is not mentioned in the lead. While I am sure this is more minor in the grand scheme of her career, it just seems a little off to have a separate section that is not mentioned in the lead at all.
- I have tailored these with FL filmographies such as as those of Jessica Chastain, Amy Adams, and Cate Blanchett. These actresses, for the most part, have appeared in music videos or video games in special, guest or voice roles but none have been mentioned in the lead since more weight is given to their film, television, and stage work. I believe there is no absolute rule for "music video" appearances in particular, that it should be mentioned in the lead. Its inclusion overall would still be acceptable since it is still considered a "screen" appearance.
I hope these comments are helpful. I could not find much to comment on, and I just have a few minor questions and comments. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any help with my current peer review, but I understand if you do not have the time or interest. Just to be clear, I have limited my review to just the prose. I have not looked through any of the citations. Best of luck with this FLC! Aoba47 (talk) 00:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking up this review Aoba47. I have provided my responses to your comments. Let me know if they are to your satisfaction. I will endeavor to provide my comments on your PR this weekend, as I am currently traveling with very spotty internet. Pseud 14 (talk) 18:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
NØ
- "Two years later, she again played a vindictive antagonist in the family drama series And I Love You So (2015)." - "Again" could be omitted, although I understand why it is used.
- Removed
- "She also appeared in" - Really nitpick-y on my part but you could remove "also".
- Removed
- The A.V. Club is in italics everywhere except ref 66
- Fixed
- Some refs like 115 and 129 link to the same YouTube channel but the publisher is written differently as "ABS-CBN" and "ABS-CBN Entertainment"
- Fixed, so that all YouTube links to the ABS-CBN Entertainment channel are written as such.
- Thanks for the media review on my current FAC and I'd appreciate anything re: prose. I can tell this is a really high-quality list and the lead section looks really well-researched. Great work!--NØ 07:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking up this review MaranoFan. Appreciate the kind words. I'll be down to review your FAC on prose (soon as I return from traveling this weekend). Pseud 14 (talk) 12:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
List of Billboard Tropical Airplay number ones of 1999
And finally, we've reached the end of the 1990s! While it tropical doesn't get as much as attention as the Latin pop field, it was still a great year for this field! As much as I love the 90s, I am so ready to forward to the 2000s! Erick (talk) 20:26, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
EN-Jungwon
- Ref 16 should be https://www.billboard.com/charts/latin-tropical-airplay/1999-01-30/
- Ref 62 should be https://www.billboard.com/charts/latin-tropical-airplay/1999-12-18/
- Ref 63 should be https://www.billboard.com/charts/latin-tropical-airplay/1999-12-25/
- Archive all references.
That's all. -- EN-Jungwon 11:32, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- "Víctor Manuelle also had the final one of 1999" => "Víctor Manuelle also had the final number one of 1999"
- "and is his fifth number one overall." => "and was his fifth number one overall."
- "had the longest consecutive run at number one in 1999" => either "had the longest continuous run at number one in 1999" or "had the longest unbroken run at number one in 1999"
- "Jennifer Lopez reached number one for the first time with "No Me Ames", a duet with Marc Anthony and" => "Jennifer Lopez reached number one for the first time with "No Me Ames", a duet with Marc Anthony, and"
- "and was the only female artist to do so on the Tropical Airplay chart in 1999" => "and was the only female artist to top the Tropical Airplay chart in 1999" (currently it says she was the only female to have her first number one during 1999, and while that it true I think the point you are actually trying to make is that she was the only female to reach number one at all (see also her photo caption)
- "Marc Anthony also achieved his 12th number one" => "Marc Anthony achieved his 12th number one later in the year" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Drive-by comment: I looked at the captions for the last two images (I don't think Chris commented on those), and made minor edits; feel free to revert. Images are appropriately licensed, and illustrate the article appropriately.
Btw, you might (or might not) be interested in reviewing List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families.- Dank (push to talk) 15:36, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
@EN-Jungwon: @ChrisTheDude: Thanks for the comments, I went ahead and addressed the issues you brought up. @Dank: Thank you for help! Erick (talk) 17:44, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support. I have added archives for the rest of the references. If you have time would you mind reviewing my FLC for List of Music Bank Chart winners (2017). -- EN-Jungwon 08:23, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Comments by AJona1992
- "It remained in place for only a single week before being replaced by "Mi PC" by Juan Luis Guerra" → "It remained in the top spot for a week before being replaced by "Mi PC" by Juan Luis Guerra."
- "which had previously topped the chart in the week ending December 12, 1998,[4] and spent two further weeks at number one in 1999 for a total of five." → "Before its two-week stint at number one, "Mi PC" had previously topped the chart in the week ending December 12, 1998, spending a total of five weeks at number one."
- "Víctor Manuelle also had the final number one of 1999 with" this implies that there were two individuals who had a final number one song for 1999. I believe you are trying to say that Victor Manuelle, along with Juan Luis Guerra, had the final number one of the year. If that's the case then rewrite this sentence to → "Like Guerra in 1998, Víctor Manuelle had the last number one song of the year, with "Pero Dile", which was the longest-running number one song of 1999, spending nine weeks at the top."
- Interjecting to say....that isn't the point that's being made. The article is saying that Victor Manuelle had the year's first number one and he also had the year's final number one. I think this sentence is fine as it is -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:32, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
- ""Mi PC" was succeeded by Jerry Rivera's song "Ese", which remained on top of the chart for eight weeks and was his fifth number one overall." → "Jerry Rivera's "Ese" superseded "Mi PC", dominating the top spot for eight consecutive weeks and earning the distinction of being his fifth overall number one on the chart."
- "Jennifer Lopez reached number one for the first time with "No Me Ames", a duet with Marc Anthony, and was the only female artist to top the Tropical Airplay chart in 1999" → "Jennifer Lopez achieved her first number one on the Tropical Airplay chart with "No Me Ames", performed in collaboration with Marc Anthony, and was the sole female artist to attain the summit during the year."
- That's all I have. – jona ✉ 12:43, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support good job on another FA-worthy list. Best – jona ✉ 16:58, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
List of Alexander McQueen collections
The career of Britsh designer Alexander McQueen spanned from his graduation in 1992 to his death in 2010. During this time, he produced 36 own-label womenswear collections, each with its own name and distinct aesthetic. McQueen used fashion to explore themes of romanticism, sexuality, and death, drawing inspiration from everything he loved, including art, nature, history, film, and his own life. He introduced groundbreaking concepts like the bumster trouser and the armadillo shoe. At his best, he was a magnificent showman who kept audiences enthralled with unique ideas and blockbuster runway shows, every one of which has sufficient coverage to merit its own article someday. In the meantime, I present this summary of his works. Long live McQueen. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:19, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Z1720
Source review, spot checks not done. Version reviewed:
- Suggest archiving all links.
- Done
- Ref 4: BBC News should be wikilinked.
- Done
- Ref 12: Not sure what is happening here, it seems to be a weird way to WP:CITEBUNDLE. Perhaps the individual citations can be placed next to the inspiration it is citing, or remove some of these?
- Each one corresponds to one factor and is necessary to support that factor. I don't see anything in CITEBUNDLE prohibiting the way I've done it, and I prefer not to place them in the sentence as it creates visual clutter which is difficult for me to process as a person with ADHD.
- "Fairer, Robert; Wilcox, Claire (2016)." Remove the page number.
- Done (this appears to be a duplicate of your final comment?)
- "Bowles, Hamish (2014)." Is this Hamish Bowles? If so, wikilink.
- "Callahan, Maureen (2014)" Is this Maureen Callahan?
- "Wilson, Andrew (2015)." Wikilink Simon & Schuster
- Above 3 done
- "Fairer, Robert; Wilcox, Claire (2016)." There's an unwanted page number in this ref.
Please ping when the above are addressed. Z1720 (talk) 03:11, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- "This article concerns itself with McQueen's own-label womenswear collections." - personally I don't like "meta" comments that say "this article is about such-and-such". I would remove this - the first sentence of the lead covers it IMO
- Per MOS:SELFREF, they're not prohibited. In fact, it specifically says "Similarly, many list articles explicitly state their inclusion criteria in the lead section." I prefer to keep it in so no one questions why this doesn't cover his menswear or the Givenchy collections.
- "romanticized survival through tragedy" - McQueen was British so UK spelling should be used i.e. romanticised
- "human-animal hybridization" - same here
- "centers the widows" - same here ("centres") also the word "on" is missing before "the"
- The absence of "on" is intentional - I'm using "centre" as a verb, in the sense of "to put something in the center"
- "Collaboration with Philip Treacy to memorialize" - US spelling again
- "Final fully-realized collection" - and again :-)
- That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:33, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:43, 29 April 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 (you have just a |+ there now); 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.!Season
becomes!scope=col | Season
. 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.| 1992 graduation collection
becomes!scope=row | 1992 graduation collection
. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use!scope=rowgroup
instead. If you think the title of the collection is the "primary"/"defining" cell of each row, you can make that the header/scope cell instead, though consider moving it to the first column instead of the second if you do so. - 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 20:18, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Comments by RunningTiger123
I support this list for promotion contingent on the table formatting issues listed above. I would also like to see sortable columns for the collection, date, location, and possibly season columns, but this isn't strictly necessary. If you do add sorting, check the following items:
- In the collection column, The Birds, The Hunger, The Overlook, The Dance of the Twisted Bull, The Man Who Knew Too Much, The Widows of Culloden, The Girl Who Lived in the Tree, The Horn of Plenty, and La Dame Bleue should each be sorted by their second word (for instance, sort by "Birds" instead of "The Birds").
- In the show date column, make sure March 1993 sorts correctly (it may not be automatically recognized as a date).
- In the show location column, The Ritz Hotel, La Conciergerie, Le Zénith Arena, and Le Centquatre should be sorted by their second word.
See WP:SORT if you need help or ping me here. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:38, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hi RunningTiger123, sorry for the delayed response. I've made the table sortable as suggested. To be honest, I don't particularly see the value in making the date column sortable as that is the default order, but I've done it. The rest should be functioning as requested. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Limited or Anthology Series
- Nominator(s): PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I do plan on doing this with all the award categories. (: This award recognizes excellence in the depiction of queer people in limited / anthology series. It's probably one of the most complex awards by GLAAD that I've worked on, having gone through multiple changes and reorganizations throughout the decades. For more details, just go to the page itself. Most recently given to HBO's The White Lotus, if anyone has seen it. "These gay lists... they're trying to murder me." --PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- Welcome back. A quick comment:
- Check the order of your cites for 1990, 2003 and 2008 ... I can't tell if the order is reversed because you want it that way, but I'm guessing that in this particular ref format, it shouldn't be reversed. (If you separate the rows, then, sure.) Also, there's something weird going on with the second 2009 ref. - Dank (push to talk) 12:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. :D Regarding the numbering, since I leave the lede last, I often end up reusing sources from the list at the top of the page, causing them to gain a new, and lower, number. I am curious, is that a FL criterion? Having the references in numerical order? As for the 2009 ref, yeah, my bad. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- AFAIK, yes, it's required at FLC. - Dank (push to talk) 13:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: All right. Done. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank I believe Panagiotis was trying to list the citations in order (nominees first and then the winner). I have had 3 FLCs pass even though they have the wrong order of citation numbers. Is this requirement actually enforced? -- EN-Jungwon 05:34, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I thought it was, but I don't know. - Dank (push to talk) 13:00, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- AFAIK, yes, it's required at FLC. - Dank (push to talk) 13:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. :D Regarding the numbering, since I leave the lede last, I often end up reusing sources from the list at the top of the page, causing them to gain a new, and lower, number. I am curious, is that a FL criterion? Having the references in numerical order? As for the 2009 ref, yeah, my bad. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- There's apparently some disagreement about the order of refs, so I'll try again to do something useful :) The table coding looks good, I don't see any prose problems in the tables, and I've checked the sorting in all the tables (for non-numerical columns).
- Btw, you might (or might not) be interested in reviewing WP:Featured list candidates/List of COM-clade families/archive1. - Dank (push to talk) 21:50, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- Continuing my review.
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I've skimmed the prose and made minor edits; nothing big jumps out at me. I checked sorting as above and sampled the links in the tables.
- 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. There are no images.
- 6. It is stable.
- Support. Well done. You might be interested in reviewing (when this link turns blue) WP:Featured list candidates/List of malvid families/archive1. - Dank (push to talk) 01:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
EN-Jungwon
- Add table key for the double dagger and green background.
- Done.
- The 1993 entry: The source doesn't directly say that "Doing Time on Maple Drive" won the award, I feel like I may be misinterpreting the source so can you please clarify this for me? Also, the movie's Wikipedia article has no mention of this award and a quick Google search didn't reveal much. The second reference (which seems to list all the winners) doesn't list any winners for that year. It is also not listed in the page template ({{GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding TV Movie or Limited Series}}).
- Although the Variety source doesn't state this explicitly, the "Past Winners" source does show how Doing Time on Maple Drive won in the TV Movie category. The fact that the Wikipedia article and template don't show this isn't really relevant. Wouldn't be the first time that omissions would exist on GLAAD-related pages. Here is another source on the TV film: https://www.tvweek.com/in-depth/2005/04/glaad-awards-15-years-of-recog/. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:46, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ref 22 doesn't mention the network of the series.
- "The Fear Street Trilogy" should sort under "Fear".
- Done.
Thats all. -- EN-Jungwon 18:23, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support. If you have time would you mind reviewing the FLC for List of Music Bank Chart winners (2017) -- EN-Jungwon 05:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- The second paragraph of the lead is a bit confusing. You say that The Women of Brewster Place won in 1990 but don't specify what award it won. Then you say "In 1994, Fox's Doing Time on Maple Drive became the first television film to be recognized by GLAAD." - was this the same award? Presumably it was, because apparently after that win, "various television films and miniseries would be recognized as different categories". How do these different categories tie in with the winners in the table, where there never seems to be more than one winner in any given year.....?
- The Women of Brewster Place likely won in the "Miniseries" category. Unfortunately, the nominees list by GLAAD doesn't explicitly state each category's name for their first ceremony, but given that it's a miniseries and a few years later, Tales of the City won in the TV Mini-series category (as indicated by the "Past Winners" source), it can be inferred that WoBP won in that category. Doing Time on Maple Drive then was the first TV movie (rather than miniseries) to be recognized, in the TV Movie category; unsurprisingly. As indicated by GLAAD's Letterboxd list, both of these separate categories are treated as one, as they're both precursors of the unified Television Movie/TV Movie and Mini-series category. Which was then expanded to include anthology series, then separated... God, the whole thing is giving me brain damage. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- So, to confirm, "various television films and miniseries would be recognized as different categories" isn't meant to indicate that these different categories existed together in any one year.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:39, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Yeah, based on the "Past Winners" source, at no point up until 1999 did GLAAD recognize both a miniseries and TV movie in the same year. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:24, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- So, to confirm, "various television films and miniseries would be recognized as different categories" isn't meant to indicate that these different categories existed together in any one year.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:39, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- The Women of Brewster Place likely won in the "Miniseries" category. Unfortunately, the nominees list by GLAAD doesn't explicitly state each category's name for their first ceremony, but given that it's a miniseries and a few years later, Tales of the City won in the TV Mini-series category (as indicated by the "Past Winners" source), it can be inferred that WoBP won in that category. Doing Time on Maple Drive then was the first TV movie (rather than miniseries) to be recognized, in the TV Movie category; unsurprisingly. As indicated by GLAAD's Letterboxd list, both of these separate categories are treated as one, as they're both precursors of the unified Television Movie/TV Movie and Mini-series category. Which was then expanded to include anthology series, then separated... God, the whole thing is giving me brain damage. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- "By 2003, during the 14th GLAAD Media Awards," => "In 2003, during the 14th GLAAD Media Awards,"
- I get it, but that's part of the problem with this award. It's whole history is a mess, and there isn't much info from GLAAD. I do know that by this year, GLAAD was recognizing both TV movies and miniseries within a single category, but I'm not sure if this is when the process started. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- If all that is known is that the change happened "by" 2003, then "during the 14th awards" isn't appropriate. "By 2003 and the 14th awards" would probably work..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:39, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- Changed it in a different manner. Hopefully it's acceptable. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:24, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- If all that is known is that the change happened "by" 2003, then "during the 14th awards" isn't appropriate. "By 2003 and the 14th awards" would probably work..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:39, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- I get it, but that's part of the problem with this award. It's whole history is a mess, and there isn't much info from GLAAD. I do know that by this year, GLAAD was recognizing both TV movies and miniseries within a single category, but I'm not sure if this is when the process started. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- "American Horror Story winning for its second season" => "American Horror Story won for its second season"
- Done.
- Note b does not need a full stop -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- Done.
- Chris, do you happen to know if references are supposed to be in numerical order within one cell at FLC? See above. - Dank (push to talk) 18:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- I always thought they were, but when someone pushed back on that at a previous FAC/FLC (I forget the exact details) I couldn't actually find anywhere that stated it..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:31, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families
- Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 13:45, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
This is it, we're almost done with this Featured List series for flowering plant families. It's been a long, productive journey, and here we are. The rosids are generally divided into the fabids (named for the fava bean family) and malvids, and the nitrogen-fixing clade is a large clade (a group of related species) within the fabids. There's a lot here that will be familiar to almost everyone ... roses, apples, cucumbers, legumes, Cannabis. Comments are welcome. Basic licensing information for the images is on the list talk page. Malpighiales is handled in a separate table, with less data and no images, because some readers have problems with images not loading when the tables are longer than these, or when there are too many images. A hatnote directs readers to a gallery of images for almost all the families at Malpighiales. (Or, I could change the name of the list to "List of fabid families (except for Malpighiales)" or "List of non-Malpighiales fabid families", if you like.) - Dank (push to talk) 03:49, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Resolved comments from PresN and Dank (push to talk) 14:28, 15 April 2023 (UTC) |
---|
:Unless I'm missing something, nothing in the list explains why you have the Malpighiales families separate here, and in a different format? Also, the lead says there's eight orders but lists seven; the eighth, is of course, Malpighiales. --PresN 15:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
|
Ceoil
Placeholder
- Think your not placing enough emphasis on Cannabis' societal importance (vs simple use as material for fabric and rope) in the lead. That it has served spiritual/ceremonial/recreational purposes for at least the last 2400 years is certainly lead worthy. The note in the list entry however is very well done.
- Done.
- Overall, I'd prefer a more substantial lead.
- I've expanded both paragraphs in the lead, and as a bonus, I added a link for "temperate" so that we don't have to link it in every row. - Dank (push to talk)
- Excellent addition to the series. More later. Ceoil (talk) 00:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Ceoil: Delighted with your edits ... they bring up really interesting issues, as always (although, since this is the last in the series for a while, it's too late in the day to go through all the previous lists changing every "scattered", I think). If you'd hold off editing for a few minutes, I'm going to follow PresN's advice and toss out 4 of the orders. - Dank (push to talk) 14:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Done for now. Carry on. - Dank (push to talk) 16:49, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support I see you have addressed the above and those implied via my edit summaries. I'm happy here; as usual crisp and spare writing, top notch sourcing, beautiful illustrations, and clearly explained annotations. What more could be asked for. Ceoil (talk) 22:02, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Very kind. Regarding your question about whether this is the end ... I'm going to give the COM clade a shot. I'm leaving one column in the malvids blank to encourage others to participate. Elizabeth is working on the campanulids. And that will finish up the flowering plant families. - Dank (push to talk) 02:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:54, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Pseud 14
- Perhaps shrubs and vines could be linked
- Done in this edit. - Dank (push to talk)
- Would it be helpful if the full name of THC is written?
- Done.
- I'm assuming the instances red-links are articles that would be created soon?
- For the people who are namesakes of plant genera, I have kind of a standard answer for that. In this list, I see one such red link, for Joseph Surian. I first mentioned him in List of plant genera named for people (Q–Z). If you go to the talk page of that list and look in "Notes", you'll see that there used to be a link to the relevant section of his Wikidata entry (but that was removed in this edit). That shows you that he's considered notable enough for articles in the German and French Wikipedias, and those articles provide some helpful information.
- There's one plant species with a red link. Plant species are always assumed to be notable, per WP:SPECIES. If you're asking me to request that these articles be created, I can do that; I'd prefer not to write them myself.
- Thank you for clarifying this and providing your rationale. I don't see the red-links as hindrance for my providing my support.
- That's all from me. Another well-structured and informative work. Pseud 14 (talk) 00:38, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Pseud 14, kind of you to say that, and thanks for the review. - Dank (push to talk) 03:37, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Support from HAL
Happy to support. A look-over found nothing of concern. ~ HAL333 20:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Hal. Does that include the sources? I'm asking because Giants put this on the source-review-needed list a couple of days ago. - Dank (push to talk) 22:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Source review – The references all appear to be well-formatted and reliable, and the link-checker turned up no concerns. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:23, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
List of National Geographic cover stories (1959 and 1960s)
- Nominator(s): Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 09:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
I am nominating this for a featured list because I feel that National Geographic is an important culturally significant magazine that deserves to have its cover stories recognized. Most reference sources require a subscription to National Geographic, however if clicked on, you will be taken to the cover photo of that issue (Very slow website), you just won't be able to go into the magazine. Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 09:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- The lack of any meaningful non-Nat Geo sources makes me wonder if this meets NLIST. Not really a FLC problem, but I strongly suggest that you flesh out the lead to establish this --In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 10:51, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- I will work on this and have it updated within 24hrs, I appreciate the feedback. Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 11:11, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- I have added a bunch of new non nat-geo references for the lead section. Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 07:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Drive-by comment
- Shouldn't the article title say "(1959 and 1960s)" per MOS:AMPERSAND.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:39, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- I can move the article, I was just trying to shorten up the title as it's a bit long. Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 08:33, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- I would move it. Using the ampersand only saves two characters and the title isn't excessively long -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:56, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Moved the page with a redirect from the "&" version Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 09:02, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Moved this nomination page to match, since the bot gets confused sometimes otherwise. @Jake-jakubowski: since I'm not sure if the move messes up page watching. --PresN 15:39, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you! Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 02:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- Moved this nomination page to match, since the bot gets confused sometimes otherwise. @Jake-jakubowski: since I'm not sure if the move messes up page watching. --PresN 15:39, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Moved the page with a redirect from the "&" version Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 09:02, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- I would move it. Using the ampersand only saves two characters and the title isn't excessively long -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:56, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- I can move the article, I was just trying to shorten up the title as it's a bit long. Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 08:33, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- More comments
- I would add an opening sentence saying something like "National Geographic magazine is noted for its cover photography" (but probably better worded) sourced to something like this. This will help to make clear that this is a notable topic in its own right.
- "The cover story titled, "New...." - no need for that comma
- I have to say I don't think it looks right to have the titles of stories/articles both in quote marks and italicised. I don't know if the MOS says anything about this but I personally would go for just the quote marks.
- "by President Eisenhower" - give his full name, people outside the US will not necessarily know it
- "Cover stories published saw articles" => "Cover stories included articles"
- No need to link Eisenhower a second time, especially if you add his full name in para 1
- "Human-interest stories such" - not the start of a new sentence so no need for capital letter
- "And geographical locations" - same again
- That sentence is unbelievably long, taking up the entire second paragraph - can you break it up at all?
- "wrote the cover story titled, "First Explorers on the Moon", writing in detail, their account" - none of those commas are needed
- "Photos could also be a painting or a drawing" - a photo can't be a drawing. If not all the images are photos, I suggest changing the column header to "image"
- Notes c, d and f do not need full stops
- Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: All above are completed. Excellent suggestions, thank you :-) Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 05:43, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Nominator comments Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 16
- 25, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- @In actu: Added a second reference on the first sentence from The Boston Globe for more notability.
- Added scope to the tables for better accessibility.
Oppose: While National Geographic is a notable magazine, its cover stories are themselves usually not notable. Thus having an article list out the titles of these non-notable items is inappropriate, given that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Indeed, over 95 percent of the references here are to National Geographic itself—i.e. self-references that do not establish independent notability of the topic at hand. Lastly, the first sentence states the magazine "is noted for its cover stories and accompanying photography", but one of the two sources backing this claim is a self-published blog.—indopug (talk) 15:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Indopug If I can't find anymore reliable sources to indicate that the cover stories are notable, would you suggest that I delete the page entirely, or should I wait it out? Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 07:52, 28 April 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 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.| New Stars for Old Glory
becomes!scope=row | New Stars for Old Glory
. 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 18:18, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Completed Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 04:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
List of international goals scored by Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang
- Nominator(s): Idiosincrático (talk) 05:20, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi all, nominating Auba's international goal tally as I think i've covered just about every aspect required for FL status, it has a detailed stats section, good goal coverage for each match with match reports, and a solid lead detailing the most significant events of his international career.
Aubameyang represented Gabon for 13 years, and despite being born in France he is Gabon's all-time top scorer, thus being being worthy of a seperate list article from his bio. Big fan of his as he was a true servant at Arsenal, solid player. Idiosincrático (talk)
- Comments
- Lead image caption is a complete sentence so needs a full stop
- Image caption does not really need that ref as it is referenced in the prose
- Burkina and Gabon nicknames should be in quote marks, not italics
- "His 13-year stop-start stint with The Panthers was mottled with controversy, tensions and setbacks, he was often" - Probably start a new sentence with "He was"
- "The spurn came" - spurn isn't a noun. Could probably just say "this came"
- Add "and" before "the decision of Aubameyang" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:46, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Cheers @ChrisTheDude Idiosincrático (talk) 10:46, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Strong opposethere is a large amount of copyvio here: large sections of the lead are copied verbatim from the ESPN article. AryKun (talk) 15:32, 28 April 2023 (UTC)- Hi @AryKun, I've rewritten/removed sections referenced by the article, I hope it suffices, if not, let me know. Not sure what happened there, rather uncharacteristic of me. Idiosincrático (talk) 02:34, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
List of tornadoes in the tornado outbreak of May 4–6, 2007
- Nominator(s): ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
In early May 2007, a violent tornado outbreak struck the Great Plains of the United States. The first day of this outbreak has become notorious with an EF5 tornado essentially wiping the community of Greensburg, Kansas, off the map. This list covers all the tornadoes that touched down throughout this three-day outbreak. It follows the structure set by the two other tornado FLs and should be up to par with MOS requirements for such a large table. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:51, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- Image caption is a complete sentence so needs a full stop
- "In early-May 2007" - no reason for hyphen there
- Daily statistics table looks a little odd with the totals centre-aligned but the columns above right-aligned
- "A brief tornado lofted" - should that be "lifted?
- Lofted and lifted work as synonyms but the latter is often used when describing tornado dissipation. In this case it's about the irrigation pivot being thrown. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 20:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- "Storm chasers observed observed" - repeated word
- "This first one caused some damage to trees" => "The first one caused some damage to trees"
- "A man was killed in this home" => "A man was killed in his home"
- "where the recreation center and marina heavily impacted" => "where the recreation center and marina were heavily impacted"
- Lots of refs have single square brackets around the title - are those meant to be there?
- Yes, those are included because the refs don't have actual titles and those are stand-ins. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 20:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- I've made the above corrections and replied to two of them. Thank you for looking this over, ChrisTheDude! ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 20:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Dank
Supporting on prose.Very nice work. I skimmed the prose and made minor edits. Nothing big jumped out at me. Earlier in my wiki-career, I used to do a lot of prose supports ... Iusuallyalmost always do complete reviews at FLC, but there was a lot to read here. If I get motivated, I might finish up later. I hope you'll consider reviewing (or even just prose-reviewing)List of basal superasterid families orList of early-diverging flowering plant families or (whenever I can nominate it) List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families. - Dank (push to talk) 15:29, 6 April 2023 (UTC) Note that my last edit wasn't strictly "prose" ... I couldn't find that phrase in the two listed sources. That's not a problem ... I just removed the phrase, and the paragraph works fine without it (prose-wise), but you can re-insert if you want to source it (or if my search failed for some odd reason). - Dank (push to talk) 16:01, 6 April 2023 (UTC) Oops ... forgot my standard disclaimer "feel free to revert or discuss". That always applies. - Dank (push to talk) 12:03, 7 April 2023 (UTC)- @Dank: I appreciate the review! The bit you removed isn't of much importance for the purposes of this list so it's all good. I'll take a look at the early-diverging flowering plants in the next day or two. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 02:49, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
- Continuing.
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- Checking the FLC criteria:
- 1. I covered prose above. I typically don't check sorting on number or date columns, but I did check the state column. I sampled the links in the main 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 one image seems fine.
- 6. It is stable.
- Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 23:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- 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. You have them for the summary table but not the main one. Row scopes can be added by adding
!scope=row
to each primary cell, e.g.|SW of [[Arnett, Oklahoma|Arnett]]
becomes!scope=row | SW of [[Arnett, Oklahoma|Arnett]]
. 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 18:17, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
List of ICC Men's T20 World Cup five-wicket hauls
I believe this article deserves to be a featured list. Made the list in accordance with the FL criteria. So, I am glad to present it for review and looking forward to your feedback. RoboCric (talk) 06:14, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- " In a T20I, each team plays single innings," => " In a T20I, each team plays a single innings,"
- "The first five-wicket haul in an ICC Men's T20 World Cup match as well as any T20I match was" => "The first five-wicket haul in an ICC Men's T20 World Cup match, as well as in any T20I match, was"
- "who picked up 6 wickets for 8 runs recording the best bowling figures in the T20 World Cup till date" => "who picked up 6 wickets for 8 runs, recording the best bowling figures in the T20 World Cup to date" ("till date" is not an expression in English)
- "He set the remarkable record" - calling it remarkable is not WP:NPOV
- "Rangana Herath's fifer against New Zealand on 31 March 2014, is" - no reason for that comma to be there
- "Mujeeb Ur Rahman of Afghanistan is the first player" => "Mujeeb Ur Rahman of Afghanistan was the first player"
- "on T20 World Cup debut" => "on his T20 World Cup debut"
- Image caption: "Mujeeb Ur Rahman is the first player to pick up a five-wicket haul on ICC Men's T20 World Cup debut" => "Mujeeb Ur Rahman was the first player to pick up a five-wicket haul on his ICC Men's T20 World Cup debut." (note the full stop at the end) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:46, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Fixed all the issues you raised. Waiting for your further review or opinion. RoboCric (talk) 08:55, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Harrias
- "..with bowling figures of 5 wickets for 6 runs.." Explain what this means, and consider linking to Bowling analysis.
- "..the first player from associate nations to.." This would seem better as "..the first player from an associate nation to.."
- "Rangana Herath's fifer against.." "fifer" isn't encyclopaedic language.
- "He grabbed five wickets conceding.." Similarly, in this context, "grabbed" isn't encyclopaedic language.
- "He averaged 0.60 in that match, which is also the best average for.." Provide the wikilink on the first, not second, use of "average" here.
- Be consistent throughout the article whether to use numbers or words for the number of wickets.
- In the table, large and well-known cities such as London, Perth, Chittagong, Kolkata etc shouldn't be linked, per the MOS.
- The "Season overview" table needs row scopes.
- Both images need appropriate and descriptive alt text.
That's it from me. Harrias (he/him) • talk 13:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
List of awards and nominations received by Joan Allen
Joan Allen is a well-known American actress with three Oscar nominations. Jovian Eclipse 22:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comments
- "The following year, she appeared in the historical drama The Crucible as Elizabeth Proctor, a woman accused of witchcraft, and and" - spot the stray word :-)
- "Allen's portrayal of Eve Archer, the wife of an FBI Agent cheated on by her husband's identity thief" - maybe "Allen's portrayal of Eve Archer, the wife of an FBI Agent cheated on by a man who has usurped her husband's identity" might be clearer.....?
- Think that's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:50, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback, @ChrisTheDude. Jovian Eclipse 14:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:31, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Eiji Tsuburaya filmography
- Nominator(s): Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Eiji Tsuburaya is considered one of the most important and influential figures in the history of cinema. I've worked had to make this comprehensive list of all works in film and television (cited in accessible documents) as featuring his contributions. I'm looking forward to the comments from other users on how to improve this article that I have dedicated myself to completing with the help of other users such as Armegon. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:34, 22 March 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.!Cinematography
becomes!scope=col | Cinematography
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, like "Credited as", 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.| 1919
becomes!scope=row | 1919
. Your choice if the first column (year) or the title column is the "primary" one. 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 18:10, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestions, I read MOS:DTAB and added these things to the page. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 22:04, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Irrfan Khan filmography
Irrfan Khan was one of the few actors to be successful in both Western and Indian cinema. He unfortunately died before his time in 2020. Here is a rundown of his key film and television roles. As always, I welcome all constructive comments on how to improve it. Cowlibob (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - all good -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:27, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Dank
- @FrB.TG and @Krimuk2.0: No rush ... I'm just pinging because I don't want to jump into a review before I see if you guys are satisfied with the changes since the last nomination (where you both commented). - Dank (push to talk) 18:21, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: I was not involved in the previous nomination. This was a project I was working on independently to the previous nominator. Cowlibob (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying. I've always been a fan of your work. Still, it will help me out if, before I review, I can get a sense of whether they're both happy with how the article has changed since last month when the previous nomination was archived. - Dank (push to talk) 18:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank sorry for the delayed response but the list looks much better than the last time. I’ll see if I have time for a full review. FrB.TG (talk) 04:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks ... not a problem, I just wanted to make sure that I wasn't ignoring the previous reviews and reviewers. - Dank (push to talk) 12:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank sorry for the delayed response but the list looks much better than the last time. I’ll see if I have time for a full review. FrB.TG (talk) 04:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying. I've always been a fan of your work. Still, it will help me out if, before I review, I can get a sense of whether they're both happy with how the article has changed since last month when the previous nomination was archived. - Dank (push to talk) 18:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: I was not involved in the previous nomination. This was a project I was working on independently to the previous nominator. Cowlibob (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- "Filmfare Award for Best Actor in a Negative Role" (in the Notes column): since filmographies and awards lists often list nominations as well as wins, it would be helpful if there were something in the table (in the column or in a header or in a key) indicating whether awards represent nominations or wins.
- Two films in the table that start with "The" aren't sorting correctly.
- Refs #16 and #134 don't have a "retrieved on" date. I'm not taking a position on whether refs #75, #91 and #131 need the same.
- The UPSD tool is a bit skeptical of Times of India; I'm not taking a position, I'm just asking you to search for and review these.
- The first comment (on YouTube) on the feature-length film sourced to YouTube implies that something (probably the film?) is still under copyright ... which seems likely.
- 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 reliable sources, and the UPSD tool probably isn't indicating any actual problems (but see above; also, this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present (except as above).
- 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 one image seems fine.
- 6. It is stable.
- I hope you'll consider reviewing
List of basal superasterid families orList of early-diverging flowering plant families or (whenever I can nominate it) List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families. - Dank (push to talk) 20:34, 1 April 2023 (UTC) - Your edits so far get it close enough for a support. Well done. I'll come back later and see what you decided to do with nominations vs. wins and the Times of India cites. - Dank (push to talk) 21:45, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: Thanks for the copyediting, looks much better. The Times of India is generally accepted for these type of lists as I think previous concerns were more about political coverage and potential promotional pieces but it would be uncontroversial to use it for simple facts like appearances in a film or television show. When the award is mentioned on its own in the notes it is a win, when it was just a nomination then it has "nominated" next to it. Cowlibob (talk) 10:23, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- With Times of India, all I wanted was for you to take a look ... which you did (you made one edit). On the subject of whether the word "nomination" should appear somewhere (more than just the one time) ... it's not something I care about, I'm just saying that I'm aware that it's something people talk about sometimes. All good! - Dank (push to talk) 13:55, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Dank: Thanks for the copyediting, looks much better. The Times of India is generally accepted for these type of lists as I think previous concerns were more about political coverage and potential promotional pieces but it would be uncontroversial to use it for simple facts like appearances in a film or television show. When the award is mentioned on its own in the notes it is a win, when it was just a nomination then it has "nominated" next to it. Cowlibob (talk) 10:23, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
- Scope row should be placed on the film title and not the year. This is a list of films and not of years, after all.
- I would archive the sources to prevent link rot.
- I'm not particularly familiar on the reliability of Indian sources, so I yield that to the source reviewer.
- There's some inconsistency in the notes column. Do blank rows imply that he was in pretty much every episode of the series? Why give the titles for the Star Bestsellers episodes if it isn't done elsewhere?
That's all I got. Glad to see Khan is getting some attention. He was a good actor. ~ HAL333 17:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
List of World Heritage Sites in the United States
- Nominator(s): Tone 08:38, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
The US has 24 World Heritage Sites and 19 sites on the tentative list. This time I am nominating a bit longer list, so input will be very welcome to check for typos and grammar. The style is standard for the WHS lists. Tone 08:38, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments by RunningTiger123
Very happy to see this one submitted here, as I've visited several of these sites myself.
- "while two sites (the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park (Montana) and Kluane / Wrangell – St. Elias / Glacier Bay / Tatshenshini-Alsek (Alaska))" – consider rewriting without nested parentheses
- "4000 archaeological sites" → "4,000 archaeological sites" (match comma usage from elsewhere in the article)
- "more than a half" → "more than half"
- "reaches the depths" → "reaches depths"
- "The original wooden steeple used to house the Liberty Bell." – sentence fragment
- "sea lions, bald eagle, and California brown pelican" – don't mix plural and singular forms
- "The park is one of the world's largest remaining remnants of the diverse Arcto-Tertiary Geoflora era, it is a refuge of the flora and fauna that survived the Quaternary glaciations." – comma splice
- "centre" → "center" (occurs three times in prose; use American English)
- "storey" → "story" (American English)
- "The mountains are meeting" → "The mountains meet"
- "world's largest marine protected area" → "the world's largest marine protected area"
- "another 2000 years" → "another 2,000 years" (consistent commas)
- "one of symbols" → "one of the symbols"
- "California Current flows" → "The California Current flows"
- "the Pacific Plate, is subducted" → "the Pacific Plate is subducted"
- "the Rio Grande river" → "the Rio Grande" ("Rio" and "river" are redundant)
- "from the second half of 18th century, are planned cities" → "from the second half of the 18th century are planned cities" (note added word and removed comma)
- Consider using Template:Efn for notes – they allow the footnote to pop up when the symbol is hovered over, which I think is more convenient for readers.
- Alt text and sorting look good.
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed, thank you for checking! Not sure about the sentence fragment, "The original wooden steeple used to house the Liberty Bell." -> Before they put it to display, the bell was in the steeple. Tone 14:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- That one's on me; I misread the sentence and how "used" was used. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:54, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:54, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Reywas92
Also excited to see this one, been to 15 between the listed and nominated sites!
- World Heritage Convention can be wikilinked (and shouldn't this be done for all these lists?)
- Please be consistent with cultural heritage and natural heritage sentence structure.
- "As of 2023," is unnecessary, this is unlikely to become outdated
- I like it because every now and then (a couple of years) these lists get updated, especially for larger countries such as the US.
- Right but when a new site is named, we can be reasonably certain that this article will be updated right away. The point of "as of" is to tell the reader, "this might not be presently accurate when you read it", but while hypothetically anything can change, we don't need a disclaimer that adds no value except in the unlikely event another site is designated yet no one is updating Wikipedia any more.
- I like it because every now and then (a couple of years) these lists get updated, especially for larger countries such as the US.
- "Second Session" should be lowercase
- "twenty different states" remove "different", it can't be 20 of the same states!
- Rm comma after Pennsylvania
- no "the" before Everglades NP
- "and also functions as a model to understand the ecosystem processes" too close to source
- "and" before mountain goat
- "The canyon is..." sentence should have parallel clauses
- It read fine to me, but please check now.
- The sentence has two verbs and therefore two clauses, but the first verb is only introducing a list with two items so they need an "and" between them. Or the second verb "reaches" can be removed so it's a proper three item list with all three items in the same format.
- It read fine to me, but please check now.
- "Precambrian and Paleozoic portions particularly well exposed and containing rich fossil assemblages" also quite close to source
- I think this is ok, if I change it too much, it will be clumsy. I am open to suggestions.
- "The area is home to several mammal, bird, and reptile species," overly wordy, rephrase for conciseness or more meaning
- The "in Danger" explanations are a bit wordy, that's half the description
- But this is important, especially because Everglades have been listed more than once.
- Olympic: "as well as" should be "and"
- I don't think the paraphrased "that the evolution is taking its separate course" has quite the same meaning as the original, reword the sentence or use a different fact
- Removed, it pretty much doubles the fact that isolation results in different subspecies and later species.
- " largest pre-Columbian archaeological site north of Mexico" doesn't mean the same thing as the orginal "the largest pre-Columbian settlement north of Mexico", not sure if this paraphrase is still accurate.
- This fact is listed later, criterion (iii). Both are correct.
- "one of the largest remaining remnants of the diverse Arcto-Tertiary geoflora era" another copy-paste
- "the continuous biological evolution of the natural system" again, just changed "this" in the source to "the", not great
- Removed.
- Statue of liberty has "state" typo
- "has welcomed millions of immigrants" in the source is more appropriate tense than "was welcoming millions of migrants", please rewrite
- Already fixed by another editor.
- "glaciers have created" -> "glaciers created"
- "The altitudes range from 2,000 ft (600 m) to 13,000 ft (4,000 m), resulting in a wide variety of habitats that include diverse flora and fauna" kind of vague, rewrite or remove altogether and put in something more descriptive, it's Yosemite!
- Removed. I guess I am going too long with some descriptions.
- "in" -> "on the island"
- "freedom, nobility, self-determination, and prosperity" copy-pasted
- It is, but I cannot really use synonyms for those... Open to suggestions. The sentence overall is different, though.
- I'd remove altogether if you can't write it in Wikipedia's voice, I don't think about self-determination when seeing neo-classical architecture
- It is, but I cannot really use synonyms for those... Open to suggestions. The sentence overall is different, though.
- Carlsbad: speleothems links to Speleogenesis instead of speleothem
- "from the Permian" -> during
- "of this site" seems unnecessary
- "blurring of the boundaries between exterior and interior" copy-paste
- What about now?
- wikilink petrified trees
- "allows the paleontologists study" "allow paleontologists to study"
- "first elevators," "first" unneeded
- "aesthetics" singular
Reywas92Talk 22:21, 2 April 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)
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. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.!! Date !! Venue [...]
becomes!scope=col | Date
, with each header on its own line. 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 23:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done for all tables, cheers. Idiosincrático (talk) 02:48, 16 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)
I've striked through the comments above that I believe have been adequately addressed. More comments below:
- "Formerly Footscray (Suburban) / Middle Footscray earlier Footscray (Main Line)." This doesn't make grammatical sense. Same with "Formerly Spottiswoode earlier Bayswater and earlier Edom".
- Citation titles in all uppercase should be changed to title case as per MOS:ALLCAPS.
- When you have an archived citation, the website parameter should be for the original website, not the archived website. E.g. www.dpc.vic.gov.au instead of web.archive.org
- There is an inconsistency between using domain names and website names for the website name parameter in citations. E.g. you've got "www.metrotrains.com.au", but then "Victoria's Big Build". Citation style needs to be consistent.
- "Connect people appointed to bayswater level crossing removal". Place names should be capitalised.
- Metro Tunnel is not a service is it? Other services will run on the Metro Tunnel. Why is it in the services column next to the Metro Tunnel stations?
- LXRP is an acronym that has not been explained.
- I'm thinking that former names should probably be removed entirely. Most of them are not sourced and it is hard to ensure you have listed them comprehensively.
- I reckon for the transport connections column, the icon should link to the article on the transport mode instead of the station, which is already linked in the name column. Those icons should also have a key at the top.
- There is still no source for the distance from Southern Cross.
- "with the main underground section being in the City Loop". How about changing that to "with the main underground section being the City Loop". What other underground sections are there?
- "These electrified 16 lines are the..." Change this to "The electrified lines are the..."
- "...Sandringham line and the Flemington Racecourse line." Change this to "...the Sandringham line and the Flemington Racecourse line."
- " In addition to these 16 electrified lines there is also the Stony Point line which operates as a shuttle service between Frankston and Stony Point." This can be simplified to "There is also the Stony Point line which operates as a shuttle service between Frankston and Stony Point."
- "...provide some sort of transport connections." Change this to "provide connections to other modes of transport."
- https://melbournesptgallery.weebly.com/ is definitely not a reliable source.
- "Bus connections are common at most suburban stations. Stations in the inner suburbs and the central business district additionally may offer tram connection." I suggest changing this to "Bus services are common at most suburban stations. Stations in the inner suburbs and the central business district commonly have tram services."
- "However, not all stations offer transport connections. This is most commonly seen in the outer parts of the city." This sentence may be redundant and could be removed.
- Putting long sentences in brackets should be avoided.
- Why is List of currently operational stations hideable but List of future stations and List of tourist/heritage stations not hideable? Should the first table even be hideable?
- "c. April 1891" and " c. December 1888" aren't sorting into correct date order.
- ".76" and ".8". There should be a leading 0 here.
- Figures such as "24.5" and "39.5" should have a trailing 0 so that they have the same number of decimal places as the other figures.
- Image column should not be sortable. Notes column should not be sortable.
As several of my initial comments are yet to be fixed and with so many more comments now, I don't believe this article is likely to meet the featured list criteria soon, and so I have to oppose. Steelkamp (talk) 05:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- @ThylacineHunter: Is the source added here publicly accessible somehow (e.g. in a library or published online somewhere)? I just want to make sure its not some internal document that has not been made public anywhere. Steelkamp (talk) 05:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I am unable to share the link to where the original source is published online. These same values are reproduced on various "fan" websites like Vicsig, but these sites have caused issues with WP:RS in the past, and I thought I would remove this issue by bypassing it and going to where they get their info from. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 05:54, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Without this source, the next available "published" ones I know of that are publicly accessible are the "c1927 Victorian Railways Diagram of Gradients & Curves" and the "1927 Victorian Railways Grades Book - Supplementary Diagrams". Both are now extremely out of date (as most stations have been rebuilt at slightly new locations, lines have also changed) and the fact they are in miles to the nearest 1/4 mile. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:12, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- This might be a problem then. Sounds like these are fan sites who are leaking internal documents which do not meet the published criterion of WP:SOURCE. Steelkamp (talk) 06:13, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Don't get me wrong, I recognise the difficulty of getting a source for the distancing. For a similar reason, I have not nominated List of Transperth railway stations for FL as I haven't found a source which has the distances of the Airport line stations from Perth station. Steelkamp (talk) 06:15, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think this list will need to keep the distances column as it is useful to sort the stations by distance (while sorting by suburb is basically useless). -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:28, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- It is possible Vicsig may have gotten permission from Metro Trains to uses this info on their site. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- There are some of these "reliable fan" sites (Vicsig, victorianrailways.net, PJV, ComRails, and even mine to name a few) that have been granted access to information that Wikipedia editors don't have access to, yet due to the outdated WP:RS this information is not acceptable to be used. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 08:46, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- How about checking out a street directory. I know the ones for Perth have station distances and maybe ones for Melbourne do as well. Steelkamp (talk) 06:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- The Melways street directory does not have station distances. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- There may need to be a reform to the WP:RS...
- These so called "fan" sites, many of which put in just as much research as book writers (if not more), may need to be accepted as reliable. While any person can publish their own book, without doing any research, and be accepted as reliable.
- Another problem, books are static, as soon as any book about the railways is published, it is instantly outdated. These reliable "fan" sites are constantly updating as changes to the actual railways occurs. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:52, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ThylacineHunter if you do believe sources such as vicsig and victorian railways are reliable you could request a review for Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources if the review deems the source reliable then it will be possible to update fo FL without removing the distances. NotOrrio (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- to begin just go to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and start a discussion NotOrrio (talk) 11:37, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Another editor tried something similar a few years back, and they weren't approved then. It is too much hassle trying to deal with Wikipedia politics. If the Australian transport Wikiproject had of existed, maybe we could have created a list of approved reliable sources.
- I'm happy to provide SOMEONE ELSE with a list of the trusted "fan" sites (that most rail enthusiasts turn to before trying the actual companies like Metro Trains for info), but I WILL NOT be putting myself through that hassle. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 12:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- to begin just go to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and start a discussion NotOrrio (talk) 11:37, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- @ThylacineHunter if you do believe sources such as vicsig and victorian railways are reliable you could request a review for Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources if the review deems the source reliable then it will be possible to update fo FL without removing the distances. NotOrrio (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- The Melways street directory does not have station distances. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- It is possible Vicsig may have gotten permission from Metro Trains to uses this info on their site. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- i believe the only way to get to FL status is to remove the distances for now and then re add them once a reliable source is published on the distances. I did a bit of research on it and the only thing i did find were fan maps which do not count as reliable sources NotOrrio (talk) 07:14, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Going from past experience, there may not be a reliable source in the next 30+ years. I'd prefer to keep this as a useable non-feature list, instead of making it a useless feature list. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 07:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think this list will need to keep the distances column as it is useful to sort the stations by distance (while sorting by suburb is basically useless). -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 06:28, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I am unable to share the link to where the original source is published online. These same values are reproduced on various "fan" websites like Vicsig, but these sites have caused issues with WP:RS in the past, and I thought I would remove this issue by bypassing it and going to where they get their info from. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 05:54, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Steelkamp just a few things to note
- -The opening dates are scattered through out Anderson, Rick (2010). Stopping All Stations (with the excpetion of stations which opened after 2010, which i have added seperate sources for). Sorry for not mentioning earlier
- -Anderson, Rick (2010). Stopping All Stations also has the former names for the stations, since the book is used multiple times to source these former names ive just added it at the top of the notes section
- -There are other underground sections in Melbourne's rail network such as the tunnel at box hill however those are smaller and less important in comparison to the city loop
- Additionally I've fixed the following
- 1.Formerly Spottiswoode earlier Bayswater and earlier Edom now says:
- Formerly
- Spottiswoode
- Bayswater
- Edom
- additionally ive used this layout for all stations with multiple former names
- 2. Although it needs a re check ive fixed most of the source name and replaced it with the proper website name including all the www.metrotrains.com.au sources which now display as "Metro Trains Melbourne" in the source name
- 3. Internet archives have been fixed so the original link and the archive link are inserting
- 4.The five metro tunnel stations now display Cranbourne, Pakenham and Sunbury services instead of just metro tunnel
- 5. There might be more use of "LXRP" but ive replaced all lxrp acroynms in the notes section with "Level Crossing Removal Project"
- 6.There is the metro train melbourne source for sitances if it can't be considerd reliable as it is a potential leak. distances could be removed all together
- 7. Lead section grammatical erros have been addressed
- 8.I've removed the source from MPTG and as a result removed the information backed up by it
- 9. Images and notes are no longer sortable
- I wil fix the rest soon NotOrrio (talk) 07:59, 7 May 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)
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.! rowspan="2" |Name
becomes!scope=col rowspan="2" | 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.![[Aircraft railway station|Aircraft]]
becomes!scope=row | [[Aircraft railway station|Aircraft]]
. 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 23:09, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Updates from nominator
- Added sources for suburbs and zones using the metro trains melbourne sources (not for showgrounds and flemington as they didn't have a metro trains page for some reason
- Added a new paragraph for railway lines NotOrrio (talk) 03:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Drive by
- I don't know if someones mentioned this already but many of the links within the transport connections column are broken/incorrectly linked/have been copied/pasted incorrectly. I started listing them but I realised a good fraction of this long list are wrong. Transport connection links that are wrong include, but not limited to: Watsonia Westgarth St Albans Seaholme Royal Park Riversdale Ripponlea Ringwood Richmond.
- Is a miles column relevant/necessary for an Australian list?
- I think link rot would rip into this article just purely because of how many references there are, archiving might be necessary. Whilst the refs in the list are fresh, it took me 15 seconds to find a dead mainstream link within a random station article, just a consequence of the constant urban development. -- Idiosincrático (talk) 15:37, 9 May 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)
Support Comments from Kavyansh
Thanks for working on the list. I have worked and raised quite a few lists of this series to FL status, and would be happy to leave some comments in a due course -– Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 03:47, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- "The party's victory in that election was mainly due to its Democratic opponent Al Smith, who was a Catholic and opposed to Prohibition, which caused many members of the Southern Baptist Convention to switch to the Republican Party" — may require an inline attribution of the author.
- " the emergence of the Pinellas Republican Party began to shift Florida towards the Republican Party" — Is there a way to avoid this repetition of 'Republican Party'
- "In the 2000 presidential election, Bush led Gore by" — The reader has not yet been introduced to George W. Bush and Al Gore. Specify full names and link.
- "The Bush campaign team filed a lawsuit against Gore in the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the recounting of votes in certain counties violated the law. The case became known as Bush v. Gore." — This whole can be diluted as "In Bush v. Gore, the Bush campaign filed a lawsuit against Gore in the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the recounting of votes in certain counties violated the law (which law??)"
- " on December 12" — No need to be that specific. But if we are going to be specific with dates, better specify when was the lawsuit filed.
- "George W. Bush eventually" — Link and name him at his earlier instance
- Perhaps add a line that the margin of 537 votes was controversial; and we have never specified in the lead that election result was deadlocked due to Florida's recount.
- Can we combing footnotes [e] and [f]
- 'www.museumoffloridahistory.com' should really be 'Museum of Florida History'
- Same with 'edition.cnn.com', 'transition.fec.gov', and many more.
- Do we need to specify all that many authors in [2]
- Is 270toWin reliable?
A fine piece of work! Thanks a lot on continuing the series. Let me know if I can help on any of these lists in future! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:44, 6 May 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)
Comments by FrB.TG
- If she hasn't received any recognition as an author, I would leave that part out from the lead. Also, I would consolidate "director and producer" as "filmmaker".
- Do we really need the one-sentence lead sentence to stand on its own as a paragraph? It can easily be merged with the second para.
- "She also received acclaim for her portrayal of the Grand High Witch in Roald Dahl's film adaptation The Witches (1990)" - while the source does say her performance is known for its "vampy splendor", I don't think that necessarily counts as "critical acclaim". FrB.TG (talk) 17:25, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Leo Mercury (talk) 12:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Z1720
Source review, spot checks not done. Version reviewed:
- Ref 15: What makes Movie City News a high-quality source?
Image review:
- No concerns.
Those are my thoughts. Please ping when the above is addressed. Z1720 (talk) 02:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- I've just changed the source to one from the Los Angeles Times. Thanks, Z1720 (talk · contribs)! --Leo Mercury (talk) 12:48, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Support my concerns have been addressed above. Z1720 (talk) 14:53, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Birdienest81
All film titles, including partial titles, within article titles used for citations or references should be italicized .
- --Birdienest81talk 08:46, 19 May 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: [3]).
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., [4]), 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)
- All images now have ALT text. Rationales are still underway. CT55555(talk) 02:06, 22 March 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. - 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 22:40, 15 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)
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. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! Title
becomes!scope=col | Title
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. You have this for some columns (e.g. the first table) but not all. - 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.| 01-CT/TW
becomes!scope=row | 01-CT/TW
. 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 22:39, 15 March 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: [5]). 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 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)
- Hi PresN, this review hasn't had any input since January and I think I'm going to withdraw it and put up List of intersex Olympians for the moment. I remembered your comments and came to review them to implement them there, but I'm finding them a little complicated at the moment. Maybe it's the hour or maybe it's because of the different cells. Would you be willing to expand on some of the points at that list's talk page - no problem if not, I'll try to wade through the accessibility help page and I'm sure you'll have comments when I put it up for consideration :) Kingsif (talk) 22:01, 29 April 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 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)
Jake
- Support All issues seem to be addressed. Table layout is good and is well written. Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 16:19, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Support from Harrias
- "It was first held in 1911 after IMS founders James A. Allison, Carl G. Fisher, Arthur C. Newby and Frank H. Wheeler began experimenting with a long-distance auto race." Do we really need this list of names? And further, I find this awkward phrasing anyhow. Maybe something more like "It was first held in 1911 after the track's owners had experimented with several other long-distances auto races over the previous two years."
- "The race was not held from 1917 to 1918 and.." It seems odd to have a range for just two years; how about simply "The race was not held in 1917 or 1918 and.."
- "Following 33 drivers qualifying for the event by completing a four-lap time trial, they are positioned in rows of three.." Two issues with this sentence. Firstly, I really don't think it is very well written, and secondly, it implies that was always the case, but it seems to have differed in early years. A simply clarification stating that this was the case for most of the race's history would suffice on this point, I think.
- "Juan Pablo Montoya holds the record for the longest period of time between two victories – 15 years between the 2000 and 2015 races." Might it be worth adding after this that Castroneves has the longest span between first and last win?
- "52 American drivers have.." Per the MOS, don't start a sentence with a number. Also, this needs context to explicitly mention that the race has been won more times by Americans than any other nationality.
- "The first winner in 1911 was.." This would be better as "The winner of the first race was.."
- "..who was also the most recent first-time winner" This feels unnecessary.
- "Two Indianapolis 500s, in 1924 and 1941, were won by two drivers sharing a car." It feels like it would be relevant to add in the context from note c that relief drivers were used in four other years, but not recognized as race winners.
- "Two Indianapolis 500s.." Maybe "Two editions of the Indianapolis 500.."
- "Team Penske has won the most races as a car entrant with 18 since their first in 1972." This could do with a footnote, as in the table these wins are listed under three separate entrants.
- "E.C. Patterson" Per the MOS the initials should be spaced: "E. C. Patterson", same for "H.C.S. Motor Company".
- The table has a column labelled "Make", described as "Make of car and engine", but many of the items on the list are Models, not Makes: Peugeot L76, Maserati 8CTF, Dallara DW12.
- It would seem worth adding a footnote somewhere in the "By car make" section, that since ?2009? all chassis have been provided by Dallara.
That's it on the prose and tables. Harrias (he/him) • talk 13:24, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Harrias: Have made changes to the list based on your points EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 17:10, 11 May 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.
- Sorry for the very long delay Morogris, I was quite ill for the past few weeks and starting to feel better now. This is a good suggestion, if it is followed it would require the addition of around 50 new references, just versions of the same one with the page number included. The references are spread around the large document. Good news is that the pdf is searchable using the find function so it is indeed possible to do this, I just want to make sure that this is what you want as it will take quite a lot of time to add these separate references. Mattximus (talk) 21:33, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- 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)
- Apart from outstanding questions, I believe I've responded to or completed all recommendations. Please let me know if I missed anything! Mattximus (talk) 01:48, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Morogris. - Dank (push to talk) 02:17, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Pinging reviewers who did not support or oppose: @ChrisTheDude, HAL333, and Morogris: --PresN 18:20, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support Morogris (✉ • ✎) 21:17, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support--金色黎明 (talk) 08:17, 16 May 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?
- Kingsif (talk) 01:28, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- Kingsif, I hopefully have addressed all of your concerns. I went through and added his acting credits but there are no sources for two or three, like the Parks and Rec cameo. ~ HAL333 15:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Screen Rant says it was S7 E1 "2017" and he played Ken Jeggings. That was the top result for 'herzog parks and rec cameo', a few more down was this Guardian write-up about the persona he has in acting cameos, something which I think could be added at the end of the introduction (where the cameos are mentioned); thanks for the work so far, I'll look through your updates soon! Kingsif (talk) 16:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- I don't regard Screen Rant as a high quality reliable source, and have never used it in any filmography I've written. But I include it if you want. ~ HAL333 17:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Screen Rant says it was S7 E1 "2017" and he played Ken Jeggings. That was the top result for 'herzog parks and rec cameo', a few more down was this Guardian write-up about the persona he has in acting cameos, something which I think could be added at the end of the introduction (where the cameos are mentioned); thanks for the work so far, I'll look through your updates soon! Kingsif (talk) 16:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
- Kingsif, I hopefully have addressed all of your concerns. I went through and added his acting credits but there are no sources for two or three, like the Parks and Rec cameo. ~ HAL333 15:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Comments from PMC
HAL333 hasn't edited since February, so I'm not sure if these comments will be seen or responded to.
- Most of the fiction films called out in the lead appear to be significant in some way - a career first, an award-winner, a collaboration with a significant partner, etc. However, Rescue Dawn and Bad Lieutenant appear to be neither. Why call them out, specifically?
- The selection for the documentaries appears similarly arbitrary. It's unclear why these specific works are being highlighted, as opposed to any of his other dozens of works. If it's because they are significant, the lead should say so.
- I revised the final paragraph of the lead to remove some repetitive wording.
- I see Kingsif has noted some of the inconsistencies with the "Other work" tables and I also noticed these
Aside from this, the formatting is clear, organization is clear, and I see no issues with the sourcing. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:38, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- Premeditated Chaos, I think I've addressed your comments. I modified the lead and tried to include more awards/noms but it simply goes down to due weight. There's major Herzog and there's minor Herzog, and their coverage in sources is proportionate. ~ HAL333 15:45, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
@HAL333: I see that you have returned to editing; are you planning on continuing this nomination? --PresN 18:20, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Yes - I'm sorry about the delay. I'll have it all knocked out by Sunday. ~ HAL333 20:41, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Source review – Reference reliability looks okay throughout and the link-checker tool shows no issues. One formatting issue exists that should be addressed: refs 72 and 80 lack publishers (The New York Times and Toronto International Film Festival, respectively). Giants2008 (Talk) 21:24, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Nominations for removal
List of Braathens destinations
I am nominating this for featured list removal because it does not meet the criteria for a featured list:
- Attribute 2: the lead of the article is a generic lead that could be for the main page of this airline, and does not set out the inclusion criteria. It is indeed not clear why the destinations of SAS Braathens are excluded but those of other previous versions of the airline are included. Whilst the list (which is much lower down in the article) has inclusion criteria above it, these criteria appear to be user-created, not cited to a reliable source.
- Attribute 3b: The list contains information that is inherently not capable of being supported by the references cited to support them, since these references were published before the dates given (in some cases many years before). For example the end-date of the service to London Stansted is given as 2002, but this is cited to a news report published in 1998. The service to Umea is given as having a start-date of 1997 and an end-date of 1999, but this is cited to a report dated 1996. The service to Rome is listed as "non-continuous" (?) and ending in 2002, but this is cited to a book published in 1996. This pattern is repeated over and over throughout the list so listing all the examples would be tedious. Since (some of) these services obviously continued under SAS Braathens it is worth asking whether they really ended in 2004 or whether they continued under SAS Braathens, and if so, which did, and which didn't?
- Attribute 3c: The list largely reproduces prose content from the main article airline article about Braathens, and from History of Braathens SAFE (1946–1993) and History of Braathens (1994–2004). Indeed, it largely repeats the prose content above the list in the same article.
Moreover this list is a massive failure of WP:NOT which expressly forbids providing exhaustive lists of all the services of a commercial enterprise. I understand featured-list review assumes that these issues should be dealt with before something is proposed for listing, and of course standards have improved, but especially the WP:CRYSTALBALL issues mentioned above should have been picked up on even back in 2010. I guess the fact that the citation were foreign-language ones and not accessible via the internet prevented them from looking at them, but even so the publication dates of these news reports are there for everyone to see. FOARP (talk) 08:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- Comment - Reviewers here may also wish to read the outcome of Wikipedia:Featured_list_removal_candidates/List_of_Cathay_Dragon_destinations/archive1 which dealt with similar content. Whilst the prose-quality and effort expended on this article appears higher, the problem of how the start-end dates of the services listed could not be sourced are essentially the same. FOARP (talk) 09:19, 19 May 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 [6] 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)
- Oppose This list is rescuable. I have removed the flags and the comments on nationality and clarified the criteria for eligibility per the latest ceremony. The rationale section could be reworded or removed. A brief search shows that they didn't publically reveal the top three until recently but this could be added. I'll try to amend more when I have more time. Cowlibob (talk) 11:57, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ping me when you're done so I can change vote Idiosincrático (talk) 02:43, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
- It's been 2 months since the last significant edit, and I don't believe the current version has anywhere enough content to meet the standard of FL. If improvements aren't being made, can we de-list this? Joseph2302 (talk) 14:40, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Joseph2302 - Agree that three months listing, and two months without progress, particularly on the list inclusion criteria and sourcing, is enough to conclude that this fails the criteria for being an FL and should be de-listed. FOARP (talk) 11:31, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- It's been 2 months since the last significant edit, and I don't believe the current version has anywhere enough content to meet the standard of FL. If improvements aren't being made, can we de-list this? Joseph2302 (talk) 14:40, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Support de-listing - The issues complained of haven't been addressed in a reasonable amount of time. Note that whilst there is an oppose !vote above, this basically concedes that the article did not meet the criteria but committed to solving the issues, however this was only partially done and shows no sign of being done (if it can be done - the list-inclusion criteria issues may be unsolvable). FOARP (talk) 08:07, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- Ping me when you're done so I can change vote Idiosincrático (talk) 02:43, 23 April 2023 (UTC)