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 World Heritage Sites in Armenia
- Nominator(s): Tone 16:11, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Slovakia has been recently promoted and Czechia is almost there. Now I am covering the Caucasus. Armenia has 3 sites and 4 tentative ones, so the list is a bit shorter than the previous ones, but still long enough. The style is standard. Azerbaijan and Georgia lists will be next. Tone 16:11, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "Following the breakup of Soviet Union" => "Following the breakup of the Soviet Union"
- "Armenia succeeded the convention" - "succeeded" definitely isn't the right word here, but I am not sure what is. Do you mean the country adopted the convention?
- "with additional four on the tentative list." => "with an additional four on the tentative list."
- That's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:40, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thank you! Fixed. As for the "succession of the convention", that's the wording the UNESCO site uses. I could change it but it makes sense to me ... --Tone 08:38, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- I saw that, but what does it actually mean? Does it mean the date the country adopted/signed up to the convention? "Succeed" used as a transitive verb can only mean either "to follow in sequence and especially immediately" or "to come after as heir or successor" (ref: Merriam Webster) so "the country succeeded the convention" definitely isn't a correct usage..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- I would suggest using "ratified", like the Slovakia list...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- I guess ratified works. Probably some paperwork needed to be done before so it was not automatic anyway. --Tone 17:30, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- I would suggest using "ratified", like the Slovakia list...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- I saw that, but what does it actually mean? Does it mean the date the country adopted/signed up to the convention? "Succeed" used as a transitive verb can only mean either "to follow in sequence and especially immediately" or "to come after as heir or successor" (ref: Merriam Webster) so "the country succeeded the convention" definitely isn't a correct usage..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thank you! Fixed. As for the "succession of the convention", that's the wording the UNESCO site uses. I could change it but it makes sense to me ... --Tone 08:38, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:25, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Source review
Comments below. Aza24 (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Formatting
- A missing retrieval date in ref 9, which I assumed is because the live link is dead, so no issues (?)
- Updated.
- Reliability
- The established convention has been to use UNESCO sources for UNESCO lists, so no issues here.
- Verifiability
- Refs 7, 12 good
- Ref 10, not seeing some of this, shouldn't it be Khosrow II? The dates aren't matching either
- It must be a typo in the UNESCO source, it was Khosrow III that is associated with Dvin in the 4th century CE. I added an extra reference for the time period, though sources are messy (Iranica says " The often expressed view that Ḵosrow had previously shifted the capital from Artaxata to Dvin is based on an unreliable report of Moses of Khorene (9th century), who relied on the much shorter text of Pseudo Faustus." But I don't want to get into such details for a brief description.)
- Ref 13 seems fine, though I think when the source says "This area of the Vorotan Valley is of considerable geological interest" they mean that there is much in the valley which is of particular geological value (i.e. important rocks or rock formations maybe). Your "The valley is also interesting from the geological point of view" seems to downplay this a little; am I making sense here? Aza24 (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
List of World Snooker Championship winners
- Nominator(s): Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it is complete. The World Snooker Championship has run for almost 100 years, and the list is well cited and covers all the winners, locations and tournaments. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments from MWright96
- "and is chronologically the third of the three Triple Crown events of the season since 1977–78," - some words are missing at the end of the word highlighted in bold
- Sure. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Wikilink knock-out tournament format to the appropriate article
- Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Think it might be appropriate to include the name of the oldest and youngest world champions and include the ages they were when they set those records
- The first table is missing the scope="col" in the columns
- Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Every single one of the players names in the winner and runner-up columns in the champions table need to made sortable like this Joe Davis|ENG}} etc.
- Due to the way we have both links and a template, I'm planning to use data-sort-value="" instead. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- I have now done this. Must admit, it was a bit odd typing Ali Carter, Peter Ebdon, Graeme Dott, Rex Williams all more times than Neil Robertson! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:20, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Due to the way we have both links and a template, I'm planning to use data-sort-value="" instead. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- The multiple champions table can be made sortable and the players' names can be sorted with the template mentioned in the above point
- Done. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- The key for the second table might be better off placed above not below
- Moved Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- The source to verify Mark Selby's WSC victories needs replacing with a more up-to-date citation mentioning all four years he won the title
- Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- An extra source is needed to verify that Alex Higgins died on 24 July 2010 since the 1982 The Guardian source won't contain that fact since it was printed 28 years before the fact
- Added obit. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- The first note "Due to World War II" needs an full stop to complete it
- Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Notes D and E are duplicates of each other and can be merged to create a single one
- Combined. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Reference 10 "Professional Snooker". Billiards and Snooker. No. January 1964. the Billiards Association and Control Council. p. 13.)" does not need the closing bracket at the end of it
- No worries. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Reference 18 "Higgins beats Trump to win title" is missing the date it was published
- Added Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Similiar problem with Reference 20 "Williams wins world title for third time"
- Added Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Same issue with Reference 21 "Then and Now: John Spencer"
- Added Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
That is all I found on a first pass MWright96 (talk) 17:29, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- I've covered everything for now, MWright96. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Lee Vilenski: One further point: "because of World War II or between 1958 and 1963 due to declining interest." - please clarify whom had a loss of interest in a World Snooker Championship that caused the event to not be held from 1958 to 1963 MWright96 (talk) 13:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Clarified Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Lee Vilenski: I have just noticed each of the ten images in the champions section are lacking alt text MWright96 (talk) 06:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- I have added some alt Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:23, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Lee Vilenski: I have just noticed each of the ten images in the champions section are lacking alt text MWright96 (talk) 06:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- I've covered everything for now, MWright96. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Drive-by comment (will come back for more later)
- In the key, the two rows for knock-out tournament don't have symbols, and the colours are pretty much completely indistinguishable (at least to my ageing eyes) so there's no way to differentiate between them in the table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:41, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- I've added a more vibrant colour that I nicked from WP:COLOUR. I'm pretty bad at knowing what looks good, so hopefully this covers your fears. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:41, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Further comments
- Per MOS:AMPERSAND, the ampersands in the image captions should be replaced with the word "and"
- "The most successful player at the World Snooker Championship was Joe Davis" => "The most successful player at the World Snooker Championship is Joe Davis"
- World Snooker Championship wikilinked twice in very close succession under the Champions heading
- There's a stray double curly bracket on one of the 1965 rows
- In the Multiple Champions table, why is there "hover over" text on the country names which simply repeats the country name?
- Note a is not a complete sentence so doesn't need a full stop
- Think that's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:11, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- I have covered these ChrisTheDude. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:17, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- One actually hadn't been changed, so I fixed that and am now OK to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:28, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- I have covered these ChrisTheDude. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:17, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
Source review
Comments below. Aza24 (talk) 21:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Version reviewed: [1]
- Formatting
- You link Everton in ref 11 but not 1, would recommend both
- You should probably run this on your list; up to you whether you want to convert ISBN 10s to 13, but at the least they should all be dashed correctly
- It's a little odd to have the work for ref 2 but then the website for ref 3 when they're both news sources—presumably some link to BBC news should be included in the latter (and in ref 16)
- presumably "Snooker.org" should be in a parameter that italicized it, like the other websites you've cited
- Hmm, for ref 9, you might consider physically bundling the refs, such as in Taylor Swift refs 127 and 159. This is certainly optional though
- Guinness Superlatives vs Guinness Superlatives Ltd
- formatting for refs 7 and 15 is different even though they are the same site
- Reliability
- Seems fine in general. Sources that might not be considered the highest quality are citing only statistical information.
- Verifiability
List of plant family names with etymologies
- Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 19:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
This will be my last Featured List nomination of plant names and meanings for a while (see my user page) ... and this one is only about a third as long as the others, since there aren't that many plant families (so, it's easier to review!) I'm expecting new, extensive sources to appear within this decade, but until they do, I'm happy with the lists in their current form. Fun fact: if you want to test your knowledge of Latin and Greek influences in English, stare at the photos in the right-hand column and see if you can match up the picture with the given name ... then you can see if you guessed right by clicking on the arrow. - Dank (push to talk) 19:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC) Also: the rows with namesakes come from my previous four plant lists at FLC (with minor tweaks), so they should be good to go. - Dank (push to talk) 19:46, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- If I ever form a heavy metal band (which is highly unlikely) I will definitely name it Goat Poison :-)
- "From a Malaysian word for cassowary" - shouldn't start with a capital F
- Probably the same for "Open mouth"
- "black mouth. (The berries stain the mouth when eaten.)" => "black mouth (the berries stain the mouth when eaten)"
- That's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- All done! Thanks again. - Dank (push to talk) 23:28, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:18, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
2020 in cue sports
- Nominator(s): Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because the 2020 year of cue sports was severely damaged, with only the bare minimum of events being held. Whilst there was only a handful of pool and billiard events held, the World Snooker Tour was mostly uninterupted, with most events continuing albiet postponed. Please see 2018 in cue sports and 2019 in cue sports, which are both FL. I welcome any thoughts on how to improve this page. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments by Kavyansh.Singh
- Every table needs a caption (although 2 tables have); I would suggest adding captions to all, with SR only template.
- Added Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Fix the disambiguation link in the lead (Masters)
- Whoops, good catch. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Suggesting you to link all the websites/news organizations, etc. in the citations (like Sky Sports, Union Mondiale de Billard, etc.)
- I dislike linking to work organisations, so I don't do it in any article I work on. My understanding is that this simply needs to be consistent. Let me know if I have accidently linked some. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Fair enough; I don't see any links to work organizations (didn't checked thoroughly) – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 13:42, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- I dislike linking to work organisations, so I don't do it in any article I work on. My understanding is that this simply needs to be consistent. Let me know if I have accidently linked some. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Images – The only image in the article is suitably licenced (CC-by-sa 4.0), and the article has ALT text. I see no issues. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'd usually try and wingarm some more images into it, but there were so few events, it was a little difficult. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Lee Vilenski – That's all I got, maybe you can fix them. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a look Kavyansh.Singh! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Lee Vilenski – Thanks for fixing all the issues (though, there weren't many) in a short period of time. I doubt whether writing date as "February 20 – 22nd" is consistent in the article. Rest seems fine to me, and I support this list for promotion as a Featured List. Great work! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 13:42, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a look Kavyansh.Singh! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "professional tournaments surrounding table-top cue sports." - the word "surrounding" looks a bit odd here. Why not simply "in table-top cue sports"?
- The lead has three consecutive sentences that start "The snooker season.....the season....the season". Any way to mix this up a bit?
- "The season featured events being played in January and February before tournaments being discontinued" - there's definitely something up with the grammar here - "being" doesn't look right there
- "The other Triple Crown events, the UK Championship and Masters were won" - need a comma after Masters to close off the clause
- "There was just one event, the Treviso Open, with an event for both men and women" - event/event - maybe change the second one to competition or tournament?
- "For the event, (m) refers to men' and" - missing s after the apostrophe
- "Non-ranking event" - events, surely, as there are four entries in the table?
- THat's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:16, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a look ChrisTheDude, I've covered all of these. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:38, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'm still seeing "The year featured events played in January and February before tournaments being discontinued for all disciplines", which doesn't make grammatical sense..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- ....also "an tournament for both men and women" should be "a tournament", but it's also occurred to me that "a tournament for both men and women" suggests that it was a single tournament which everyone could enter. Maybe "with tournaments for men and women"? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:27, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- No issue Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:29, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- ....also "an tournament for both men and women" should be "a tournament", but it's also occurred to me that "a tournament for both men and women" suggests that it was a single tournament which everyone could enter. Maybe "with tournaments for men and women"? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:27, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'm still seeing "The year featured events played in January and February before tournaments being discontinued for all disciplines", which doesn't make grammatical sense..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a look ChrisTheDude, I've covered all of these. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:38, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- "The year featured events played in January and February before tournaments being discontinued for all disciplines, and the World Snooker Tour returning in June without an audience." - the grammar in this sentence still needs to be fixed
- "with a tournaments for both men and women" => "with tournaments for both men and women"
- I also just noticed (apologies for not spotting this before) that there's inconsistent use of spacing around the dashes in date ranges.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
- This should be covered now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:49, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- That tricky sentence in the lead still wasn't right, but I just fixed that and am now happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:53, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- This should be covered now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:49, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments from MWright96
- "These events include snooker, pool disciplines and billiards. Whilst these are traditionally singles sports, some matches and tournaments are held as doubles, or team events." - repetition of "events"
- Reworded Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- "The snooker season runs between May and April, whilst the pool and billiards seasons run in the calendar year." - repetition of the word "run(s)"
- Reworded Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- "Cue sports events were played in January and February, before tournaments were discontinued for all disciplines due to the pandemic, with events returning in June without an audience." - repetition of the word "events"
- Reworded Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Consider using the date table sorting template in the date(s) column in each of the relevant tables
- "For the event, (m) refers to the men's and (f) to the women's tournament." - think there is a word missing after the word highlighted in bold
- Reworded Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- "The World Snooker Tour generally begins in July and ends in May, however due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2019–20 snooker season ended in August," - needs to be verified by a reliable citation(s) since none of this is mentioned in the WST source used after this sample of text
- added a cite Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- "whereas the 2020–21 snooker season begin" - spelling error
- Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- "Ronnie O'Sullivan won his sixth World Snooker Championship, defeating Kyren Wilson in the final." - needs to be verified by a reliable source
- Added source from table Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- "Judd Trump defeats Jack Lisowski 10–7" - past tense, please
- Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Please be consistent in how the works/publishers in the references are presented. For example, there is a mix of World Snooker as either in the work field or in the publisher field
- Should now be all as website. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Reference 39 ""Challenge Tour 9 (2020) - snooker.org" - the hyphen should be replaced by an en dash per MOS:DASH
- Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Reference 44 "Results (Belgian Women's Open 2020) - snooker.org". - same issue as above
- Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
That is all I found on a first pass MWright96 (talk) 10:21, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Should be all done now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
List of Formula One Grands Prix
This list is about each and every one of the 1,040+ Formula One Grands Prix that have been held as part of the FIA Formula One World Championship since the inaugural world championship season in 1950. Such countries to have held Grands Prix include the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany, France, Brazil and the United States. I began redoing this list in December 2020 and have made frequent changes. I believe it meets the FLC critieria and welcome all comments MWright96 (talk) 08:19, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "The information below is correct as of the 2021 Hungarian Grand Prix." but "Races have been held under 48 race titles as of the end of 2020" - should these not be consistent?
- "Colours ranging from airy green to black denote the number of how many Grands Prix a country has hosted." => "Colours ranging from airy green to black denote the number of Grands Prix a country has hosted."
- Per WP:MOSFLAG, should not the country name be against the first use of each flag?
- That's all I got on a first pass..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Made changes based on each of the above points MWright96 (talk) 15:22, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
|
Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
United States presidential elections in Utah
- Nominator(s): Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:13, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that these types of lists on United States presidential elections have a great potential to be FL. I almost completely re-formatted the list and added a lead, key for political parties, and a TOC. It lists all the elections in which the state of Utah participated, with votes and percentage. I intend to make similar changes to all the lists within this series. I would respond to every comment, and try to bring this nomination to FL standards whenever needed. With one of the list (United States presidential elections in Arkansas) currently a FLC, with multiple supports, I nominate this too. Thanks! (48 states + Washington D.C. more to go) – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:13, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
one of the most Republican state
--> "one of the most Republican states"- Done – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:08, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Lead is also a little short.
- Expanded a bit – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:08, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Also maybe mention Evan McMullin in the lead. Pretty notable for an independent to win over 20% in the general.
- Added – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:08, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
That's all for now. Nice work. ~ HAL333 19:22, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- @HAL333 – Done all, let me know if you have any other comments. Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:08, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:39, 13 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
@ChrisTheDude – Thanks. I have addressed all in this edit. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
|
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:39, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
List of Samuel L. Jackson performances
I'm back at it with another filmography. This time it's Samuel L. Jackson, one of my favorite actors and the highest grossing live-action actor of all time. ~ HAL333 15:46, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "Ignored" spelt incorrectly in note 1
- "Tarantino-directed Pulp Fiction.[4] For Pulp Fiction" => "Tarantino-directed Pulp Fiction.[4] For the latter film" (to avoid repetition of the title)
- "collaborated with Tarantino again in Django Unchained" =>"collaborated with Tarantino again on Django Unchained"
- "He is scheduled to receive a Academy Honorary Award" => "He is scheduled to receive an Academy Honorary Award"
- There are two credits for him playing Agent Augustus Gibbons but one just for Augustus Gibbons - this might be correct (the character might not be an agent in one film) but I jus thought I'd check.....
- Any reason why only the TV table is not sortable?
- A Soldier's Play sorts incorrectly
- Think that's all I've got. Great work :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:12, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:16, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Comments from Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- Forbes.com/sites is being flagged by the UPSD tool as iffy (it depends on the particular page), and Express is flagged as "generally unreliable".
- "and he has reprised the role in later entries": "reprise" shows up a lot in this paragraph; I think this is probably the bit that I'd cut back on to avoid repetition. Maybe you can delete it, or replace it with "and other films" or something. Otherwise:
- FLC criteria:
- 1. The prose is fine. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. I see Chris has checked the sorting. I've 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. Except as above, the article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any other 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. I'm a little surprised that there's no navbox (but I see that's standard in filmography lists) and so few categories at the end, but you'd know better than I do what's expected.
- 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
- 6. It is stable.
- Close enough for a support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 14:01, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments by Kavyansh.Singh
- Hi @HAL333 – This is not a source review, but just few comments
- Add "RogerEbert.com" as work in Ref#59.
- I would suggest adding WP links to all the websites/media sites, etc in the citations. Currently, some are linked (like The New York Times in Ref#99), while others are not.
- I ended up unlinking everything. ~ HAL333 16:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- That works. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:54, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- I ended up unlinking everything. ~ HAL333 16:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Capitalize l in "The los Angeles Times" (Ref#154)
- Replace "New York Times" with "The New York Times" in Ref#169
- Capitalize W and P in "The washington post" (Ref#183)
- There is a Reference named "Archived Copy". (Ref#188) Reformat it.
- Comment on images – Three of the four images were originally posted in Flickr, and are licenced properly. The remaining image was original work of a user, which was confirmed by an OTRS ticket. I see no issues. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kavyansh.Singh All addressed. ~ HAL333 16:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- HAL333 – Thanks for addressing everything. I see no other major issue with the table, and I feel I can support this list for promotion as a Featured list. It would be a great help if you could review any of my current 2 FLC's. Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:54, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kavyansh.Singh All addressed. ~ HAL333 16:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
List of Billboard number-one country songs of 2016
- Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:57, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi everyone! With 71 of these lists now promoted to FL and one having multiple support !votes, here's what I hope will be #73. Notable events in this year include only the third song ever to enter the Hot Country Songs chart at #1, a superstar assemblage of country singers from multiple generations. As ever, I will respond as soon as possible to feedback...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:57, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Support from HAL
- Florida Georgia Line caption needs a period.
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comma needed before
and Brett Eldredge topped Country
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
- Is
which topped both charts.
supported by ref 8?- No, but I didn't think that phrase needed a citation, as it's self-evident from the table..... - ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
That's all. Great work as usual. ~ HAL333 22:29, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- @HAL333: - responses above :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Other reviews
Comments from Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- I fixed two double redirects, so you might want to check for other double redirects.
- FLC criteria:
- 1. The prose is fine. The coding at the top of the table seems fine. I checked sorting on all 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 article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any 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 a support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 21:33, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Support from Aoba47
- Everything looks good with this list. I made some very minor edits, which were very nitpick-y, but otherwise, I cannot find anything that requires further comments or revisions. I support the article for promotion. Have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 17:48, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
- Version reviewed – this – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Formatting
- No issues.
- Reliability
- Seems fine to me. Most of the citations are from Billboard, appropriate for these type of lists.
- Verifiability
- Suggesting to archive all citations. This one was easy to check. Source review – pass – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Karisma Kapoor filmography
- Nominator(s): 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 13:50, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Karishma Kapoor is one of the most famous and widely known actress of Hindi Cinema. Recently, have added refs, re-wrote lead and tried to add all necessary things required to be a FL. All comments welcome. Thank you. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 13:50, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- Tables need captions ("|+ <caption_text>" above the column header lines, or "|+ {{sronly|<caption_text>}}" if that text would duplicate a nearby section header). Table captions allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables, without having to read all prior text to provide context. --PresN 15:15, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
- Added @PresN: Check now please--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 05:53, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
- I would place the scope on the film title rather than the year.
- Added--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:54, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
- Many of her roles are not correctly sorted by surname.
- Fixed--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:54, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Just got interrupted... I'll get to the lead soon. ~ HAL333 22:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
appearing in the commercially successful films
--> "appearing in these commercially successful films"- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
playing smaller parts of the love-interests in male-dominated films
--> "playing smaller love-interest roles in male-dominated films"- Comma needed after "The film earned her praise from critics"
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
several of the years
--> "several of the year's"- I have re-written entire sentence
- The above sentence also does not make sense. Hero No.1 is from 1997.
she portrayed the real life actress Zubeida Begum
--> "she portrayed actress Zubeida Begum"- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Change "Though" to "However"
--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "thriller Bodyguard, which ranks among the highest-grossing Bollywood films of all time." needs a source.
- Done Meanwhile changed the sentence. Let me know if it's framed correctly.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Does Note a have a source?
- Added--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
That's all for now. ~ HAL333 16:44, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "Kapoor had her first commercial success in a leading role in romantic action drama Anari (1993). Anari was a commercial success and was one of the highest grossing films of 1993" => "Kapoor had her first commercial success in a leading role in romantic action drama Anari (1993), which was a commercial success and was one of the highest grossing films of 1993"
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Also, what's the source for that last bit?
- Added--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:07, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "From 1992–1996; she featured in" - no reason for that semi-colon to be there
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "The success of the these films" => "The success of these films"
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "in the Yash Raj's produced musical romance" => "in the Yash Raj-produced musical romance"
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "Subsequently, she played leading roles in several blockbuster films, including the comedies Hero No.1 (1997)" - you already mentioned that film. The chronological order has gone a bit weird here.........
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "acclaimed performance of a disillusioned sister of Hrithik Roshan's character in the terror drama Fiza (2000), won" - no reason for the comma before "won"
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "took sabbatical from films" => "took a sabbatical from films"
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "during the time" => "during this time"
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "Within the first day of its release, it went on to become" => "Within the first day of its release, it became"
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "the film and her performance received mixed reviews" - that bit should be a separate sentence
- Check now--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "she again took sabbatical from films" => "she again took a sabbatical from films"
- Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:51, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:42, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Source review – Pending
- Version reviewed – this – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:09, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Formatting
- Ref#3 – Add March 1, 2020 as date
- Be consistent with linking Website/News/Institute/etc. in citations. Few, like British Board of Film Classification (Ref#33), Firstpost (Ref#43) are linked, rest are not.
- Be consistent with 'Rediff' or 'Rediff.com'
- Ref#83 is just a link. Format it as a citation
- Please check Ref#89. It reads 'DelhiJuly 4, India Today Web Desk New; July 4, 2019UPDATED; Ist, 2019 11:33'
- Reliability
- Seems fine to me. No major issues.
- Verifiability
- Few links are dead, like British Film Institute (Ref#20), NDTV (Ref#50), etc. I'll suggest to archive all the citations. You can use this tool (Check the box saying 'Add archives to all non-dead references')
- Afterwards, try running the Citation bot – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:09, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Nicolas Cage filmography
- Nominator(s): Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 23:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because I have expanded its lead, added over 100 sources (one for each of his films), and followed all of the criteria necessary to make this a FL. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 23:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "The following year, he made his feature film acting debut on Fast Times at Ridgemont High" => "The following year, he made his feature film acting debut in Fast Times at Ridgemont High"
- "the second and last time he was credited as Nicolas Coppola" - maybe worth specifically stating that this is his birth name
- "for his role on Moonstruck" => "for his role in Moonstruck"
- "he lent his voice as Grug" => "he voiced the character of Grug"
- "Direct-to-VOD" - link/explain VOD. I had to stop and think for a moment what it stood for.
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:26, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: All Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 16:50, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:34, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
- Surely there's a better image of Cage than that... If you found other images relevant to a specific film/period, I would add them next to the table.
- I mean, there's this but I don't see the need for a change since the current image is clear and has a description related to one of his films. Additional images were removed after they started causing line breaks. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- Ok. I'll leave it up to you.02:34, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
- I mean, there's this but I don't see the need for a change since the current image is clear and has a description related to one of his films. Additional images were removed after they started causing line breaks. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- Best of Times being unaired is unsourced.
- Done Removed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- I like the lead's scope. Covers the important areas.
- I'm liking all the Roger Ebert references.
- Is the Rotten Tomatoes summary really the most important/notable commentary on Valley Girl?
- Well it's a consensus compiling 30 reliable reviews, so yes? Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
the character of Grug
--> "the character Grug" more concise
- Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- The use of "straight-to-video" as a verb is a little weird. Maybe change to "some of which were straight-to-video". More concise as well
- Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
his highest-grossing film at the box office
Is "at the box office" needed?
- Done Removed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- I would standardize the table notes. For example, "Producer" versus "Also producer".
- I did it that way to make it consistent with other FL-articles, like this one passed in July. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
More comments later. Nice work. ~ HAL333 20:26, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- Mental Floss isn't really a high quality RS. You could replace with Vulture.
- Done Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:53, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
That's all I got, but I'll go ahead and support. ~ HAL333 14:33, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
List of presidents of Princeton University
- Nominator(s): PoliticsIsExciting (talk) 20:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Just to preface this, this is my first featured list nomination, so I apologize ahead of time for any issues. Anyway, I've been working on this article for the past few days, and I believe it meets the featured list criteria. It covers relevant information on the office of the president for Princeton University as well as lists all presidents and acting presidents that have served the office. I'll be pleased to address any and all feedback. PoliticsIsExciting (talk) 20:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:52, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
|
Support – nice work! RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Comments Support from Sdkb
- For Jacob Green and John Blair, they died long enough ago that I'd expect any images of them to be in the public domain. Do any exist? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- You would be correct, but I have scoured the internet and can not find any pictures of either of them. The Princeton University Art Museum typically has portraits of every president (and acting presidents) but there is none for either. The only picture I've found for either is this this one of Green, but I believe it is an illustration for the book (published 1993), so definitely still copyrighted.
- Princeton University Press is linked in one ref but not another; MOS:REPEATLINK doesn't apply within refs, so I'd link it in both. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- Fixed; good catch.
- Shouldn't Princeton University be linked right at the start of the first sentence? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- Fixed. When I revised the lead sentence, I must've forgot to wikilink the institution again.
- I'm on the fence about whether or not adding {{Infobox official post}} would be an improvement or not, so I'll leave it to your discretion. It has some parameters for details you may want to add anyways, such as the president's salary (available on Princeton's 990 form). {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
three presidents who have resigned
Don't most presidents resign at the end of their tenure (the only alternatives being dying or being impeached)? I'm guessing that this is saying something more specific, perhaps resigned in the middle of their term, but if so it's ill-defined. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)- I suppose that every president does resign. The reason I have that statistic is that is what Leitch (1978) and the university say: only three have. I believe the reasoning follows more along the lines of the three that resigned were having issues with the trustees (two were pressured to leave; one was having disagreements) while the others simply did not want to serve the office anymore or had other ambitions (looking at Woodrow Wilson over here). If you want, I'll remove it since it is ambiguous in a way.
- It needs to be either clarified or removed. If the sources don't offer any clarification, removing it is alright. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Removed. PoliticsIsExciting (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- It needs to be either clarified or removed. If the sources don't offer any clarification, removing it is alright. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- I suppose that every president does resign. The reason I have that statistic is that is what Leitch (1978) and the university say: only three have. I believe the reasoning follows more along the lines of the three that resigned were having issues with the trustees (two were pressured to leave; one was having disagreements) while the others simply did not want to serve the office anymore or had other ambitions (looking at Woodrow Wilson over here). If you want, I'll remove it since it is ambiguous in a way.
Many of Princeton's deceased presidents are buried
Do we have a specific number? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)- The citation for NJ.com on that sentence says 12 out of 16 deceased presidents are buried there. That source came out in 2014 and president Bowen died in 2016. A news release from Princeton University says that he was buried there. That would make 13 out of 17, so I guess I could also cite the news release and provide that number if you want.
- I think that would be good. We should avoid vagueness in the lead when it's possible to do concisely, WP:ABOUTSELF makes the reference fine, and WP:CALC covers the basic addition. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Added and clarified. PoliticsIsExciting (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- I think that would be good. We should avoid vagueness in the lead when it's possible to do concisely, WP:ABOUTSELF makes the reference fine, and WP:CALC covers the basic addition. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- The citation for NJ.com on that sentence says 12 out of 16 deceased presidents are buried there. That source came out in 2014 and president Bowen died in 2016. A news release from Princeton University says that he was buried there. That would make 13 out of 17, so I guess I could also cite the news release and provide that number if you want.
Father of Ashbel Green, 8th president of the university
Ashbel Green shouldn't be listed right next to a big ten, then. Whatever numbering system we decide on, it needs to be self-consistent. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)- A similar issue with the fact that Eisgruber is called the 20th in the lead and the 25th in the list. The footnote explains what's going on, but we still need to be consistent—either go with the university's official numbering or go with our own. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- See above.
The longest serving president was James Carnahan at 31 years, and the shortest was Jonathan Edwards at five weeks
There's a grammar issue here, as "at 31 years" refers to Carnahan's tenure, not Carnahan himself. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)- Reworded.
- The wikilinking in the lead could probably be improved. Currently, we link the common terms corporation and alumni but not the less common term charter. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- Improved wikilinking (hopefully).
- Has the university ever had a non-white president? Noting the racial demographics along with the gender demographics would seem appropriate. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- You see, uh, the answer is no. Shirley Tilghman, for example, was the first woman president, and only the second woman president ever of the Ivy League. Change comes a bit slow.
- Could we mention that fact in the same sentence as Tilghman, e.g.
All of Princeton's presidents have been white and all besides Shirley Tilghman have been male.
? Race and gender are frequently brought up together, and it'd introduce neutrality concerns to highlight only the one where the university has started to diversify. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)- Added the fact that there has not been any non-white presidents. PoliticsIsExciting (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Could we mention that fact in the same sentence as Tilghman, e.g.
- You see, uh, the answer is no. Shirley Tilghman, for example, was the first woman president, and only the second woman president ever of the Ivy League. Change comes a bit slow.
Died while in office in Philadelphia seeking medical treatment
Do we know anything more specific about what disease he had? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)- I've checked all my main sources I go to for Princeton history, and it doesn't appear that anyone knows. He was also a fairly inconsequential president so not much is every really said on him. I've done other searching but cannot find anything. Once I eventually work on his page, I'll update this list if I do find out.
Founding Father of the United States of America; Signer of the Declaration of Independence
In the sense you're using Founding Father here, it's synonymous with signer of Declaration of Independence; to avoid redundancy, we should choose only one. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)ongoing issues with the institution
This is rather vague; would there be any way to concisely say what the issues were, or would that require going into undue detail? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)- Basically, Smith fired 125 students over a mini riot that occurred in 1807, which had made both students and trustees not fond of him. He was also in the process of educational reforms (causing less students to go into ministry), which others were dissatisfied with. Furthermore, enrollment was dropping and faculty was declining. All combined, the trustees weren't happy and told him to resign, or they'll replace him; he resigned. Could I summarize that -- maybe, but the sentence would be quite long. On the Princeton University page, where I rewrote the history section, I dedicated two complex sentences to Smith, so it might fall into undue if I attempt to do that here.
Resigned after pressure from university trustees
Again, it'd be helpful to have a little bit of specificity if it's possible to provide it concisely. Especially given that we're citing a history from Princeton, we should be wary of any attempts to sugarcoat some of the nastier battles in history by papering them over with generalities. I'm not sure if that's something happening here, but something to be on the lookout for. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)- His was mainly due to dissatisfaction with his administration style (it was quite lackluster). I'll add that in.
- "dissatisfaction with his administration style" still reads as pretty nonspecific to me, but good enough I guess. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Added "lackluster" as a descriptor. It might still sound non-specific, but genuinely, he was removed because the board of trustees wanted someone more effective. PoliticsIsExciting (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- "dissatisfaction with his administration style" still reads as pretty nonspecific to me, but good enough I guess. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- His was mainly due to dissatisfaction with his administration style (it was quite lackluster). I'll add that in.
- Per MOS:SPECIFICLINK, I would suggest changing
28th President of the United States
to28th President of the United States
(including the "28th" in the link to avoid any eggs). {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)- Fixed, another good catch.
- There's a lot of capitalizing titles, such as
10th President of the University of Michigan
, which would work equally well as10th president of the University of Michigan
, since "president of the University of Michigan" is both a description and a title. I don't have any issue if you want to leave it this way, as the way you've done it is both valid and consistent, but just wanted to note it. Institutions almost always prefer to capitalize, as it makes them seem more important, so it's sometimes something to watch for neutrality. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC) - For ref 13, there's some trickiness between
|website=
and|publisher=
, as I'm not sure of the exact relationship between NJ.com and The Times, but however we resolve it, The Times needs to be italicized as it's a newspaper. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)- Fixed.
- I assume ref 36 ought to have Hampden-Sydney College as publisher. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- Fixed.
- For ref 42, Chi Phi Fraternity is probably better as the publisher, not the website, and it can be wikilinked. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was undecided, but I'll go with your input.
- For ref 44, if we're citing the White House as a website rather than a publisher, the wikilink would actually be whitehouse.gov. Again, probably better to just list the publisher. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- To be honest, I wasn't aware that whitehouse.gov was a Wikipedia page. I'll switch The White House to publisher, though.
Overall, this list looks in quite good shape (especially considering it's your first FL nom). The lack of information about academic specialties is probably the biggest issue. I haven't done a full source review, but if my concerns above are adequately addressed, I will be happy to support. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Sdkb: I've resolved all your requested edits and left responses for you to decide on for two other comments you made (Presidents buried and how many have resigned). Feel free to answer those and have a look over the page again. If you have any other suggestions, I'm more than willing to address them. PoliticsIsExciting (talk) 23:47, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Sdkb: Implemented and I believe resolved the last couple response comments you had. If you have any other suggestions, feel free to let me know. PoliticsIsExciting (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support. I made a grammar tweak to your latest edit, and with that my concerns are addressed. Nice work on this! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Oops, apologies to come back here with more, but I just realized that the comment I was going to make about academic specialties I must've forgotten to make anywhere outside my head except my conclusion and then forgotten about. That comment is that it'd be nice to have more information about the academic specialties of the presidents. For instance, Tilghman is a molecular biologist in addition to being an academic administrator, and most of the others are similar. I think it'd improve the list to add mentions of those things if you'd be willing. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Little late to responding to this, but I thought about adding their specialties, but the issue is that besides Tilghman, the rest are basically political scientists, economists, or theologians. Tilghman is probably the most interesting academic specialty out of them all. I'll consider adding them for later, but I'll do that after researching more thoroughly into each president if that sounds reasonable. PoliticsIsExciting (talk) 04:19, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
- Oops, apologies to come back here with more, but I just realized that the comment I was going to make about academic specialties I must've forgotten to make anywhere outside my head except my conclusion and then forgotten about. That comment is that it'd be nice to have more information about the academic specialties of the presidents. For instance, Tilghman is a molecular biologist in addition to being an academic administrator, and most of the others are similar. I think it'd improve the list to add mentions of those things if you'd be willing. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support. I made a grammar tweak to your latest edit, and with that my concerns are addressed. Nice work on this! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
56th Academy Awards
- Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk) 09:48, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating the 1984 Oscars for featured list because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I followed how the 1929, 1979, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 ceremonies were written. Please keep in mind that because this ceremony happened earlier than in recent ones that I did, the format of how I configured this list may look slightly different than others. Birdienest81 (talk) 09:48, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "The Right Stuff came in second with seven eight" - so which was it? :-)
- Fixed: Removed the word "seven" since the film received eight nominations.
- There's two full stops at the end of Hal Roach's honorary award citation
- Fixed: Removed the extra period at the end of the Hal Roach citation.
- "with 30.3% of households watching over a 50 share" - what's a "50 share"?
- A share is the number of households with their TV on that are tuned in or watching a specific program. This is different than a rating which is based on all television sets in households regardless if the television is on or not. They are explained in the Nielsen rating article.
- Apologies, but even after reading that other article I still can't grasp what is being expressed here. I understand that 30.3% of households were watching the show, but what does "over a 50 share" mean? That 50% of all TVs which were switched on were watching it? Over 50% of all TVs which were switched on (and if so, how much over? Over 50% covers everything from 51% to 100%)? Or something else....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:02, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude:I have a hard to time explaining it, but this is what I understand. The first number (30.3) represents the rating or the percentage of households with a TV (REGARDLESS of if the television set was on or off) that were tuned in to the program. The second number (50), the share, ONLY counts television sets/households that had their TV turned on during the program's duration. So 50 percent of TV's that were in USAGE DURING THE LENGTH OF THE CEREMONY were tuned in to that program. I can remove the share number if you find it confusing or unnecessary. The reason newer ceremonies don't have the share number is because fewer media outlets don't report the share number as often. They focus on the viewership total and 18-49 rating.
- Apologies, but even after reading that other article I still can't grasp what is being expressed here. I understand that 30.3% of households were watching the show, but what does "over a 50 share" mean? That 50% of all TVs which were switched on were watching it? Over 50% of all TVs which were switched on (and if so, how much over? Over 50% covers everything from 51% to 100%)? Or something else....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:02, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 03:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- In that case would "with a 50 share" work? I think it's the use of the word "over" that confused me...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 03:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- A share is the number of households with their TV on that are tuned in or watching a specific program. This is different than a rating which is based on all television sets in households regardless if the television is on or not. They are explained in the Nielsen rating article.
- Think that's all I've got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:28, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: - I've addressed your comments above, accordingly.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 09:04, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments from Kavyansh.Singh
- I see that links in the sources are not consistent. Some newspapers like The Times-Picayune (Ref#12), Akron Beacon Journal (Ref#22) ,and Indianapolis News (Ref#23) are linked, while rest are not linked. I'll suggest to either link all, or remove link from all.
- Fixed: Linked the first mention of newspapers for each reference.
- Some of the bibliographies like Franks 2005, Jones 1999, and Pond 2005 are not used as citations. I'll suggest moving them to Further reading section.
- Fixed: Removed unused bibliographies since they were most likely holdovers from another ceremony, and I forgot to remove them.
- Gene Allen is linked twice in the prose. First in the "Winners and nominees" section, second in the "Ceremony information" section.
- Fixed: Delinked Gene Allen in the ceremony information section.
- Suggesting to archive all the references (though some already are)
- Fixed: Archived all references
- I see that various news citations doesn't have link. Although not a major issue, I'll suggest adding these links to the article so that the reader could access them.
- Oscar Nominations Are Due – Ref#7
- The Oscar Winners for 1984 – Ref#17
- Gullible Viewers Hooked Again By Tedious Academy Awards – Ref#27
- Unrewarding: Oscar Show's Bright Spots Few and Far Between – Ref#28
- 'Endearment' Wins Oscars as Best Picture – Ref#31
- Sure They Drag, but The Oscars Are Always Fun" – Ref#32
- First-Round Emmys Presented: Moyers' 'Walk,' J.F.K. Special Honored – Ref#36
- Fixed: Added links from above to respective references. I also indicated that the sources were retrieved using Newspapers.com.
- @Birdienest81 – Maybe you can fix these issues. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:31, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kavyansh.Singh - Done: I have addressed all the comments and responded to them by making the necessary corrections.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 03:17, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- @uBirdienest81 – All my concerns are addressed, and the list looks and reads fine. I support this list for promotion as a Featured list. Great work! I'll appreciate your comments on FLC of United States presidential elections in Arkansas, which I do intent to make a series of 52 articles! Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 03:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 03:17, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kavyansh.Singh - Done: I have addressed all the comments and responded to them by making the necessary corrections.
Older nominations
Municipalities of San Luis Potosí
Here is one more! I'm happy to keep working on the project of bringing all list of municipalities in Mexico to a high standard (10, nearly 11, states already have their municipality lists featured using this standardized format, along with dozens of other list of municipalities in North America). We have updated the information to reflect the most recent census and tried to incorporate changes from previous nominations. The page should be pretty standardized but there can always be improvements. Thanks to everyone who regularly reviews these lists! Mattximus (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- The sub-column headers (km2, sq mi) need colscopes like the other column headers (e.g. scope=col). Colscopes, along with the rowscopes that are already there, allow screen reader software to accurately read out what column/row a bit of cell text is in, so you need them on all parts of a multi-part column header. Done
- Tables need captions (|+ <caption_text>, or |+ {{sronly|<caption_text>}} if that text would duplicate a nearby section header). Table captions allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables, without having to read all prior text to provide context. Done --PresN 20:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- In the last FLC I commented that it's weird to single out slaughterhouse regulation. Reading the constitution in source 4 ([2] 115.II), it says municipalities are responsible for Drinking water, drainage, sewerage, treatment and disposal of its wastewater; Public lighting; Cleaning, collection, transfer, treatment and final disposal of waste; Markets and supply centers; cemeteries; trails (can't tell best translation of rastro); Streets, parks and gardens and their equipment; Public security; and others. So even if the no-longer-accessible source 6 mentioned it among types of "Markets and supply centers" regulated, perhaps, I don't really think that should be called out in any of these articles, unless maybe another source gives the significance of this. Done
- Comments
- "Soledad, second largest municipality by population in San Luis Potosí." - not a complete sentence so doesn't need a full stop Done
- Nice catch! Should have seen this myself.
- "Axtla was renamed as Villa Alfredo M. Terrazas from 1932 to 1981" - so was it named Axtla before 1932, renamed for 49 years, then renamed back? Same with note K Done
- Agree, I think "renamed" is just inappropriate, so removed. Should be clear now.
- "Axtla was as Villa Alfredo M. Terrazas from 1932 to 1981." - think there's a word missing there..... Done-- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:15, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- Agree, I think "renamed" is just inappropriate, so removed. Should be clear now.
- That's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:30, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:05, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pending
Comments below. Aza24 (talk) 21:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Version reviewed: [3]
- Formatting
- Recommend linking INEGI
- Be consistent with whether you include the location for INEGI (e.g. Mexico: INEGI vs INEGI alone)
- Ref 6 needs a publisher; if the publisher is International Business Publications, I would just repeat it like in ref 5, otherwise it just appears to be missing
- Run the dash tool [4]
- Reliability
- No issues
- Verifiability
List of plant genera named for people (Q–Z)
- Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 23:32, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
The three other lists in this series have received extensive reviews, and there are no unresolved issues that I know of. There are a lot of pointers to fun history-of-science tales here. Enjoy. Pinging Tim riley, per his request. - Dank (push to talk) 12:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Support and a few comments from Tim riley
Precious little from me. My few gleanings:
- I notice that though you give some people's nationalities you are not consistent. I don't mind greatly, but consistency is on the whole a good thing. Why, for instance, is Pierre Ambrunaz Quézel outed as being French, but Edouard Prosper Quesnel, who precedes him, stateless?
- And if you are going to include people's places of origin I think you might decide whether to label those from this sceptred isle as either "English"/"Scottish" on the one hand or just "British" on the other. At present it's rather pot luck.
- You are also – and again I am not objecting vehemently – inconsistent with your indefinite articles: thus, Philippe Sergeant, a French monk and botanist followed by Joseph Serrurier, Dutch doctor.
- Fixed all three, I think. - Dank (push to talk)
- I don't think Berlin should be blue-linked chez Schefflerodendron (WP:OVERLINK, you know).
- The only link I see on Berlin is for Dahlem (Berlin) ... I've changed it to Dahlem, Berlin. - Dank (push to talk)
- Perhaps you should add that Lord Bute was PM of Great Britain. (You tell us where George Washington was president of, after all.)
- Done. - Dank (push to talk)
You will gather from this modest collection of minor quibbles that I can't find anything of consequence to complain about. I have no intention of withholding my support for the elevation of this scholarly article to join its siblings at FL. It seems to me to meet all the criteria, and is a surprisingly good read into the bargain. I doubt if anyone will read it without a smile of recognition at some point or other. Excellent stuff! Tim riley talk 16:19, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- The only people I identify as British (Joseph Snowden, Dennis Stanfield, James Tennant and William Treutler) are identified that way in these sources ... and Burkhardt generally will say English or Scottish if she can, so my guess is that she didn't know (and she generally makes an effort to find out). That's not too surprising; many people who named genera gave us no clue at all who they were referring to ... they may have thought it was obvious then, but it's not always obvious now ... and when they did, they sometimes picked people about whom little is now known. The only one of these mentioned in another Wikipedia (Spanish Wikipedia) is Tennant, and he's identified as English there, but I think they mean that he worked in England (at Kew). Similarly, Quesnel is stateless because no state is given in these sources. But I can do more checking if you like. - Dank (push to talk)
- Kind, supportive, thorough ... just what I expect from a Riley review. Thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 18:24, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- The reviewer reviewed! Thank you for your nice comments. (And while I'm here, Edgar Quinet, in the article, reminds me that my favourite restaurant in all Paris is in the Boulevard Edgar Quinet. I shall raise a glass to your four articles when next there.) Tim riley talk 18:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Other reviews
- Support - I got nothing :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:52, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
Comments below. Aza24 (talk) 22:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC) Version reviewed: [5]
- Formatting
- No issues, per usual/past similar lists
- Reliability
- No issues, per usual/past similar lists
- Verifiability
- No issues, per usual/past similar lists
- Heh, rather routine now, isn't it? Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 22:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Boring is good. - Dank (push to talk) 22:42, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
List of Gillingham F.C. players (1–24 appearances)
- Nominator(s): KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 21:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
After making the list up to date and fixing some of the suggestions made on the previous FLC, I am nominating this for featured list status. It is very similar to the other Gillingham player lists and fits all of the FLC criteria. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 21:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
- Comment
- The rubric at the top of the FLC page says "Those who are not significant contributors to the list should consult regular editors of the list before nomination". I show as having done 75% of the edits (by count) and added 98% of the text, so would have appreciated being consulted. If I had been, I'd have cautioned that there are over 120 red links, which people might take issue with per criterion 5a which requires "a minimal proportion of items [to be] redlinked"...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:31, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: I am also very surprised by the high amount of redlinks (despite all of them passing WP:NFOOTY criteria). I believe this is only a minor issue which could be ignored seeing how flawlessly the list meets the other criteria, but we can work together to make some quick stubs for the redlinks (for example: Michael Freiter) using Soccerbase, Gillingham Scrapbook, and other sources. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 20:18, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- Column headers need colscopes, e.g. "!Name!!Nationality!!..." should be "!scope=col| Name (line break) !scope=col| Nationality", etc., like in your Key table. Colscopes, along with the rowscopes that are already there, allow screen reader software to accurately read out what column/row a bit of cell text is in. --PresN 20:40, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
United States presidential elections in Arkansas
- Nominator(s): Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:50, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that these types of lists on United States presidential elections have a great potential to be FL, and promotion of this list would help me in modifying 50 other similar lists. I almost completely re-formatted the list and added a lead, key for political parties, and a TOC. It lists all the elections in which the state of Arkansas participated, with votes and percentage. I intend to make similar changes to all the lists within this series but first wanted to finalize the structure of the list, which would be best done during this process. I would respond to every comment, and try to bring this nomination to FL standards whenever needed. Thanks! (49 states + Washington D.C. more to go) – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:50, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Comments by ChrisTheDude
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:17, 5 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
|
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:17, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Image review
Passed image review by (t · c) buidhe 07:16, 6 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Image review
|
Comments by RunningTiger123
Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:58, 4 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
Fair warning: Since you've expressed an interest in modifying the other states' election articles to match this, I'm going to be a lot more nitpicky just so the standard is set in the right place. Hopefully, this will make any future nominations easier.
Lead
Tables
Other
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:06, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
|
- Support – this seems like a good template for other lists, and if you choose to keep pursuing them, that would be a great addition to Wikipedia. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:58, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment – Very interesting topic for a list.
If this is going to be a series in the future (which I'd love to see), one thing that might be useful is noting any home-state candidates. For Arkansas, I know about Bill Clinton off the top of my head and there may be others I'm not aware of. If nothing else, mentioning this would help explain how he got a majority in 1992.Giants2008 (Talk) 22:24, 5 August 2021 (UTC)- @Giants2008 – Thanks! I have added in a footnote that Arkansas was the home state of Bill Clinton (couldn't find any other candidate). Would surely consider mentioning candidates with home state in other lists. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:03, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Comments by Reywas92
Resolved comments from Reywas92Talk 21:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
Reywas92Talk 21:06, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
|
- Support Any comments for Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/National Trails System/archive1 would be appreciated. Reywas92Talk 21:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- @PresN – Hi! Can I mark this nomination in the grey box on WP:FLC as a Source review is required? – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:47, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Kavyansh.Singh: Please do! --PresN 18:15, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
Passed source review from Aza24 (talk) 06:57, 17 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Source review
Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 20:55, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Works cited
References
|
Looks good! Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 06:57, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- @WP:FLC director and delegates: – The nomination is now open for a month. With three comprehensive reviews, all resolved, and a passed image and source review. "Is there a consensus for promotion of this nomination?" – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:11, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Regine Velasquez on screen and stage
I am nominating this for featured list after working on getting the singer's list of songs and awards to FL status. It has gone through a copy-edit to improve the lead. Constructive criticism, in any form and from anyone, will be appreciated.
A pre-emptive comment re sourcing – I've struggled with finding reliable sources for music videos specifically dating back in the 80s and 90s (e.g. MTV, Billboard and the likes). Unlike in the U.S., the Philippine music scene is quite devoid of music video promotion and charts. I utilized a website/artist page that compiled a screenshot of videos released, which perhaps can be an acceptable substitute. As well, I have used verified/official YouTube channels (per WP:RSPYT) for the more recent ones. I’ve sought guidance before nominating and Aza24 was kind enough to provide clarity. Happy to address your comments and thanks to all who take the time to review the list. Pseud 14 (talk) 01:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- In the film table, "Mars Ravelo's Captain Barbell" sorts under C for Captain. If the title of the film was Mars Ravelo's Captain Barbell, it should sort under M
- Film title corrected, it was in fact released as Captain Barbell in 2003. Same correction made under music videos too.
- The notes in the stage table are not full sentences, so they shouldn't have full stops
- Removed full stops
- Same for the notes in the video albums table
- Done
- Description column in the commercials table should not be sortable
- Fixed
- Some of the refs in the commercials table have the company (eg Ariel (detergent)) as the author. These should be shown as the publisher, not the author.
- Done for the refs noted, switched from author to publisher
- That's all I got - great work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:35, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time to review ChrisTheDude! I have addressed the above comments, let me know if there's anything I may have missed. Much appreciated! Pseud 14 (talk) 20:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:16, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for your input and support, ChrisTheDude! Pseud 14 (talk) 21:30, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Support Comments by Aoba47
Addressed comments
|
---|
I hope my review is helpful. The lead is well-written, and my comments about that are relatively minor. My biggest concern is about the inclusion of the music videos and video albums as neither of these two items really fit this list in my opinion. I have noticed some issues with the citations, but they should be easy to correct. I will read through the list again once all my comments have been addressed. I hope you are having a great start of your week. Aoba47 (talk) 05:04, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
|
- Thank you for your patience with my review. I support this list for promotion. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any input on my current peer review on a more obscure singer. Either way, have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 04:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Comments Support from HAL
Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 00:04, 15 July 2021 (UTC) |
---|
* She went on to appear in a series of supporting roles in the comedies Pik Pak Boom (1988) and Elvis and James 2 (1990)--> "She went on to appear in supporting roles in the comedies Pik Pak Boom (1988) and Elvis and James 2 (1990)"
|
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- Tables need captions- e.g. at the top of each table code put `|+ table_caption_text`. If this text would duplicate a nearby section header, you can hide it from visual browsers like |+ {{sronly|table_caption_text}}. This allows non-visual screen reader software to jump straight to a named table without having to read out all the text above it to find it. --PresN 16:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks PresN, I missed this one. Done per these changes. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:23, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Discography of Sibelius symphony cycles
- Nominator(s): Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 18:21, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Having checked the nominated list against the six FL criteria, I believe it's ready for FLC. As the main editor, I have sought to be neutral and comprehensive in my writing, and the list includes extensive citations. All recording dates, venues, and runtimes are sourced directly to the CD (or in the case of one or two entries, LP) liner notes, rather than third party websites such as musicbrainz.org, discogs.com, or musicweb-international.com. (I'd like to here acknowledge, and thank, a handful of users over at talkclassical.com, who generously provided me scans of liner notes in their personal collections... in particular, Kiki was extremely helpful.) Moreover, citation templates have been used. I have also made use of the work of Sibelius biographers and musicologists, especially in relating the importance of the Sibelius cycle and the historical play-by-play. Thank you, in advance, for your comments and for having taken the time to give the list a read through. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 18:21, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Comments Support from Tim riley
Booking my place. Looks top class after first quick read-through. Comments after closer second perusal. Tim riley talk 22:50, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- General
- WP:ENGVAR – I'm not sure whether English or American spelling/vocabulary is intended. "Program" for "programme" suggests AmE, but "gramophone" rather than "phonograph" suggests BrE.
- Titles: it is usual to give British and Commonwealth conductors their titles, if knighted. This can be a bit of a pain for the editor, as e.g. Colin Davis recorded his Boston cycle when he was Mr Davis and his LSO Live one after becoming Sir Colin, but it's not too difficult to find out which applied at the time of recording/release. At all events, you ought to avoid a hit-and-miss approach, e.g. giving Beecham his title or not, seemingly at random.
- Knighted Sirs Thomas, Colin (sans Boston cycle), Simon, Mark, John, and Alexander Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- I apologise for wittering on about the minutiae of British forms of title, but (i) Colin Davis shouldn't be "Sir" for the Boston cycle though he is rightly Sirred for the later two; (ii) Barbirolli and Gibson were both knighted at the time of their cycles and should be Sirred.
- Ah, I can't believe I forgot about Gibson and Barbirolli! (I'm ashamed to admit that, in an earlier draft of this article, I had all Sirs properly knighted, but cut the titles after worrying that I wasn't including titles for other nationalities, you know, fairness and all... or are titles a uniquely British thing? Anyway, happy to restore them now.) One question on the timing issue re: Colin Davis. Elsewhere in the table (for reasons of sorting and comparison, as well as having noticed that most record labels update, too), I use the most current title of the orchestra (e.g., for Ehrling in the 1950s, the Royal Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra was called the Stockholm Radio Orchestra). If that's the case, then would consistency demand that all knighthoods be retroactively applied, too? Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Well, my practice is to apply the performer's title current at the relevant time. Some writers use the last current term, which is OK but can lead to e.g. a bizarre index entry for the Elgar Violin Concerto played by a teenage prodigy conducted by the composer: "Lord Menuhin (violin)/London Symphony Orchestra/Sir Edward Elgar". Hmm. Nobody, I think, is going to complain if you use your own discretion here. As to orchestras, I try to use the label current at the time, so that e.g. the Concertgebouw wasn't Royal until it was. But again, I don't think you'll get objections if you choose to standardise on the current title. Tim riley talk 23:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Okay. Thanks for permitting me freedom of choice. I think I'll go the route of standardizing on the current title. Ergo, Davis–Boston will have a 'Sir.' Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 13:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Well, my practice is to apply the performer's title current at the relevant time. Some writers use the last current term, which is OK but can lead to e.g. a bizarre index entry for the Elgar Violin Concerto played by a teenage prodigy conducted by the composer: "Lord Menuhin (violin)/London Symphony Orchestra/Sir Edward Elgar". Hmm. Nobody, I think, is going to complain if you use your own discretion here. As to orchestras, I try to use the label current at the time, so that e.g. the Concertgebouw wasn't Royal until it was. But again, I don't think you'll get objections if you choose to standardise on the current title. Tim riley talk 23:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Ah, I can't believe I forgot about Gibson and Barbirolli! (I'm ashamed to admit that, in an earlier draft of this article, I had all Sirs properly knighted, but cut the titles after worrying that I wasn't including titles for other nationalities, you know, fairness and all... or are titles a uniquely British thing? Anyway, happy to restore them now.) One question on the timing issue re: Colin Davis. Elsewhere in the table (for reasons of sorting and comparison, as well as having noticed that most record labels update, too), I use the most current title of the orchestra (e.g., for Ehrling in the 1950s, the Royal Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra was called the Stockholm Radio Orchestra). If that's the case, then would consistency demand that all knighthoods be retroactively applied, too? Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- I apologise for wittering on about the minutiae of British forms of title, but (i) Colin Davis shouldn't be "Sir" for the Boston cycle though he is rightly Sirred for the later two; (ii) Barbirolli and Gibson were both knighted at the time of their cycles and should be Sirred.
- Lead
- one of the most significant symphonists" – what did he signify? Perhaps you mean most important or best-known.
- Changed to "important" Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC),
- conducted … on gramophone" – "for the gramophone" would be a more familiar usage.
- Corrected Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:12, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- recorded from 1952–55" – alas the eccentricities of the Manual of Style require us to say 1952–1955. God knows why, but there it is.
- Corrected Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- the Sibelius cycle has, to date, been recorded" – WP:DATED" – you need to say what the date is, and the later statement "As of 2021, an additional four projected cycles are in progress, according to press releases" is pushing your luck.
- Added month and used {{As of}} Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 03:44, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Notably, a number of conductors" – who say's it's notable?
- Deleted Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- all titans of twentieth century record" – come come! – WP:PEA!
- De-puffed! Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:12, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- Ormandy twice tackled the incomplete cycle" – what is "the incomplete cycle"? I suppose this means Ormandy twice recorded an incomplete cycle.
- Article changed to "an". Yes, the appropriate phrasing here is}} something that I have struggled to find. As you indicate, the phrase "incomplete cycle" makes very little sense. And yet, "cycle projects that remained incomplete" seems, though most precise, quite laborious. What I know is this: between Karajan, Bernstein, Ormandy, etc. there are a number of
notable(oops! we're avoiding that word now) recording projects that encompass 3 or more Sibelius symphonies and, in my opinion, need to be mentioned by this article. Can you perhaps help me brainstorm an alternative to "incomplete cycle"? I'm all ears. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 13:10, 9 July 2021 (UTC)- Ah, I realized you may have been being cheeky... haha, are you just asking me to change the article "the" to the article "an"? Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 13:23, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Cheeky! Moi? But yes, that is just what I meant. Tim riley talk 13:25, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Ha! This is my first time every using "cheeky", and I had to look up the term to make sure it wasn't offensive! Okay, well... then I'll merely change the article to "an" (and make sure there are no other "the incomplete cycles" elsewhere in the article). Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 13:36, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- The last time anyone called me "cheeky" in Wikipedia was when I suggested that IRCAM in Paris, the home of tuneless composers, stood for I Really Can't Abide Music. Kindly do not mention this to User:Dmass, particularly as fans of Pierre Boulez and a fortiori René Leibowitz seem peculiarly allergic to Sibelius. – Tim riley talk 17:04, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Haha... well you have a fellow traveler in me, then. Don't even get me started on Leibowitz's asinine Sibelius commentary. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 18:35, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- The last time anyone called me "cheeky" in Wikipedia was when I suggested that IRCAM in Paris, the home of tuneless composers, stood for I Really Can't Abide Music. Kindly do not mention this to User:Dmass, particularly as fans of Pierre Boulez and a fortiori René Leibowitz seem peculiarly allergic to Sibelius. – Tim riley talk 17:04, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Ha! This is my first time every using "cheeky", and I had to look up the term to make sure it wasn't offensive! Okay, well... then I'll merely change the article to "an" (and make sure there are no other "the incomplete cycles" elsewhere in the article). Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 13:36, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Cheeky! Moi? But yes, that is just what I meant. Tim riley talk 13:25, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Ah, I realized you may have been being cheeky... haha, are you just asking me to change the article "the" to the article "an"? Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 13:23, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Such a perspective thus conceptualizes Kullervo as Sibelius's de facto "Symphony No. 0" and accordingly expands his completed contributions to the symphonic canon from seven to eight" – here and in the main text: says who? Looks like WP:OR without a citation for the supposed expansion of the canon.
- Citation added. The "Symphony No. 0" turn of phrase is}} from Breitkopf & Härtel's own product description:
- "By the time Sibelius was celebrating his major international triumphs in the early 20th century, his Symphony 'No. 0' was long forgotten... The volumes of the Complete Edition edited by Glenda Dawn Goss now offer a musicologically accurate music text for the first time. This music text forms the basis for the performance material. The complete edition 'Jean Sibelius Werke' intends to pave the way for a new evaluation of the Finnish composer and, in particular, of this hitherto editorially neglected work, the composer's only choral symphony" (emphasis added).
- So, yes... the conceptualization of Kullervo as the first in a series of eight completed symphonies by Sibelius is certainly "new", a fact that makes Wikipedia's content on Kullervo about a decade out-of-date (Note: I am working on an expansion of the Kullervo article at User:Silence of Järvenpää/Kullervo; this article has a subsection under Analysis that addresses the is-it-or-isn't-it-a-symphony back-and-forth.) Nor is Sibelius musicologist Glenda Dawn Goss a lone wolf: as I have tried to demonstrate, many other Sibelius writers (e.g., Tawaststjerna, Rickards, Barnett, Hurwitz, etc.) have called Kullervo a symphony. Is the problem that the citation chain appears after the first sentence of the paragraph but the "Symphony No. 0" phrase appears in the sentence after? If so, should I move the citation chain to after the second? Or is the solution that you would like to see the Breitkopf & Härtel product description cited immediately after the phrase "Symphony No. 0"? Happy to fix how you see fit. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 12:58, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- As long as there is a citation the contention that Kullervo can be seen as Symphony No 0 (which is after all hardly a very contentious contention) that's fine with me. Tim riley talk 13:19, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, then I will add the reference to [7]. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 13:36, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- As long as there is a citation the contention that Kullervo can be seen as Symphony No 0 (which is after all hardly a very contentious contention) that's fine with me. Tim riley talk 13:19, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Precursors: 1930–1951
- "then in his seventy-fourth year), writing of the septuagenarian conductor" – need we be told a man in his 74th year is a septuagenarian?
- Trimmed Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- "the orchestra was credited as the "Royal Philharmonic Orchestra", the musicians were "largely drawn from the London Symphony [Orchestra], which could not be named for contractual reasons" – not according to the LSO's official discography: here" – see note at the end of entry >0139 on page 243.
- Hmmm... well, as I cite in the article... both Tawaststjerna and Layton write that it was the LSO, sneaky style. They hint at contractual issues that prohibited the orchestra from being appropriately identified. Could this also explain why the LSO's own history (which I haven't been able to open on my computer/slow internet) doesn't list the Kajanus No. 1 and No. 2? The Finlandia release (here) lists the ensemble for Nos. 1–2 as "Symphony Orchestra" (playing it safe, I suppose), whereas the Naxos Historical release (here and here) says "Royal Philharmonic Orchestra" on the back cover, but in the liner notes: "London’s Royal Philharmonic Society (the pre-Beecham 'old RPO')". The new release of 'rarities' by Warner Classics (here) calls the group "The Orchestra of the Royal Philharmonic Society", and and earlier re-release by Koch (here) and (here) says "London Symphony Orchestra". Thus, I admit to being perplexed, but as always, tend to trust Tawaststjerna. (Note: I did just purchase the Warner Classics set, and once it arrives in the mail I can see if the liner notes shed any light for us.) Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 18:27, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- "Fifth (22–23 June) symphonies" – 22 to 24 June according to the LSO
- Hmmm... well, here's the link... to the liner notes of the Naxos Historical release: https://www.naxos.com/SharedFiles/pdf/rear/8.111395r.pdf#.Unfortunately, I cannot get the link you sent about the LSO's own records to open on my computer/slow internet. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 18:27, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- "Each of Kajanus's recordings were world premieres – "each" takes a singular verb
- Corrected Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- "prevented these from coming to fruition – a lot of words to say "prevented it".
- Corrected Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- "would knock Schnéevoigt's Sixth from its perch" – rather slangy for the formal prose of an encylopaedia?
- De-slanged; changed to "displaced" Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:07, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- "According to Robert Layton, Sibelius is said to have referred to Beecham's Sixth as "his favorite recording of any of his symphonies" – did Layton – an English writer, and a good one too – really misspell "favourite" as "favorite"?
- Changed to "favourite" Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 04:00, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- "to guest conduct the BBC Symphony Orchestra at Queen's Hall" – it is usual to give the Queen's Hall its definite article
- Corrected Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- Complete cycles
- "conducted many of Sibelius's symphonies on gramophone" – not normal English usage. "For the gramophone" would be normal
- Corrected Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- "both Metronome … and Decca each began cycles" – either "both" or "each", but not the two of them at once.
- Deleted "both", retained "each" Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 04:00, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- "(the U.S. distributor was Epic)" – here and elsewhere you mention American distribution but not that of other countries. Why single out the US?
- This is a good point; however, I... include the U.S. distributors for a couple of reasons: 1) along with Britain, the U.S. was the biggest market for Sibelius's music; 2) I figured many readers would be more familiar, e.g., with Epic as the distributor for Watanabe I rather than Nippon Columbia... thus, I thought it would be important to signal to them that the Nippon Columbia set was the same as the Epic set (I applied the same logic to the Mercury release of Metronome's Ehrling cycle; and, 3) oftentimes, the British distributor (again, along with the U.S., the most important market) was the original label, e.g., HMV/EMI. Is there a solution that would make you happy? I'm all ears! Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:04, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- As long as you are happy that you have presented a good global balance, rather than one confined to the US, I have no objections. Tim riley talk 23:15, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. I am happy, i.e., I think there is global balance due to the natural emphasis on Britain. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 13:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- As long as you are happy that you have presented a good global balance, rather than one confined to the US, I have no objections. Tim riley talk 23:15, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- "with Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra" – normal usage would be "the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra"
- Corrected Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 15:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- "43 times across 30 conductors" – unexpected choice of preposition
- Changed to "by" Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 03:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- "ten are Finns" – as some of them are dead "are or were" might be advisable here
- Changed Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 03:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Table: entry 30 misspells the recording company's name
- Corrected spelling Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 14:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- Complete cycles that include Kullervo
- "Notably, Kullervo eschews obvious categorization" – we could do without the editorial "notably".
- Deleted Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 14:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- Notable incomplete Sibelius cycles: 1952–present
- Somewhat tendentious title. "Notable" according to whom?
- Changed to "Select incomplete cycles" Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 14:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- "Karajan (then in the employ of Legge's EMI)" – Karajan contracted with EMI to record for that company but was never an employee of Legge or EMI.
- Changed to "under contract with" Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 03:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- "Nos. 4–5, recorded in 1952; and, Tapiola, 1953]" – two things here: "4–5", rather than "4 and 5" looks odd and the comma before Tapiola looks odder.
- Both changes made Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 03:57, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- "other notable incomplete Sibelius cycles" – another unsubstantiated "notable"
- Deleted Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 03:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- "the orchestra he led for over three decades" – a usage best avoided, as in British and Commonwealth usage the leader of the orchestra is the principal violinist (Konzertmeister).
- Changed to "conducted" Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 03:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Table: poor old DG is misspelled again in the Bernstein row.
- Corrected spelling Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 14:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- Notes
- Note G: your link to Julius Ruthström takes the reader to a page in Swedish Wikipedia. You shouldn't spring surprises like that on your readers, but should make it clear that it is a cross-Wiki link. One way is like this (from Carnival of the Animals): Turban . I haven't checked, but if there are any other links to non-English Wikipedias you should do likewise for them.
- Done, I would like to note, however, that... this request surprised me, because I had previously picked up on other editors switching from the format you requested to the (new?) alternative of, e.g., [[:fi:Petri Sakari|Petri Sakari]]. The advantage of this method is that it looks much cleaner and avoids red links, but the obvious disadvantage, as you noted in your review, is that it surprises the reader. I have changed them, but I would be curious to know what the policy is on this according to MOS. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 22:21, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Note H: "he also recorded the Second two times" – strange English. "Twice" would be normal here.
- Changed Silence of Järvenpää (talk)
- Note J: "comprise" is exactly the wrong verb here: the cycle comprises the programmes, not vice versa.
- Changed to "correspond to" Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 22:13, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
That seems like a longish list of quibbles, and so let me conclude by saying that this seems to me an impressive article, thoroughly researched and scrupulously cited. I look forward to supporting its elevation to FL. – Tim riley talk 09:46, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- It seems to me that the only quibble left undealt with is the one about the LSO recording dates in 1932, a matter so minor as to be barely discernible with the naked eye. Do sort it out if you can, but I'm not delaying my support on that account. So, I'm adding my support for the elevation of this article to FL. It seems to me to meet all the criteria, and I found it a pleasure to read and to review. A first rate piece of work, in my view. Tim riley talk 13:34, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, Tim. I have long admired your work on the English/British classical music scene; indeed, their quality is what encouraged me to, when I have time, work hard on the Sibelius/Finland classical articles. Glad you enjoyed this one and found it a good read. Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 18:30, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Comments from ChrisTheDude
- Note I haven't read through all the above comments :-)
- "(released by Mercury Records in the U.S.)" why mention the US? Why not Britain, or some other country?
- Done The review above had the same thought. I will cut and paste my response to him here: "Include the U.S. distributors for a couple of reasons: 1) along with Britain, the U.S. was the biggest market for Sibelius's music; 2) I figured many readers would be more familiar, e.g., with Epic as the distributor for Watanabe I rather than Nippon Columbia... thus, I thought it would be important to signal to them that the Nippon Columbia set was the same as the Epic set (I applied the same logic to the Mercury release of Metronome's Ehrling cycle; and, 3) oftentimes, the British distributor (again, along with the U.S., the most important market) was the original label, e.g., HMV/EMI." Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "Karajan left three incomplete cycles, one with the Philharmonia Orchestra and two with the Berlin Philharmonic respectively" - no reason for that last word
- Done Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- "With the Schnéevoigt recordings lacking favour" - last word uses the British English spelling, but elsewhere you have words like "conceptualizes" which use the US English spelling - pick one or other and be consistent
- Done Oops... Changed to "favor" (not having "favourite", however, since it is a direct quote from a British author). Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:21, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Notes r and s are not full sentences so should not have full stops
- Done Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- That's all I got - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks!! I appreciate your time. I do hope that the article will now have your support. Warmly, Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:21, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- All column headers need colscopes (e.g. `! style="width:11em"; rowspan=2 | Conductor` should be `! style="width:11em"; rowspan=2 scope=col | Conductor`), including the "secondary" column headers (runtimes 1, 2, etc.). This, combined with the rowscopes you already have, lets non-visual screen reader software accurately read out what cells go with what columns.
- Doing... Sorry, I learn by example and am not that great at the technical elements of Wikipedia code. Would you be kind enough to help me? Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:24, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Tables need captions- e.g. at the top of the table code put `|+ table_caption_text`. If this text would duplicate a nearby section header, you can hide it from visual browsers like |+ {{sronly|table_caption_text}}. This allows non-visual screen reader software to jump straight to a named table without having to read out all the text above it to find it. --PresN 16:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
- Doing... Sorry, I learn by example and am not that great at the technical elements of Wikipedia code. Would you be kind enough to help me? Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 23:24, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
List of protected cruisers of France
This list comprises all of the protected cruisers built by the French Navy in the 1880s and 1890s, some 33 ships in total, which filled a variety of roles. Their designs also represented the strategic and doctrinal fighting in the French naval command, between factions who favored a strong main fleet in French waters, those who preferred the long-range commerce raiders needed by the Jeune Ecole, and those who wanted a fleet based on colonial requirements. The list is the capstone to this topic, and it passed a Milhist A-class review earlier this year (here). Thanks to all who take the time to review the list. Parsecboy (talk) 15:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "that relied heavy belt armor! - missing word
- Good catch
- Some of that first paragraph doesn't seem to be covered in the body so needs sourcing in the lead
- I went through line by line, and I think the only thing that isn't explicitly mentioned in the body is the specific bit about strategic confusion, so I've added a citation for that - let me know if there's something I overlooked
- North American station vs North Atlantic Station vs North Atlantic station - should the last word have a capital?
- It's not the official title, so I don't think so
- That's all I got on a first pass - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:22, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:59, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- All images need alt text
- Added
- All tables need a caption using either
|+ your caption
or|+ {{sronly|your caption}}
- Added - forgot to put those on
- Some armaments include measurements in inches while others don't – pick one format or the other
- The units are converted at first use and not subsequently - this is pretty standard practice
- Similarly, some propulsion measurements note km/h and mph while others don't
- As above
- Similarly, some propulsion measurements note km/h and mph while others don't
- Under Linois class, "2,285 to 2,318 long tons (2,322 to 2,355 t)" → "2,285–2,318 long tons (2,322–2,355 t)"
- Done
- If possible, find some type of identifier for Stowell & Munro, Glennon, and "The New Port of Bizerte"
- Added all three
- Navbox "Warships of France" has a redlink as the heading; the navbox should probably be removed or the redlink amended
- Redlinks are fine per WP:REDLINK - at some point, we'll get around to creating the overarching list.
- I would still suggest removing the link from the navbox; it kind of defeats the point of finding related articles if the article doesn't exist, and as the title, it probably doesn't need a link. But I won't haggle over this detail, it's just my opinion. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
- Redlinks are fine per WP:REDLINK - at some point, we'll get around to creating the overarching list.
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:31, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Comments from Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing. I'm assuming that RunningTiger's review will be successful; I'll check back to make sure.
- FLC criteria:
- 1. The prose is fine in the lead, and you've already got two reviews on prose ... I'm assuming if another one is needed, someone will let me know. I added one word to the lead; although plural verbs with singular subjects are gaining in popularity every year, I'm still not completely comfortable with that. Otherwise, the writing is excellent (no surprise there). The coding at the top of the tables seems fine. I 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 article is well-sourced, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review and I don't speak Polish). I know from many years' experience that your ship sources are reliable.
- 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. If you're looking for a list to review, you might want to skip my current nomination (it's got a long table) and take a look at List of plant family names with etymologies (much shorter); I'll be nomming that one as soon as the current nom gets one more support. (And you can even skip the rows that include namesakes if you like ... they will have been reviewed in other lists.) - Dank (push to talk) 18:36, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- Correction: that will be the nom after my next nom. - Dank (push to talk) 19:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Source review The sources are all reliable (AGF on the Polish ones), and despite the age of some of the journals, and one or two books, there is no problem with that given the time period of the subject, nature of the refs and what they are being used for. Two minor things: Everett and Parkinson need locations for consistency, and it is Houghton Mifflin not Houghton Miflin. The first Brassey listed should probably be the one linked, as it is the same guy AFAIK. Is there a numerical identifier, location and publisher available for Ship Management International? What about a location for Twardowski? Spotchecks not conducted due to Nate's long history at FLC. Just a side issue, the Warships of France navbox has a redlink at the top? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Curiously, Everett doesn't have a location, not in the scan of the book or in Worldcat. And the first Brassey is actually the father - he's linked now. I think the rest are taken care of. As for the navbox link, RunningTiger mentioned that above, but I don't think it's an issue. I'll get around to doing that list at some point ;) Parsecboy (talk) 00:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Weird. OK, this looks fine now. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:30, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
List of Billboard number-one country songs of 2017
- Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello again everyone. With 71 of the lists now promoted to FL, here's what I hope will be #72. We are definitely on the home stretch now :-) In this particular year, Sam Hunt broke the record for the longest run at number one on Hot Country Songs, but this record would only stand until the following year. Fun fact: the same artist ended both Hunt's record run and the next record run..... ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments from Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- "Backstreet Boys, an extremely successful pop act since the 1990s": I'm not up to speed on FLC standards for promotional language in media articles. Consulting Backstreet Boys, I find that they "rose to superstardom". Yeah. This is pretty tame by comparison. I don't like it, but I'm behind the times.
- The last artist column isn't sorting right ... Brett Eldredge, for instance.
- FLC criteria:
- 1. The prose is fine. The coding at the top of the table seems fine. I checked sorting and sampled (and fixed) 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 article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any 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, since this is close enough to the finish line. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 13:25, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Fixed the bad sorting and toned down the description of BSB.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:57, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Support from Aoba47
- This is a super nitpick-y comment so apologies in advance. For this part,
and subsequently guested on "What Ifs"
, I am uncertain about the "guested" word choice as it is honestly not something I see when discussing music. I would instead use "featured" (in a way that fits this part, of course) as I think that is the wordage more often used for this kind of thing.
This is my only comment for this list. Wonderful work as always and once this very nitpick-y comment is addressed, I will be more than happy to support this for promotion. I hope you are doing well. Just out of curiosity, how many more Billboard number-one country songs are left for you now? Aoba47 (talk) 03:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Aoba47: - made that change. There's five more to go after this one to complete the run from 1944-2020. Assuming those are all successful (and 2021 as well, if it takes long enough for those five to pass that we are nearly at the end of the year), I then plan to nominate List of Billboard number-one country songs, and assuming that is successful then nominate the whole lot at WP:FTC. And then I guess I need to find a new project...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:16, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 22:22, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Formatting
- Billboard linking is inconsistent, e.g. links are on refs 10, 11 and 17 but not 18–120 or 4
- @Aza24: - should all be linked now -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:21, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Recommend "|url-access=limited" for NYT ref
- Recommend archiving links
- Reliability
- No issues
- Verifiability
- checked a few, all pan out as expected. Aza24 (talk) 22:24, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 23:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
List of songs recorded by Britney Spears
- Nominator(s): Saiff Naqiuddin (talk) 09:56, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
For the third time, I am nominating this for featured list because I believed that this page already meets the Featured list criteria and guidelines. Also noticed that this user:GOTH $FACE$ POKER removed all my edits last year and reverted it back so that in the page statistics his name will be on the top of Top 10 by added text.
First, as you can see in the previous version which is the table, date, sources, font, and else is a reallu mess so I've made my contributed to clean all the mess until it meets the criteria. In terms of reference, the reference of the previous version is very incomplete and I've resolved this problem. The Lead, Prose, Comprehensiveness is created by Javila200084898 and I believed that the sentence doesn't need the copyediting also in that section I only solved the problem of the date to make all of the dates are consistent."
—Saiff Naqiuddin (talk) 09:56, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments on the lead
- "which attained global success and reached the top position of every country's charts"" - I don't believe this is true. Every country in the world? Even Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Micronesia, Nepal, etc?
- "The album sell over 3 million units worldwide" => "The album sold over 3 million units worldwide"
- "With the releases of "Womanizer" and "Circus", it sold four million copies worldwide" => "Featuring the singles "Womanizer" and "Circus", it sold four million copies worldwide"
- "Spears's eighth studio album" - earlier you didn't have the s after the apostrophe. I think both are valid but pick one and be consistent
- "however, failed to reach the success of other Spears albums" => "but failed to reach the success of other Spears albums"
- Lead image caption should not have a full stop.
- I will look at the list later....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:00, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Solved! Saiff Naqiuddin (talk) 20:12, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "reached the top position in at least 22 countries" - source?
- "Spears' self-titled album spawned worldwide "I'm a Slave 4 U"" - think there's a word missing in there
- "her seventh studio album, Femme Fatale, which debuted at number one in the country" - which country?
- "spawned the hit-single" - should not have a hyphen
- ""Tik Tik Boom" features American rapper T.I.." - don't have two full stops at the end
- "Robyn co-wrote "Over to You Now" from Britney & Kevin: Chaotic and she is a chorist on "Piece of Me" from Blackout." - what is a chorist?
- Song and album titles which start with punctuation marks should sort based on the first actual word
- Song and album titles which start with "The" should sort based on the first actual word
- "I Love Rock and Roll" should be marked as a cover
- Something seems to have gone weird with the row for "Passenger"
- ""Boys", released as a single in 2001, is a remix featuring Pharrell Williams, and is not featured on the Britney album." - is there only a remix? Not an original version?
- Lose the Daily Mirror ref, it's a trashy tabloid. There are four refs against that sentence so I presume the others should cover it.....
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:51, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Solved! Saiff Naqiuddin (talk) 04:36, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
@SNUGGUMS: and @The Rambling Man:, can you guys please have a look at this page, thank you. Saiff Naqiuddin (talk) 11:14, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Oppose you haven't done nearly enough to address my concerns from Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Britney Spears/archive2. Only two of the things I listed there have been resolved. Also, whether critics liked the music is irrelevant here; save that for the album/song articles. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:44, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- @SNUGGUMS: Solved! Saiff Naqiuddin (talk) 10:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- Not exactly; you still need to add some non-singles to the prose for diversity (don't exclusively focus on singles when this isn't a discography article) as well as details on genre and lyrics. I'd also reduce the details on commercial performance. Maybe talk about some covers she performed. On a more minor note, I still see inappropriate uses of "hit single" used (one in singular form and another as a plural). SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:37, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- @SNUGGUMS: is it possible to get someone (Wikipedian) that fluent in English to rewrite this lead, because I'm really bad at writing. Saiff Naqiuddin (talk) 11:50, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- It might help to take this list to WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests and link to the nomination page here showing my comments. I can't edit make any major edits to it myself right now because reviewers aren't supposed to get too involved working on pages they're assessing. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:45, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- @SNUGGUMS: Here Done!. Saiff Naqiuddin (talk) 08:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- It might help to take this list to WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests and link to the nomination page here showing my comments. I can't edit make any major edits to it myself right now because reviewers aren't supposed to get too involved working on pages they're assessing. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:45, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- @SNUGGUMS: is it possible to get someone (Wikipedian) that fluent in English to rewrite this lead, because I'm really bad at writing. Saiff Naqiuddin (talk) 11:50, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- Not exactly; you still need to add some non-singles to the prose for diversity (don't exclusively focus on singles when this isn't a discography article) as well as details on genre and lyrics. I'd also reduce the details on commercial performance. Maybe talk about some covers she performed. On a more minor note, I still see inappropriate uses of "hit single" used (one in singular form and another as a plural). SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:37, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
While some changes help the flow of text, the bigger issue of this reading like a discography page unfortunately still isn't resolved at all. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 14:00, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
List of awards and nominations received by Coldplay
- Nominator(s): GustavoCza (talk) 02:18, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because as boring as it sounds, I do think it meets the criteria. All the awards, listicles and world records have sources attached to them now and my editions for it were based on lists that are already featured, such as Taylor Swift's. The makeover to a current template was done almost completely by myself, meaning that the list is not subject to edit wars either. I have also found over 100 lost awards and made sure to verify that everything is an actual physical accolade in order to avoid credibility problems. I believe without a doubt that this is the best version of Coldplay's awards and nomination list, so it would be very nice to have my contributions recognized!
P.S. I'm not really into Wikipedia that much so please be patient with me. GustavoCza (talk) 02:18, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:54, 27 June 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
|
Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:36, 30 June 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
In addition to any remaining comments from ChrisTheDude, particularly regarding citation formatting, here's what I've got.
|
- Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support – ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:31, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- Support – zmbro (talk) 13:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Michael Jackson videography
- Nominator(s): TheWikiholic (talk) 18:09, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Nominating this for the featured list because I think it has greatly improved from its previous failed nomination. The page was copy-edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors. I've also fixed the other issues pointed out during the previous reviews. I hope to fix the remaining issues the way I recently did with this successful nomination. Looking for comments and suggestions. Warmest Regards...— TheWikiholic (talk) 18:09, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:41, 30 June 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:00, 26 June 2021 (UTC) Everything from earlier looks good; just two more quick fixes I noticed.
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:17, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
|
Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:41, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "It featured Macaulay Culkin, Tess Harper, and George Wendt and Jackson" - the two "and"s read a bit oddly here
- Fixed.— TheWikiholic (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- "The singer's first music video as a solo artist, shows" - no reason for that comma
- Fixed.— TheWikiholic (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- "It was filmed on the 800 Stage stage" - Stage stage?
- Fixed.— TheWikiholic (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- "Darryl wants to prove to his friends private school has not changed him" => "Darryl wants to prove to his friends that private school has not changed him"
- Fixed.— TheWikiholic (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Image captions that are complete sentences, like "Paula Abdul appears in the "Liberian Girl" video", need full stops. Those that are not complete sentences don't.
- Fixed.— TheWikiholic (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- "reporting on the his eccentric behavior" - there's a stray word in there
- Fixed.— TheWikiholic (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- ChrisTheDude take a look now, please.— TheWikiholic (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
List of Formula One World Championship points scoring systems
This list is about the various points systems used by the FIA Formula One World Championship over the course of the history of the series to determine who wins the World Drivers' Championship and the World Constructors' Championship each season. I expanded this list two months ago and believe it meets the FL criteria. All comments are welcome MWright96 (talk) 13:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- Table is mostly good, but is missing rowscopes: the primary cell of each row needs "scope=row", e.g. "| {{F1|1950}}–{{F1|1953}}" should be "!scope=row| {{F1|1950}}–{{F1|1953}}". Rowscopes, in combination with the colscopes you already have in the header row, let screen reader software easily parse tables accurately
- In general, it's frowned upon to have multiple rows spanned together in a column to the right of one where they aren't spanned together; I can't find any guidance against it in DTAB so it might just be a visual thing. I think that what you have here is fine as it makes sense for the data to span together what you have done, so this is just a note calling it out for awareness. --PresN 13:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 24 June 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
|
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments
- "Unlike certain other motor racing series..." feel like you should mention which series. As a follower of F1, I'm a bit stumped about which series you're referring to.
- "there have been 345 out of 770 Drivers' Championship points scorers..." this is a bit of a convoluted way of saying a certain number of drivers have scored points in a race. Would reword it for greater clarity.
- I'm not sure if this is necessary per the criteria, but it would be nice to have an image in the lead. Perhaps of a Ferrari as they are the record points scorers?
Other than these points, it looks good. NapHit (talk) 14:24, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
93rd Academy Awards
- Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk) 11:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating the 2021 Oscars for featured list because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I followed how the 1929, 1979, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020 ceremonies were written. Please note that because this ceremony took place during a pandemic, this list may look slightly different than others. Birdienest81 (talk) 11:19, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
|
- Apologies for taking so long to get back to this one. I made a few minor tweaks, but the one thing outstanding for me is that I don't really get a sense of how the "Boseman NFT controversy" actually relates to the Oscars. The paragraph says "Furthermore, artist Andre Oshea apologized on Instagram after a Non-fungible token (NFT) he designed in the likeness of Boseman's face sparked online backlash", but there's no context of how it links to the ceremony (it just reads like some guy decided to do a thing, which left me wondering how it was relevant to this article). The Deadline article used as a source says "An NFT created of the late Chadwick Boseman for the 93rd Academy Awards" but even that doesn't really explain in what way it was "for" the ceremony. Is it possible to elaborate at all? Bear in mind that this question may in part stem from the fact that I am decidedly middle-aged and un-hip and don't really understand the concept of an NFT...... :-D -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Apologies for the intrusion, but that was my mistake. For some reason, I had misinterpreted the NFT situation as being more connected to the ceremony than it actually was. Aoba47 (talk) 17:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude:: Aoba47 removed the NFT items from the section. Is there anything left to address?
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:34, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- The Presenters and Performers tables are missing rowscopes and captions, though you have them in Film awards and nominations
- Fixed: Reformatted the presenters and performers tables to include rowscopes and captions just like the wins and nominations tally table.
- I think this is the first one of these that's come through since I started doing accessibility reviews, so I'm working out what to do with the main "table". It's not really a "data table", because it's really just a bunch of boxes stacked next to each other for visual effect. MOS:LTAB says that in that case you shouldn't use a table element at all but html divs, but that if you do use a table, you should add ' role="presentation"' to the table. I've gone ahead and done that- I'm not going to ask that you try to recreate the look with divs, as that would be a lot, but consider going back and adding ' role="presentation"' to the prior Oscars lists to help screen reader software-using readers out with being able to parse your lists. --PresN 22:48, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Fixed: Added a role="presentation" to the winners and nominees table.
- @PresN: - I've addressed both comments and made the necessary adjustments.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 09:07, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- @PresN: - I've added captions to the presenters and performers tables and now I have addressed your comments in full.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 02:31, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- @PresN: - I've added captions to the presenters and performers tables and now I have addressed your comments in full.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 09:07, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Support from Aoba47
Addressed comments
|
---|
Apologies for my rather extreme delay in my review for this. You have done a great job with this list. The prose was engaging and I genuinely enjoyed reading this. Once my above comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this for promotion. I hope this is helpful. Have a great rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 03:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
|
- @Aoba47: - Thank you for removing the NFT. I actually do agree with ChrisTheDude's comment that the NFT issue is only tangently connected to the Oscars, but not signigcant enough to warrant inclusion on this page. I would say it would be more appropriate on the Chadwick Boseman page itself, but that article is a Good Article and I would suggest asking the user who promoted that article to GA before including it on that page. So, is there any other outstanding issue left on this list?
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 07:35, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Aoba47: - Thank you for removing the NFT. I actually do agree with ChrisTheDude's comment that the NFT issue is only tangently connected to the Oscars, but not signigcant enough to warrant inclusion on this page. I would say it would be more appropriate on the Chadwick Boseman page itself, but that article is a Good Article and I would suggest asking the user who promoted that article to GA before including it on that page. So, is there any other outstanding issue left on this list?
Support from HAL
Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 21:40, 11 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
*due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cinema and televisionIt may be more concise to just say "due to the COVID-19 pandemic"
|
Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
|
Support – I made one small tweak to the wording, but otherwise, everything looks good. As to the Rotten Tomatoes rating, it's perfectly fine to leave it out; I just wanted to make sure you were aware it was out there. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 22:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Version reviewed: [8]
- Formatting
- Ref 6 Deadline Hollywood missing link (should unlink in ref 10 then, I'm assuming)
- The rest looks good...
- Reliability
- No issues, great sourcing all around from what I can see
- Verifiability
- checked a few, no issues.
- Alas Birdienest81, finding less and less issues in your lists every time :)—Pass for source review, just look at the one minor linking thing above. Aza24 (talk) 22:13, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Aza24: - Done - Linked Deadline Hollywood on ref 6 and did the opposite for ref 10.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 03:13, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Timeline of the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season
The 2020 Atlantic hurricane season was the most active Atlantic hurricane season on record. It featured a total of 31 (sub)tropical cyclones, all but one of which became a named storm. Of those that did, 14 became hurricanes, with seven becoming a major hurricane; several underwent periods of rapid intensification during their lifetime. As this timeline provides comprehensive documentation of the season's tropical cyclone formations, strengthening, weakening, landfalls, extratropical transitions, and dissipations, I am nominating it for featured list. Drdpw (talk) 22:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Oppose Support from Hurricane Noah
The sources need a lot of love, there's outdated/incorrect information throughout the article, and a large reliance on operational data. There are mostly minor prose and image issues as well. I will leave more detailed comments later tonight after dinner and more tomorrow. NoahTalk 23:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Source Review
NHC advisories should be replaced with the TCR in text (they may be used for notes and such) in almost all cases. I will wait for you to do this before conducting a full SR. NoahTalk 01:15, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Formatting
- @Hurricane Noah: This same statement appears in scores of articles, including many that are GA-class and FL-class, without author mentioned.
- For tropical cyclone reports, tropical cyclone report is not a work. It is part of the title of a report. "Tropical Cyclone Report: Tropical Storm Arthur". You also do not need to include the original report dates in citations. NoahTalk 20:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- FN11: Please use Andrew Latto for author name as that is what is used on most NHC products. It needs to be consistent in this article as well. Check for more occurrences. NoahTalk 20:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Please do not include middle initials and "the II" for references unless you include it for all of them. NoahTalk 20:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Hurricane Noah: So, first and last name only, regardless of how the author is credited on the individual report? I went with how the author was named in each individual report. Drdpw (talk) 22:04, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- FN38:
Hurricane And Typhoon Updates
"and" should not be capitalized. This should also be a series and not a work. NoahTalk 20:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Spot Checks
06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m CDT) at 18.9°N 92.3°W – Tropical Storm Cristobal attains maximum sustained winds of 60 mph (95 km/h), while located about 40 mi (65 km) northwest of Ciudad del Carmen.[13]
Statement supported by source. NoahTalk 20:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)18:00 UTC (1:00 p.m. CDT) at 27.3°N 92.5°W – Hurricane Laura intensifies to Category 4 strength about 200 mi (320 km) south-southeast of Lake Charles.[24]
Statement supported by source. NoahTalk 20:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)18:00 UTC (1:00 p.m. CDT) at 28.9°N 96.5°W – Tropical Storm Beta weakens to a tropical depression inland, about 30 mi (45 km) north-northwest of Matagorda Bay.[36]
Statement supported by source. NoahTalk 20:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)23:00 UTC (6:00 p.m. CDT) at 29.8°N 93.1°W – Hurricane Delta makes landfall near Creole, Louisiana, with maximum winds of about 100 mph (155 km/h).[41]
Statement supported by source. NoahTalk 20:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m. EST) at 14.9°N 80.4°W – Tropical Storm Eta becomes a hurricane about 310 mi (500 km) south of Grand Cayman.[44]
Statement supported by source. NoahTalk 20:48, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Lead
and had the highest accumulated cyclone energy (ACE) since 2017.
Unsourced NoahTalk 01:32, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
and Tropical Storm Bertha on May 16 and May 27 respectively
Comma needed after May 27 NoahTalk 01:32, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Of these, 14 became hurricanes, with six becoming major hurricanes
Don't mix numerical and written form numbers in the same sentence. NoahTalk 01:32, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
was the nation's deadliest and most destructive of the season. It killed at least 40 people after striking Louisiana on August 27 with winds of 150 mph (240 km/h), and caused at least $14 billion in damage.
US-centric... ignores an additional 5 billion in damage as well as dozens of indirect deaths outside the US.
- Modified. Hurricane Laura produced catastrophic storm surge levels, heavy rainfall, and spawned over a dozen tornadoes after striking Louisiana on August 27 with winds of 150 mph (240 km/h). The storm was responsible for 81 deaths and it caused over US$19 billion in damage across the Greater Antilles and the Southern United States.[6] Drdpw (talk) 08:48, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Also causing significant loss of lives and widespread destruction were November hurricanes Eta and Iota, which made landfall in Central America as category 4 storms just two weeks apart.
Also is redundant. You should specify the deaths and damage that these storms caused (collectively) as it was quite significant. I would even go as far as to mention the collective number of missing individuals considering it was quite high. NoahTalk 01:32, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Modified. Causing significant late-season loss of life and widespread destruction were November hurricanes Eta and Iota, which made landfall in Central America as Category 4 storms just two weeks apart.[2] The storms left a toll of 184 deaths and 110 missing across the region, thousands of families lost their homes and livelihoods.[7]
The storms left a toll of 184 deaths and 110 missing across the region, thousands of families lost their homes and livelihoods.
You need an "and" after the comma. NoahTalk 12:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Prose
forms from a broad area of low pressure about 125 mi (200 km)
Link for low-pressure area should be moved here NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Check mph/kmh and mi/km conversions for accuracy (should be converted from knots and nautical miles, respectively) NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Arthur reaches its peak intensity with maximum sustained winds of 60 mph (95 km/h) and a minimum barometric pressure of 990 mbar (29.23 inHg)[nb 3] about 190 mi (310 km) east-northeast of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina.[9]
Comma after the pressure reading NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
north-northwest of Progreso, Yucatán in the Gulf of Mexico.
Comma after Yucatán NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Cristobal makes its second landfall between the mouth of the Mississippi River and Grand Isle in southeastern Louisiana with winds of 50 mph (85 km/h) and a central pressure of 992 mbar (29.29 inHg)
Comma after Louisiana NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Link subtropical cyclone on first mention for a subtropical system NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
north of the Gulf Stream about 200 mi (320 km) south
recommend removing the gulf stream mention as two directions is confusing. NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Edouard becomes post-tropical about 445 mi (715 km) southeast of Cape Race, Newfoundland[17] and subsequently dissipates.[15]
Comma after Newfoundland. Any reason why there is a ref in the middle of a sentence? NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
and is later absorbed into a larger mid-latitude low.[19]
Sentence fragment NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Seven forms from a broad low pressure system moving slowly westward within the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) about 1,440 mi (2,315 km) east of the southern Windward Islands
Comma after ITCZ NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)- Tropical wave should be linked on the first mention
Tropical Depression Eight forms from a tropical wave over the central Gulf of Mexico about 240 mi (385 km) south-southeast of the mouth of the Mississippi River
Comma after Mexico NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Gonzalo reaches its peak intensity of 65 mph (105 km/h) maximum sustained winds and minimum barometric pressure of 997 mbar (hPa; 29.44 inHg) while located about 690 mi (1,110 km) east of the southern Windward Islands.
Comma after pressure reading NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
along the eastern coast of Trinidad near Manzanilla Beach.
Comma after Trinidad NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Hanna reaches its peak intensity of 90 mph (150 km/h) maximum sustained winds and minimum barometric pressure of 973 mbar (hPa; 28.73 inHg)
This is worded strangely. It would also be worth mentioning it was a Category 2 hurricane as well. NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Hanna makes landfall on Padre Island, Texas with maximum sustained winds of 90 mph (150 km/h)
Comma after Texas NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Hanna makes a second landfall about 15 miles (25 km) north-northwest of Port Mansfield, Texas with maximum sustained winds of 90 mph (150 km/h)
Comma after Texas NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Hanna weakens to a tropical depression near Monterrey, Nuevo León and dissipates shortly thereafter
Comma after Nuevo León NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Isaias strengthens into a hurricane shortly after emerging over the Atlantic Ocean while its eye was located just offshore of the northern coast of Hispaniola
Comma after Atlantic Ocean NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Isaias makes landfall on Great Inagua Island, Bahamas with sustained winds of 80 mph (130 km/h)
Link Bahamas and add a comma after it NoahTalk 02:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Ten degenerates to a remnant low while located about 230 mi (370 km) north of the Cabo Verde Islands and later dissipates
Comma after CV Islands NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Isaias reaches its peak intensity with maximum sustained winds of 90 mph (145 km/h) and a minimum barometric pressure of 986 mbar (29.12 inHg) while located just off the coast of South Carolina
Comma after pressure reading NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Isaias makes its fourth and final landfall near Ocean Isle Beach, North Carolina with maximum sustained winds of 90 mph (150 km/h)
Comma after NC NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Isaias transitions to an extratropical low about 5 mi (10 km) west-northwest of Rutland, Vermont and later dissipates
Link Vermont and add a comma after it NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Kyle develops from a mesoscale convective system offshore of the Outer Banks about 105 mi (170 km) east-northeast of Duck, North Carolina
Pick one location reference NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Check spelling of mbar and spacing between number and unit abbreviation NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Kyle moves over the Gulf Stream, where attains its peak intensity with maximum sustained winds of 50 mph (80 km/h) and a minimum pressure at 1,000 mbr (29.53inHg) about 230 mi (370 km) southeast of Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Comma after pressure reading NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Kyle becomes extratropical roughly 545 mi (880 km) southwest of Cape Race, Newfoundland and is absorbed by a nearby stationary front
Comma after Newfoundland NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Josephine weakens to a tropical depression as it passes to the north of the Leeward Islands and later dissipates
Comma after Leeward Islands NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
northeast of Cabo Gracias a Dios, on the Honduras–Nicaragua border
Comma isn't needed here NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Laura becomes better organized as it moves offshore from Cuba over the Gulf of Mexico
Why is this point needed? NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Marco degenerates into a remnant low along the Louisiana coastline and later opens up into a trough
Comma after coastline NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Capitalize "Category" throughout the article when talking about the Category of a hurricane NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Laura reaches its peak intensity with maximum sustained winds of 150 mph (240 km/h) and minimum pressure 937 mbar (27.67 inHg)[36] about 120 mi (190 km) south of Lake Charles
Comma after pressure reading NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Laura makes landfall near Cameron, Louisiana with sustained winds of 150 mph (240 km/h)
Comma after Louisiana NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Laura degenerates into a remnant low over northern Kentucky and is later absorbed by another low
Comma after Kentucky NoahTalk 02:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Fifteen strengthens into Tropical Storm Omar about 115 mi (185 km) southeast of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina and simultaneously reaches its peak intensity with sustained winds of 40 mph (65 km/h) and a minimum pressure of 1,003 mbar (29.6 inHg)
Comma after NC NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Nana becomes a category 1 hurricane about 60 mi (95 km) southeast of Belize City, Belize and simultaneously reaches its peak intensity with sustained winds of 75 mph (120 km/h) and a minimum central pressure of 994 mbar (29.36 inHg).
Comma after Belize NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- ◆ No link for Sittee Point.
Nana weakens to a tropical depression near the Guatemala–Mexico border
Should be Tropical Storm Nana NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
ropical Depression Nana degenerates into a remnant low and dissipates over the mountainous terrain of western Guatemala shortly thereafter
Comma after RL NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Omar degenerates into a remnant low about 575 mi (925 km) northeast of Bermuda and is later absorbed by a frontal system
Comma after Bermuda NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Nineteen makes landfall about 10 mi (15 km) south-southeast of Miami, Florida with winds of 35 mph (55 km/h).
Comma after Florida NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Nineteen becomes Tropical Storm Sally while the center was located over the Everglades about 30 mi (50 km) west of Homestead, Florida
Whose center? NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Twenty strengthens
strengthens into NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)and becomesTropical Storm Teddy
Hurricane Paulette makes landfall near Tucker's Town, Bermuda as a category 2 hurricane with sustained winds of 100 mph (160 km/h) and a minimum pressure of 970 mbar (28.64 inHg)
Comma after Bermuda and hurricane NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Rene opens into a trough roughly 1,120–1,035 mi (1,805–1,665 km
Lower end values are always listed first NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Sally reaches its peak intensity as it makes landfall near Gulf Shores, Alabama with maximum sustained winds of 110 mph (175 km/h) and a minimum central pressure of 965 mbar (28.50 inHg)
Comma after Alabama NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Teddy strengthens to Category 2 velocity
Not sure velocity is a correct wording here NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Sally becomes an extratropical low over eastern Alabama and is subsequently absorbed within a cold front
Comma after Alabama NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Vicky becomes a remnant low about 920 mi (1,480 km) west-northwest of the northwesternmost Cabo Verde Islands and subsequently dissipates
Comma after CV Islands NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Subtropical Storm Alpha reaches its peak intensity with sustained winds of 50 mph (80 km/h) and a minimum pressure of 996 mbar (29.41 inHg) about 260 mi (420 km) west-southwest of Lisbon, Portugal
Comma after pressure reading NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Subtropical Storm Alpha makes landfall about 10 mi (15 km) south of Figueira da Foz, Portugal with winds estimated at 50 mph (80 km/h)
Comma after Portugal NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Subtropical Depression Alpha degenerates to a post-tropical remnant low near Viseu, Portugal.[74] and subsequently dissipates
sentence fragment here. Should be a comma instead of a period. NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Paulette degenerates into a remnant low again about 690 mi (1,110 km) southeast of the Azores and subsequently dissipates
Comma after Azores NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Beta becomes extratropical inland near the Texas coast and subsequently dissipates.
Comma after Texas coast NoahTalk 02:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Gamma makes landfall near San Felipe, Yucatán and its circulation later dissipates.
Comma after Yucatán NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Delta reaches its peak intensity with maximum winds of 140 mph (225 km/h) and a minimum pressure of 953 mbar (28.14 inHg) about 200 mi (320 km) south of the Isle of Youth, Cuba
Comma after pressure reading NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Delta makes its first landfall near Puerto Morelos, Quintana Roo with winds of around 105 mph (170 km/h)
Comma after Quintana Roo NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Delta makes landfall near Creole, Louisiana with maximum winds of about 100 mph (155 km/h)
Comma after Louisiana NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Delta weakens to category 1 strength inland along the Louisiana coast about 25 mi (40 km) west-southwest of Jennings, Louisiana
Comma after coast NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Delta becomes extratropical over Mississippi and subsequently dissipates
Comma after Mississippi NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Twenty-Seven becomes Tropical Storm Epsilon[91] about 720 mi (1155 km) southeast of Bermuda.
Missing comma on km value NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Epsilon reaches peak intensity with maximum winds of 115 mph (185 km/h) and a minimum pressure of 952 mbar (28.11 inHg) while about 345 mi (555 km) southeast of Bermuda
Comma after pressure measurement NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Twenty-Eight forms from the combination of a tropical wave and a midlevel trough about 70 mi (115 km) southwest of Grand Cayman.
Should be mid-level NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- I think I missed it earlier, but link trough (meteorology) on the first mention of trough. NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Epsilon becomes extratropical about 565 mi (910 km) east of Cape Race, Newfoundland and later merges with a larger extratropical low
Comma after Newfoundland NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Zeta makes landfall near Ciudad Chemuyil, Quintana Roo with an estimated intensity of 85 mph (135 km/h).
Comma after Quintana Roo NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Zeta moves offshore of the northern coast of the Yucatán Peninsula about 25 mi (40 km) north-northeast of Progreso.
Comma after Peninsula NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Zeta transitions into a post-tropical cyclone about 25 mi (45 km) south-southeast of Charlottesville, Virginia[102] and later dissipates
Comma after Virginia NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Eta reaches its peak intensity with maximum sustained winds of 150 mph (240 km/h) and a minimum central pressure of 929 mbar (27.43 inHg) about 65 mi (100 km) east-southeast of Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua
Comma after pressure reading. Also, that's not the peak. Peak intensity is determined by pressure, not winds. NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Eta maintains its peak intensity with maximum sustained winds remaining near 150 mph (240 km/h) and minimum pressure falling to 922 mbar (27.23 inHg)
This could do without the detailed wind portion. NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Eta makes landfall about 15 mi (25 km) south-southwest of Puerto Cabezas with maximum sustained winds of 140 mph (220 km/h)
Comma after Puerto Cabezas NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Disturbance Eta emerges over the Gulf of Honduras
Disturbance is not an official status for a TC. It would be the remnants of Eta or something similar. NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Disturbance Eta re-develops into a tropical depression east of Belize
Same thing here. How far east? NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Eta makes landfall about 30 mi (45 km) south-southeast of Sancti Spíritus, Cuba with winds of 65 mph (100 km/h)
Comma after Cuba NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Eta emerges off the north coast of Cuba into the Straits of Florida
Comma after Cuba NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Eta re-strengthens into a hurricane and simultaneously reaches its second peak intensity with sustained winds of 75 mph (120 km/h)[103] about 130 mi (210 km) west-southwest of Fort Myers, Florida
Comma after wind speed NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Eta makes landfall near Cedar Key, Florida with maximum sustained winds of 50 mph (85 km/h)
Comma after Florida NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Depression Theta degenerates to a remnant low and later dissipates
Comma after low NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Iota attains its peak intensity with maximum winds of 155 mph (250 km/h) and a minimum pressure of 917 mbar (27.08 inHg) about 25 mi (35 km) northwest of Providencia Island
Comma after pressure measurement NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurricane Iota weakens to a tropical storm over western Nicaragua[113] about 105 mi (160 km) east of Tegucigalpa, Honduras
Comma after Nicaragua NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Iota weakens to a tropical depression over east-central El Salvador and later dissipates.
Comma after El Salvador NoahTalk 10:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Notes
The remnants of Nana emerged over the Gulf of Tehuantepec on September 4 where they later regenerated into Tropical Storm Julio.
The TCR states the remnants of Nana were responsible for the formation of TS Julio but doesn't state exactly how so. To say they directly regenerated into Julio is WP:OR. NoahTalk 11:00, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
At the time, the National Hurricane Center did not name the system at that point because it was unclear whether it had a well-defined low-level-circulation.[50] However, with the storm posing an imminent threat to Central America, the National Hurricane Center initiated advisories on the system as Potential Tropical Cyclone Sixteen that day at at 15:00 UTC (10:00 a.m. CDT)
Typo NoahTalk 11:00, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
An average Atlantic hurricane season, as defined by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, has 12 tropical storms, six hurricanes and two major hurricanes
Missing Oxford comma NoahTalk 11:00, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Pre-SR Source Issues
Tons of sourcing issues remain. This pertains to outdated operational sources being used when more up-to-date information is in the TCRs. The locations in these need to be adjusted based upon the TCR. I didn't mention this much below, but if the best track doesn't show every status change, you don't mention the ones not shown. Only display the status changes that the TCR has. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Hurricane Noah: Fixes and modifications completed. Drdpw (talk) 20:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m CDT) at 18.9°N 92.3°W – Tropical Storm Cristobal attains maximum sustained winds of 60 mph (95 km/h),[13] while located about 45 mi (70 km) northwest of Ciudad del Carmen.[14]
Operational sourcing should be removed and location should be adjusted if needed using the method you used for the others. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
12:00 UTC (8:00 a.m. AST) at 39.4°N 62.7°W – Subtropical Storm Dolly transitions into a tropical storm and simultaneously reaches its peak intensity with 45 mph (75 km/h) maximum sustained winds and minimum barometric pressure of 1,000 mbar (29.53 inHg),[15] while located about 370 mi (600 km) south-southeast of Halifax.[16]
Same thing. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
about 430 mi(695 km) southeast of Cape Race, Newfoundland
Not a sourcing issue, but I found this while skimming. Add a space after the miles. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
21:00 UTC (5:00 p.m. AST) at 11.0°N 63.0°W – Tropical Depression Gonzalo degrades to a tropical wave roughly 125 mi (195 km) west-northwest of Trinidad, and then dissipates.[21]
TCR doesnt mention this so this point needs removed. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m. CDT) at 26.5°N 98.5°W – Hurricane Hanna weakens to a tropical storm roughly 30 mi (50 km) northwest of McAllen, Texas.[22]
Needs TCR sourcing/Location adjustment. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
03:00 UTC (10:00 p.m. CDT, August 24) at 29.0°N 89.8°W – Tropical Storm Marco weakens to a tropical depression about 45 mi (70 km) west of the mouth of the Mississippi River.[30]
Same thing. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
03:00 UTC (10:00 p.m. CDT, August 27) at 35.1°N 92.0°W – Tropical Storm Laura weakens to a tropical depression about 30 mi (50 km) north-northeast of Little Rock, Arkansas.[31]
Same thing. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
09:00 UTC (4:00 a.m. CDT) at 16.7°N 88.8°W – Hurricane Nana weakens to a tropical storm about 70 mi (110 km) southwest of Belize City.[35]
Same thing. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
00:00 UTC (11:00 p.m. CVT, September 7) at 16.2°N 22.8°W – Tropical Storm Rene makes landfall on Boa Vista Island with sustained winds of 40 mph (65 km/h) and a minimum barometric pressure of 1,001 mbar (29.6 inHg).[38]
Same thing. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
06:00 UTC (2:00 a.m. EDT) at 25.7°N 80.2°W – Tropical Depression Nineteen makes landfall about 10 mi (15 km) south-southeast of Miami, Florida, with winds of 35 mph (55 km/h).[40]
Same thing. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
05:00 UTC (12:00 a.m. CDT) at 29.8°N 87.8°W – Hurricane Sally intensifies to a Category 2 hurricane about 65 mi (105 km) south-southeast of Mobile, Alabama.[43]
Same thing. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
13:00 UTC (8:00 a.m. CDT) at 30.5°N 87.6°W – Hurricane Sally weakens inland to a Category 1 hurricane about 20 mi (30 km) north-northeast of Gulf Shores, Alabama.[44]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
15:00 UTC (11:00 a.m. AST) at 16.5°N 49.7°W – Hurricane Teddy strengthens to Category 2 intensity about 775 mi (1,245 km) east of the Lesser Antilles.[45]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
18:00 UTC (1:00 p.m. CDT) at 30.9°N 87.1°W – Hurricane Sally weakens to a tropical storm about 30 mi (45 km) north-northeast of Pensacola, Florida.[46]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
21:00 UTC (4:00 p.m. CDT) at 24.3°N 93.1°W – Tropical Depression Twenty-Two becomes Tropical Storm Beta about 280 mi (450 km) east-southeast of the mouth of the Rio Grande.[51]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
00:00 UTC (8:00 p.m. AST, September 21) at 34.6°N 61.4°W – Hurricane Teddy re-strengthens to a Category 2 hurricane about 250 mi (400 km) northeast of Bermuda.[53]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
15:00 UTC (10:00 a.m. CDT) at 28.9°N 96.7°W – Tropical Storm Beta weakens to a tropical depression inland, about 15 mi (25 km) east-northeast of Victoria, Texas.[54]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:43, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
00:00 UTC (8:00 p.m. EDT, October 5) at 16.5°N 79.6°W – Tropical Storm Delta becomes a Category 1 hurricane about 220 mi (355 km) south-southeast of Grand Cayman.[57]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
09:00 UTC (5:00 a.m. EDT) at 17.5°N 81.3°W – Hurricane Delta attains Category 2 intensity about 125 mi (200 km) south of Grand Cayman.[58]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
12:00 UTC (8:00 a.m. EDT) at 17.8°N 82.0°W – Hurricane Delta strengthens to Category 3 intensity[56] about (115 mi (185 km) south-southwest of Grand Cayman.[59]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m. CDT) at 23.0°N 91.3°W – Hurricane Delta re-strengthens to Category 2 intensity about 485 mi (780 km) south-southeast of Cameron, Louisiana.[60]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
18:00 UTC (1:00 p.m. CDT) at 28.7°N 93.6°W – Hurricane Delta weakens to Category 2 intensity about 80 mi (130 km) south-southwest of Cameron.[61]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
23:00 UTC (6:00 p.m. CDT) at 29.8°N 93.1°W – Hurricane Delta makes landfall near Creole, Louisiana, with maximum winds of about 100 mph (155 km/h).[62]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
00:00 UTC (7:00 p.m. CDT, October 9) at 30.0°N 93.0°W – Hurricane Delta weakens to Category 1 strength inland along the Louisiana coast, about 25 mi (40 km) west-southwest of Jennings, Louisiana.[63]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m. CDT) at 31.2°N 92.3°W – Hurricane Delta weakens to tropical storm intensity about 15 mi (25 km) east-southeast of Alexandria, Louisiana.[64]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
18:00 UTC {2:00 p.m. CDT) at 33.3°N 90.6°W – Tropical Storm Delta becomes extratropical about 70 mi (115 km) north of Jackson, Mississippi, and subsequently dissipates.[56]
Incorrect bracket used for the 2:00 p.m. time. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
09:00 UTC (4:00 a.m. CDT) at 21.0°N 88.4°W – Hurricane Zeta weakens to a tropical storm inland about 85 mi (140 km) east-southeast of Progreso, Yucatán.[67]
Same sourcing issues. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
15:00 UTC (10:00 a.m. CDT) at 21.6°N 89.5°W – Tropical Storm Zeta moves offshore of the northern coast of the Yucatán Peninsula, about 25 mi (40 km) north-northeast of Progreso.[68]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m. CDT) at 24.4°N 91.5°W – Tropical Storm Zeta becomes a hurricane again about 410 mi (660 km) south of New Orleans, Louisiana.[69]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
00:00 UTC (7:00 p.m. CDT, October 28) at 30.2°N 89.9°W – Hurricane Zeta weakens to Category 2 intensity inland about 10 mi (15 km) southwest of Slidell, Louisiana.[70]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
01:00 UTC (8:00 p.m. CDT, October 28) at 30.7°N 89.6°W – Hurricane Zeta weakens to Category 1 intensity about 25 mi (40 km) north-northeast of Slidell.[71]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m. CDT) at 32.9°N 87.4°W – Hurricane Zeta weakens to a tropical storm about 25 mi (40 km) south-southeast of Tuscaloosa, Alabama.[72]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m. EST) at 14.0°N 82.8°W – Hurricane Eta attains its peak intensity when its minimum pressure falls to 922 mbar (27.23 inHg),[73] about 40 mi (65 km) east of Puerto Cabezas.[74]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
00:00 UTC (7:00 p.m. EST, November 3) at 13.8°N 83.7°W – Hurricane Eta weakens to Category 2 intensity about 25 mi (40 km) southwest of Puerto Cabezas.[75]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
12:00 UTC (7:00 a.m. EST) at 13.8°N 84.9°W – Hurricane Eta weakens to a tropical storm about 90 mi (140 km) west of Puerto Cabezas.[76]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
06:00 UTC (1:00 a.m. EST) at 13.0°N 77.0°W – Tropical Storm Iota strengthens into a hurricane about 295 mi (475 km) east of Providencia Island, Colombia.[81]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
00:00 UTC (7:00 p.m. EST, November 15) at 13.4°N 79.8°W – Hurricane Iota attains Category 2 strength about 110 mi (175 km) east of Providencia Island.[82]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
09:00 UTC (4:00 a.m. EST) at 13.7°N 84.3°W – Hurricane Iota weakens to Category 2 strength about 65 mi (105 km) west-southwest of Puerto Cabezas.[83]
Ditto. NoahTalk 19:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Image Review[edit]
- Paulette, Rene, Sally, Teddy and Vicky 2020-09-14 1550Z.jpg The caption needs to be more succinct per MOS:CAPSUCCINCT. Recommend cutting it off after the bit about the five tropical cyclones NoahTalk 23:41, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Unless the captions are full sentences, periods should not be included. NoahTalk 23:41, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
A map plotting the track and intensity of Hurricane Paulette at 6-hour intervals during its September 7–28, 2020 lifetime
A comma is needed after 2020 NoahTalk 03:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Everything looks good now. Thanks, Drdpw! That was a lot. codingcyclone advisories/damages 19:20, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
|
---|
Support from codingcyclone[edit]Alright, there are a few inconsistencies that need to be addressed.
Timeline of events[edit]
August 2 Needs distance to land as well.
Please ping me when this is done, Noah got the rest of the issues codingcyclone advisories/damages 03:37, 18 June 2021 (UTC). |
@CodingCyclone: @Hurricane Noah: It is finished. Drdpw (talk) 19:05, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Yash Chopra filmography[edit]
- Nominator(s): Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 12:05, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
The filmography of the well-known Indian director and producer Yash Chopra. I really believe this list meets the FL criteria. --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 12:05, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:50, 17 June 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
|
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:50, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments from HAL[edit]
- His birth year of 1932 is not supported by the provided reference.
- Yes, it is. Look at the second slide of the ref #1 --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
named Yash Raj Films
Remove "named".
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
emerged as a commercial success in both India and overseas
Use of "emerge" here seems strange.
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
family who are
Reword - family is singular.
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- Is Rediff.com considered reliable?
- Yes, it is. Rediff.com is the oldest Indian website, and many GA/FA about Indian films used it as a source. Many of the writers are also notable, like Dinesh Raheja, Sukanya Verma, Shobha Warrier, and Raja Sen. --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:57, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
it was because action and crime films
--> "this was because action and crime films"
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
one of his career's best films
--> "one of his best films"
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
incest-themed
Is incest really a theme?
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not a fan of the use of checkmarks in the table. Could you maybe use {{yes}}?
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 02:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Overall, pretty good work. I'll be glad to see another featured director's filmography. ~ HAL333 20:03, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- Full stop missing in the alt text.
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 22:29, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- You can mention in the table that 'Jab Tak Hai Jaan' was his posthumous release.
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 22:29, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- older brother --> elder brother
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 22:29, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:14, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support this nom. Yashthepunisher (talk) 05:56, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Image review – Pass
- The only image File:Yash Chopra 2012.jpg – is licenced under CC Attr 3.0, and reviewed in an OTRS ticket. Pass for image licencing. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
List of songs written by Bruno Mars
- Nominator(s): MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 07:34, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because it is a comprehensive look at Bruno Mars' written songs up to today. It contains an introduction and a list of the written songs, their respective writers', albums they were included, and the year of release. I'll try to update it constantly as new songs are released like I have done with all the works for the artist mentioned above. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 07:34, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- No need for the dashes around the titles of his albums
- "as well as other artists" => "as well as for other artists"
- "They also co-wrote songs to soundtracks" => "They also co-wrote songs for soundtracks"
- "As well as these artists, Mars co-wrote" - I would just say "Mars also co-wrote"
- Need a comma after World Cup to close the clause
- "Jay-Z & Kanye West "Lift Off"" => "Jay-Z & Kanye West's "Lift Off""
- And you need a comma after that, otherwise it reads as if "Welcome Back" was also by Jay-Z and Kanye
- Apostrophe missing after Sugababes in the Garibay caption
- The artist column should sort by surname (where the person has one), not forename, so for example Adam Lambert should sort under L, not A
- Song and album titles which start with the word "The" should sort based on the next word in the title
- In note a, the mixtape title should be in italics
- Notes which are not complete sentences (eg "Alternate title "Mister Johnny".") should not have full stops
- That's what I got on a first pass...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:51, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- ChrisTheDude I believe I have addressed the issues you pointed out. However, I'm uncertain regarding the "surname" advice o rappers. Should it also be done? Thank you so much for taking your time. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:28, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support - the name sorting looks OK to me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:27, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Support Comments from Aoba47
- I am uncertain about the first sentence. Is it necessary to list out the names of all his studio albums? In this FL (List of songs written by Tove Lo), the lead only lists the number of studio albums that the artist had released. I am only suggesting this because it makes the prose more concise and I am assuming that Mars will continue to release albums in the future so it would avoid having a rather long list of title right at the top of the page.
- For this part,
and create "a hip-hop, R&B, soul or rock" song
, would be it worthwhile to link the genres? This seems to be a standard practice for song and album articles, but II am not entirely sure how this is handled for this type of list. - I think that this part,
Mars explained the record was going to be a movie
, could use a little more clarification to avoid any confusion that this was literally going to used as the basis for a future movie or it would be a visual album. I think this sentence from the 24K Magic article expresses this a little more clearly: He told that the album was inspired by a non-existent movie that he visualized. - In the third paragraph, there are two sentences (i.e.
He also co-wrote Cardi B's "Please Me"
andHe co-wrote Alicia Keys's "Tears Always Win"
) in a row that begin the same. I would revise one of these instances to avoid being repetitive. - I have a question about this sentence,
He co-wrote Alicia Keys's "Tears Always Win", Adele's "All I Ask" for her third studio album, 25 (2015), Jay-Z & Kanye West's "Lift Off", and "Welcome Back" for the soundtrack of Rio 2.
Why are two albums named (i.e. 25 and Rio 2). but not (Girl on Fire or Watch the Throne)? It just seems a little random to only mention two albums here.
Great work with the list. I am glad to see a FLC about songwriting. My comments are relatively minor and once everything is addressed, I will be more than happy to support this nomination for promotion. I hope you are having a great week so far! Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- Aoba47 Thank you for the compliment, as well as the comments. I believe I have addressed every issue. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:28, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Source review – Reliability of the sourcing appears okay throughout.
There's one formatting issue that needs to be resolved: ref 126 is giving me a red error message. The problem appears to be that there is a space in the url. Try puttingOtherwise, it showed no problems. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:23, 11 August 2021 (UTC)%20
where the space should be, as Help:Footnotes calls for that; my hunch is that will resolve the issue. Also, the link-checker tool doesn't seem to like the Global Music Rights site, so I suggest double-checking a couple of them to make sure the links are still in working order.
Giants2008 First of all, thank you for taking your time to comment on the article and making the source review. I checked all the Global Music Rights and they all work, I also fixed the issue on reference 126. If anything else rises an eyebrow just let me know. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 09:22, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- Ref 126 looks fine now. The source review has been passed. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:23, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
1951 in spaceflight
I am nominating this for featured list because the timeline articles are of the utmost important to WP:SPFLT -- and the universe at large! :) Neopeius (talk) 14:56, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 9 July 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments on the lead
|
- Comments from Spaceflight before 1951 FLC
I haven't reviewed this list fully, but from my review of Spaceflight before 1951 for its FLC, there are several major issues that carry over to this list: namely, the table formatting and the use of Encyclopedia Astronautica. I've put a more thorough explanation there (link). RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:59, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- @RunningTiger123: Answered at Spaceflight before 1951 :) Someone's going to have to tell me what to do with the table since it's a problem endemic to ALL of the timeline articles. And Wade should be just good enough. --Neopeius (talk) 03:13, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- @RunningTiger123: Now that Before 1951 is in shape, I went through 1951 and made the same improvements (citation name order, flag fix, table fix, pie chart fix). Let me know if there's anything left to do. :)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- Now that the before 1951 list is sorted out, please copy over the structural changes from there- e.g. one table per section, instead of sections inside of the one table.
- Note the change I made at that list to add |caption={{sronly|<caption_text>}} into the table header template call- captions are needed in tables to allow screen reader software to jump to named tables; the {{sronly}} template makes it so that the text doesn't show up for visual browsers if it duplicates a nearby header.
- Note also the change I made at that list to the "by country" and "by rocket" tables at the bottom- there I added captions, colscopes, and rowscopes (which combined let screen reader software parse tables correctly/more easily), and that should be copied here. --PresN 21:33, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- Per MOS:FLAG, "The name of a flag's political entity should appear adjacent to the first use of the flag, as no reader is familiar with every flag, and many flags differ only in minor details". None of the flags are ever accompanied by a country name, and (on my screen at least) what I eventually figured was the Soviet flag just looks like a red rectangle, not recognisable as a flag
- I'd appreciate some guidance on this. It was a non-issue in Spaceflight before 1951 because all three countries with flags were named in the infobox under "firsts" -- I can't see an elegant place to put country names (unless you're fine with me just squeezing them into the first table appearance)
- Could you stick a key at the top? Like this?
- That would work, I would have thought..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- I'd appreciate some guidance on this. It was a non-issue in Spaceflight before 1951 because all three countries with flags were named in the infobox under "firsts" -- I can't see an elegant place to put country names (unless you're fine with me just squeezing them into the first table appearance)
- Image caption is not a complete sentence so should not have a full stop
- fixed.
- "11 total were launched during the year" - I have always been told not to start a sentence with a number written in digit form
- fixed with a semicolon.
- "Launched 7 August" - as a speaker of UK English I would say "Launched on 7 August", but I believe this usage might be OK in US English, can you confirm?
- It's goed Ingelsk to me...
- "six R-1s specifically designed equipped" => "six R-1s specifically designed and equipped"
- Fixed.
- "had been eclipsed since World War 2" => "had been eclipsed since World War II"
- Fixed
- Pipe SCORE (satellite) to hide the disambiguator
- Fixed
- "a process that was completed November 1953" - regardless of my comment above, this surely needs to be "a process that was completed in November 1953".......?
- Not really, for the same reason. That's pretty standard usage here, in news, newspapers, etc.
- Write Launch service provider in full in the column header
- I am hestitant to change the table headers used for the complete series of article. I wonder if it was originally abbreviated for space concerns (this would make it the longest label)
- Ionospheric, Solar, Aeronomy - don't think words other than the first need capital letters
- You Are Probably Right.
- "Apogee: 100 kilometres (62 mi) Dogs Dezik and Zhegan were carried in space and were recovered" - there seems to a need for a comma or full stop after the bracket
- Or a semi-colon for consistency!
- Legend for the pie chart says USA 24 but the table says 25
- PresN's fault. :) Fixed.
- Refs 2, 6, 8, 16, 17 list no work/publisher
- Fixed.
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:45, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments from Balon Greyjoy
- "The U.S. Navy fired its powerful Viking sounding" I would replace "fired" with "launched" or "flew" as that seems like a more spaceflight-esque term (I understand it's ambiguous, as weaponized rockets and spaceflight rockets are similar, and sometimes the same). Also, I would remove "powerful" as that seems to already be established by its world-record flight, and "powerful" is a relative term based upon the era of spaceflight.
- I think the subsection "American" should be "United States" or "USA" to be in line with the rest of the article.
- I would similarly change "Soviet" to "Soviet Union"
- "By 1950, the ballistic war-head carrying missile," I think this should be clear that this is development of the ballistic missile
More comments later, but the list looks in good shape! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 06:19, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
United States congressional delegations from Hawaii
- Nominator(s): theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 06:56, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi! I've been working on this page for a bit–taking after United States congressional delegations from Utah, I added language and citations, added photos by the lists, updated the tables to look nicer, added notes, and cleaned up/culled templates that didn't make sense anymore, and I think this fits the FL criteria now. This is my first FL nomination, so I am and always will be happy to take suggestions! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 06:56, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "meaning that each seat a class determining in which years the seat will be up for election" - think there's either some words missing or too many words here, as this doesn't make sense
- At the start of the House of Representatives section, the exact same paragraph appears twice
- "the first woman of color to serve in the United States Congress from any state" - source?
- "Spark Masayuki Matsunaga" vs "Spark Matsunaga" - any reason for the variation in name?
- That's all I got on a first pass - nice work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:31, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Done Changed the language on that sentence, deleted the extra paragraph, added a source (thanks to the article Patsy Mink for providing a ref to steal), and corrected the variation (it was preserved from the previous table)–thanks! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 22:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- The tables needs a caption, e.g. at the top of the table code add "|+ <table_caption_text>" or, if that caption would duplicate a nearby header, you can make it only for screen reader software like "|+ {{sronly|<table_caption_text>}}". Captions allow screen reader software to jump to tables by name.
- Column headers need to be marked with colscopes, e.g. "! colspan=2 | Class 1 senators" should be "!scope=col colspan=2 | Class 1 senators". Colscopes and Rowscopes (below) allow screen reader software to properly read out tables verbally.
- The primary cell of each row should be marked with rowscopes, e.g. "| rowspan=9 | Hiram Fong (R)" should be "!scope=row rowspan=9 | Hiram Fong (R)" --PresN 02:54, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- @PresN: I have been away from my computer for a while, but it appears all of these have been Done by others in my absence. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:49, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- @PresN: sorry, second ping here- what's happening with this nomination? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 06:50, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
Comments from Kavyansh.Singh
Resolved comments, Image review and Source review from Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
I have seen this list listed here from almost a month without any review. Maybe I can help. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:21, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
@Theleekycauldron – Ping me whenever you have addressed those issues. Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:21, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Version reviewed — 1
@theleekycauldron – Sorry for the long list of quibbles, but these are just minor errors, which can easily be fixed. Ping me whenever you fixed these, so that I can proceed with the Reliability and review. I suggest adding links to all the news organizations/newspapers/websites,etc. Also, archive all the citation links through this tool. Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:24, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Overall the verifiability looks fine, but I would still prefer a citation for the following statements.
@theleekycauldron – Apart from those minor issues, great work overall! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
|
@Theleekycauldron – That's fine. I have made an edit to add some links. In my opinion, all the major issues have been resolved. The only issue I see is the grey color rectangles in the senate table, between the Class I senators and the congress column (they didn't existed in the previous version). Maybe, that needs to be removed/re-formatted. Else, everything seems to be fine. I have done the Image Review and the Source Review. Since the remaining issue is a minor one, I feel I am ready to Support this article for promotion as a Featured List. Great work! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
I did United States congressional delegations from Indiana long ago so I'm happy to see this one!
- one from both -> one from each
- In caption you can use Map instead of Geographical location. Not a complete sentence so no period. And technically that map didn't take effect until 2013
- ndash after 2012 should have spaces around it or be an emdash
- No comma after House
- I think the lead could include more facts like that Matsunaga, Akaka, and Hirono all served in both houses. Maybe include a count of people who've served in each house and total, like the Utah and Indiana lists. Since the delegation is so small you could even mention all of them, not just Hirono. Up to you what else you can think of but the lead's a bit short.
- "Hawaii's senators are elected in classes 1 and 3." but then the table says Class I and Class II.
- "from 1963–2012" -> "from 1963 to 2012"
- "The territory initially consisted of the Hawaiian Islands, with the exception of Baker Island, Canton Island, Enderbury Island, Howland Island, Jarvis Island, Johnston Atoll, and Midway Atoll." I don't understand this sentence, these aren't part of the Hawaiian Islands so they're not exceptions.
- "to be succeeded" -> "succeeded"
- There's a stray semicolon before ref 13, seems like the "Hawaii had one seat" sentence belonged there instead of the end of the paragraph.
- "both of Hawaii's representatives to the United States" -> "both of Hawaii's representatives"
- The first two tables had (D) and (R) in the key but this one doesn't, be consistent
- "from 1986–1987 and from 1991–2010" see https://style.mla.org/words-with-dash-in-range/
- All of the see also links are in the article already so the section should just be removed
- For this point, instead of removing the section, you may add other lists like United States congressional delegations from Indiana, Utah, etc. But it doesn't matters much, and could also be removed. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:00, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- Template at the bottom missing {
Reywas92Talk 16:53, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Reywas92: Thanks! Apologies for the delay. Almost everything on the list is Done, but I want to talk to another user about the party abbreviations—I'm not sure if they're so necessary in general. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:17, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- Looks great, Support once the abbrevations are resolved for all or none of the keys. Any comments at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/National Trails System/archive1 would be appreciated. Reywas92Talk 15:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks so much! I removed all of the party abbreviations–with the keys at the top of every table, I don't believe it to be necessary. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:55, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- They were re-added per MOS:COLOR so i made it consistent. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 23:47, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks so much! I removed all of the party abbreviations–with the keys at the top of every table, I don't believe it to be necessary. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:55, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- Looks great, Support once the abbrevations are resolved for all or none of the keys. Any comments at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/National Trails System/archive1 would be appreciated. Reywas92Talk 15:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Reywas92: Thanks! Apologies for the delay. Almost everything on the list is Done, but I want to talk to another user about the party abbreviations—I'm not sure if they're so necessary in general. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:17, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
List of Billboard Tropical Airplay number ones of 1996
Well, going to straight to the succeeding year after List of Billboard Tropical Airplay number ones of 1994 and 1995 just became FL. After this FLC, I plan to zigzag with the Latin pop and tropical #1's of each other with the same years. Here goes nothing! Erick (talk) 00:08, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "Víctor Manuelle and Jerry Rivera achieved their first chart-toppers in 1996 and had two number ones in the year" - I would say "Víctor Manuelle and Jerry Rivera achieved their first chart-toppers in 1996 and each had two number ones in the year" for total clarity
- ""Loco de Amor" by Rivera held this position for the longest with seven weeks in a tie Frankie Ruiz's song "Ironía"" - better, I think, to say ""Loco de Amor" by Rivera held this position for seven weeks and tied with Frankie Ruiz's song "Ironía" for the longest run at number one"
- "which also the final number one of the year" => "which was also the final number one of the year"
- Think that's it from me - nice one! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thanks as always! I got everything you brought up. One of these days, I have to return the favor by reviewing one of your Country #1's FLC. Erick (talk) 13:09, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 13:59, 13 August 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
– RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:05, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
@RunningTiger123: Gotcha, I think that about covers it? I really appreciate the help you provided in your feedback. :) Erick (talk) 04:17, 13 August 2021 (UTC) |
Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 13:59, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
List of League of Legends media
League of Legends is one of the most popular games in the world and as a result, quite a lot of surrounding media has been made over the years. This list collects all major works and is structured similarly to other featured video game media lists. I've been working on it for about a month and am now nominating it because I think it meets the FL criteria. – Gultejp ('sopp) 22:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "in Fall 2021" - don't think fall should have a capital, as it isn't a proper noun
- Think that's all I've got - excellent work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:57, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:35, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comment (for now). Hi! I brought League of Legends to FA. You've done some really impressive work on this list—it’s really well-formatted and pretty judiciously sourced. The sole comments I have right now are about the Twitter and YouTube sources—so that's the vinyl release, Pixel Poro, and the Tales of Runeterra videos. RE: the last one, it’s definitely media, but I don't really think it fits "television and film". Cutting some of these would be the most straightforward solution, and (imo) wouldn't hit comprehensiveness. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 02:11, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hi! I agree that Twitter and YouTube aren't ideal sources, and were only used as a last resort. For the vinyl release I have managed to find a source even if the author seems a little confused over the nature of the release. Pixel Poro could be sourced as simply released in May from 4Players, but I'm not a fan of that. It's unfortunate that the old announcement on leagueoflegends.com isn't properly archived, but I personally think the tweet should be OK – it's directly from Riot after all and I think that's allowed per WP:TWITTER?
- As for Tales of Runeterra, I would say it certainly falls under film as in "moving images"... Honestly, to me the boundaries seem very blurry between film, video and streaming television. "Television and film"/"Film and television" was the heading user in the two FLs that had that kind of section (DQ & FF) so I used it as well; IMO it's better than only having "Film". Regardless, it's unlucky the last episode was broadcast without much fanfare during the 2021 season opening livestream, but after much digging I found a source (in Portuguese). – Gultejp ('sopp) 10:29, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hi again! I'm so sorry for the delay. I completely forgot about this (please ping me to get my attention next time). You could always move all of the short cinematics (like Tales of Runeterra) to a new section for "Promotional materials"? — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 13:57, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
- As for Tales of Runeterra, I would say it certainly falls under film as in "moving images"... Honestly, to me the boundaries seem very blurry between film, video and streaming television. "Television and film"/"Film and television" was the heading user in the two FLs that had that kind of section (DQ & FF) so I used it as well; IMO it's better than only having "Film". Regardless, it's unlucky the last episode was broadcast without much fanfare during the 2021 season opening livestream, but after much digging I found a source (in Portuguese). – Gultejp ('sopp) 10:29, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
New Zealand women's national cricket team record by opponent
I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria and I've created it along the lines of this and this, both of which are FLs. $ufyan (talk) 07:57, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comment
The only thing I would suggest (I know you asked for feedback on my talk page and I didn't mention it, but it's only just occurred to me :-P) is that the lead would be better as two larger paragraphs rather than four very small ones......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- Merged first and second paragraph, and third and fourth paragraph --$ufyan (talk) 13:19, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Additional Comments
The lead section needs more expansion. Lead section needs more explanatory text and context which summarises the whole list as per WP:NOTSTATS. You may also follow the related articles for the men's teams such as this and this. Moreover, the tables do not meet the manual of style for data tables as per MOS:DTAB. So the rows and columns should be in this format below:
{| |+ [caption text] |- ! scope="col" | [column header 1] ! scope="col" | [column header 2] ! scope="col" | [column header 3] |- ! scope="row" | [row header 1] | [normal cell 1,2] || [normal cell 1,3] |- ! scope="row" | [row header 2] | [normal cell 2,2] || [normal cell 2,3] ... |}
That's what I got on the first pass. Will inform later if I find more issues. For now, please fix these. Thanks. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 04:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Minor issues
- At the very first sentence- "The New Zealand women's national cricket team represents New Zealand in international women's cricket." The word "New Zealand" is not linked to the country New Zealand.
- "A full member of the International Cricket Council (ICC), the team is governed by New Zealand Cricket."- unsourced. Please add a reliable web page or book through which we can know that New Zealand Cricket is exactly the the governing body of the team. Although it is common and known to all, it is better to add a source.
- I found this article on the ICC website which has the sentence "New Zealand Cricket CEO David White is confident of hosting plenty of men's and women's international cricket during the upcoming summer". Wish I could have added a clearer source, but it qualifies, I guess? --$ufyan (talk) 08:32, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- The URL access date on the references are sometimes in the format year-month-date (2021-06-01), while in some refs the format is in DMY (1 June 2021). But the date formatting should be consistent, and DMY is considered to be the suitable one for date formatting. You have to add {{Use dmy dates}} at the top of the page, so that all the dates in appear in DMY format.
- "They recorded their first test victory against South Africa in 1972."- The first letter of the word test should be in capital letter as per WP:CRICSTYLE. Also the same issue is visible in the previous sentence.
- "They recorded their first test victory against South Africa in 1972."- And the word Test is not also linked.
- And the sentence is also unsourced. Please add any reliable source that links to a book or an online site, where the history of New Zealand women's cricket can be found, or any statistical source through which we can verify.
- "The New Zealand women's national cricket team first competed in 1935 when they played England in a single test at home." => "The New Zealand women's national cricket team competed in international cricket for the first time in 1935 when they played against England in a one-off Test at home."
- "New Zealand played their first Women's One Day International cricket (WODI) match against Trinidad and Tobago in the 1973 World Cup, which they won by 136 runs." => New Zealand played their first Women's One Day International cricket (WODI) match against Trinidad and Tobago in the 1973 World Cup, in which they won by 136 runs."
- "They won the match". "They won in the match". I think the former is more correct, although I'm not a native speaker of English.--$ufyan (talk) 08:21, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- @$ufyan: - I am a native speaker and I can confirm that "They won the match" is definitely correct and "They won in the match" is not -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- "They won the match". "They won in the match". I think the former is more correct, although I'm not a native speaker of English.--$ufyan (talk) 08:21, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- "As of May 2021, they have played 36 Test matches against four different opponents—Australia, England, India, and South Africa."- Here 36 is in numbers, while four is in words. Please use both in words or in numbers. The same issue is in the second paragraph.
- Not done per MOS:NUMERAL. It's not inconsistent because they are not comparable values. I'm trying to avoid making the lead full of numerals, impairing readability.
- "They have been most successful against England, with 35 wins." => "They have been most successful against England, by winning 35 times against the team."
- "Since their first Women's Twenty20 International (WT20I) against England in 2004, New Zealand have played 133 matches." => "Since their first Women's Twenty20 International (WT20I) match against England in 2004, New Zealand have played 133 WT20I matches."
— A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 06:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support Great Job! You have fixed all within a short span of time. And two comments which you opposed me were really my mistake. (Sorry for that). Thanks. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 07:28, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
List of accolades received by Koi... Mil Gaya
- Nominator(s): Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Koi... Mil Gaya is one of the earliest science fiction films from India, with its star Hrithik Roshan receiving appreciation from the audience, critics, and award groups. The film is also popular in other countries, especially in my country Indonesia. I nominated this list because I believe it is comprehensive enough. --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- Photo caption needs a full stop
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- "the film revolves on Rohit" => "the film focusses on Rohit"
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- "who comes in contact" => "who comes into contact"
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- "with the computer of his late father" => "by using the computer of his late father"
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- "In addition to write the film's story" => "In addition to writing the film's story"
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- "Rakesh Roshan also done its screenplay" => "Rakesh Roshan also created its screenplay"
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- "Produced on a budget between" => "Produced on a budget of between"
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- In the table, "Idhar Chala Mein" should disregard the quote marks and sort under I.
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- It still sorts at the top.........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:02, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 09:20, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- It still sorts at the top.........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:02, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- That's what I got on a first pass.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- The table needs a caption, e.g. at the top of the table code add "|+ <table_caption_text>" or, if that caption would duplicate a nearby header, you can make it only for screen reader software like "|+ {{sronly|<table_caption_text>}}". Captions allow screen reader software to jump to tables by name. --PresN 14:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- Done --Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 23:20, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support this nomination. Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:16, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- No need for the year in the infobox caption
- Done —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Sources 2 and 3 seem to be about the cast and crew, so how do they support the claim that it received "positive reviews"?
- Done —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Eight Rotten Tomatoes reviews is too few to be meaningful (see Wikipedia:Review aggregators#Limitations)
- Done —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
it also got
→it also received
- Done —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- The date 20–22 May 2004 doesn't sort correctly (ranges of dates aren't automatically recognized as dates)
- Done —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hrithik Roshan, Rakesh Roshan, Rajesh Roshan, and Johnny Lever are not sorted correctly
- Done —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- First names also need to be considered – so "Hrithik" should sort before "Rajesh", which in turn should sort before "Rakesh"
- Done —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Source 23 is from Getty Images, which I highly doubt is relevant to this article
- Done —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I would not stack references vertically as they are currently listed in the table. When the table is sorted in any way, it splits merged cells, so the references makes each cell unnecessarily tall and limit how much can be shown. Instead, I would place the sources for each award next to each other horizontally, or if that would make the cell too wide, place them into a single ref tag as a list.
- @RunningTiger123: Like this? —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Exactly.
- @RunningTiger123: Like this? —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments above. Also, one more note: fixed image sizes are discouraged per MOS:IMGSIZE, so change the infobox image to use relative scaling. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Done —Nicholas Michael Halim (talk) 04:03, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Image review – Pass
- The only image File:Hrithik at Rado launch.jpg – is licenced under CC Attr 3.0, and reviewed in an OTRS ticket. Pass for image licencing. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
List of Caribbean Premier League cricket five-wicket hauls
- Nominator(s): — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 11:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because the article probably meets all the criteria for FL. I think its comprehensive, complies with the Manual of Style and has summarised and explanatory text in the lead section to meet the inclusion criteria. Actually, I have another article nominated for FL, but I got 3 supports there, so there may be no problem in nominating this one. Thank you. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 11:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- Image caption: "Shakib Al Hasan took the first five-wicket haul as well as has the best bowling figure in the CPL." => "Shakib Al Hasan took the first five-wicket haul and has the best bowling figures in the CPL."
- No reason to bold Caribbean Premier League in the first sentence, or Hero CPL further on for that matter
- "The inaugural tournament was won by the Jamaica Tallawahs which defeated" => "The inaugural tournament was won by the Jamaica Tallawahs, who defeated"
- Merge the two-sentence second "paragraph" with the one below
- "The first five-wicket haul was taken by Shakib Al Hasan of Barbados Tridents" - any reason why this team isn't linked?
- It would be best to say what his figures were before saying they were the best ever, not after
- "The most recent five-wicket haul was taken by Mohammad Nabi of St Lucia Zouks" - again, why is this team not linked?
- You refer to the St Kitts and Nevis Patriots but not the Barbados Tridents. I think all teams should have the the.
- "Sohail Tanvir's five-wicket haul for 3 runs was the most economical five-wicket haul" - can you find a way to avoid using the exact wording "five-wicket haul" twice in the same sentence?
- "Among the Caribbean," - no idea what this means
- "bowling at an economic rate of 7.50 in a Caribbean Premier League match" - well obviously in a CPL match, otherwise it wouldn't be mentioned in this article, so no need to state it
- "the youngest player to pick up a five-wicket haul in Caribbean Premier League" => "the youngest player to pick up a five-wicket haul in the Caribbean Premier League"
- Given that he was the youngest ever, it might be an idea to say how old he was........
- "While among the overseas players, Shakib Al Hasan is the youngest one to claim a five-wicket haul in this competition." => "Shakib Al Hasan is the youngest overseas player to claim a five-wicket haul in this competition."
- ....and again, say how old he was
- ....also that sentence is unsourced
- "The 2013 season and 2015 season had seen the most number" => "The 2013 season and 2015 season saw the highest number"
- "While the 2014 and 2016 seasons had the fewest five-wicket hauls where no bowler could pick up a five-wicket haul" => "No player took a five-wicket haul in the 2014 and 2016 seasons"
- "Dwayne Bravo is the only player to take five-wicket haul while captaining his side." => "Dwayne Bravo is the only player to take a five-wicket haul while captaining his side."
- ....also that sentence is unsourced
- "Bravo captained Trinidad & Tobago Red Steel in that match." - say when this was and who it was against
- The sorting on the "bowler" column in the table is wrong. It is sorting based on the flag - it should sort based on the player's surname
- In the season overview table, the column heading should be "Best bowling figures", not figure
- The "best bowler" column is not explained. Is it the bowler who took the figures in the column to the left? Or something else (eg the bowler with the most wickets)?
- Ref 26 lists no publisher or accessdate
- That's what I got on a first pass..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:19, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Done @ChrisTheDude: Thanks for your comments. I have fixed all the problems you raised. And the last one you said, I have added a tooltip template on the "Best bowler" column through which you or anyone may understand what it actually is. And about the sorting, I have added a separate column for the players' nationality, and so now the players name sorting look correct. Hoping to get reply from you if now all is okay. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 06:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'll have a proper look later, but at a quick glance, you also need to fix the sorting on the "best bowler" column in the final table, which is sorting based on the flag/nationality rather than the name (apologies for not mentioning this above)..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Some other comments
- There was discussion a while back at the cricket wiki project about these five-wicket haul lists. Leaving aide whether these are actually notable in themselves, the outcome was that we would prefer if the list of batsman were not added to each one. It bloats the table massively, especially on a mobile device or on any screen that isn't superwide. Discussions also agreed that the maidens and economy rate were irrelevant and should probably be removed. These things won't have happened on similar lists, but it doesn't make those lists any more helpful or usable. Going forward I think it's better to accept that this is a list with 8 rows in it rather than anything of any length.
- Beyond that, the nationality of the player is utterly irrelevant and I would prefer it if it were removed. The result column is of dubious relevance in my view as well; if it's kept it needs to tell use who won - not just won, but "Any Island won", for example.
- Removing all of this will make the table actually usable.
- The innings for the first match must be wrong for one of the two players - they can't have both bowled in the second innings of the match. You should probably go back and verify all of the information in the table and all of the statistics in the lead as well.
- The are written english issues in the lead. It's economy rate, not economic rate, for example. You also need to ensure that you preface "records" with "As of...". These things change and, guess what, people don't update stuff like this when they do. The whole lead is a bit of a Sea of Blue as well fwiw - and there's an argument that a lot of the stuff on things like economy rates is rather overdue in there.
- You have date formats mixed in the table - given that DMY seems to be being used elsewhere, that should probably be used here - per CRICSTYLE or whatever it's called.
- I mean, that's on a first look without really reading it tbh. Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Blue Square Thing: Okay, I will try to solve all the issues. But as you said about discussion in cricket project, there are five-wicket hauls for many franchise competitions. And the consensus of most of those discussions were that article need to meet WP:NOTSTATS which says,
Statistics that lack context or explanation can reduce readability and may be confusing; accordingly, statistics should be placed in tables to enhance readability, and articles with statistics should include explanatory text providing context.
And in this article, it has explanatory text and clear summarisation of whole context, so it is not just a bunch of statistical information. And this is exactly one of the criteria for featured list. Articles not meeting inclusion criteria won't be a featured list, although I think that those articles should be deleted which has just been copied from Cricinfo without any context. But this one is not like those all. Thanks. — A.A Prinon Leave a dialogue 13:11, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
List of Marshals of the First French Empire
- Nominator(s): BasedMisesMont Pelerin 00:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because I have worked extensively on this list. I brought it from having 0 sources and no table, with no images, to having enough to qualify. I strongly suggest that you drop as many suggestions as possible below. Thank you! BasedMisesMont Pelerin 00:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- "The rank was used sporadically" - later on you specifically state that it wasn't a rank...........?
- Corrected
- "In total, 26 men have been awarded" - this should be "In total, 26 men were awarded" given that the award is long defunct
- Done
- "The most recent promotions to field marshal came in 1815" - first mention of "field marshal" - how does that relate to the role being discussed?
- Done
- "when Napoleon promoted Grouchy" - use Grouchy's full name and wikilink them both
- Done
- "Some, including Poniatowski, served in foreign armies" - can't see any reason to only use his surname here given that he's not been mentioned before
- Done
- "One Marshal, and one future non-Napoleonic Marshal was present at the Battle of Vitoria" - assuming this refers to two different men, then the comma shouldn't be there and it should be "were present", not "was present"
- Removed the "Non-Napoleonic Marshal"
- I would merge the existing background section into the lead as both are pretty short and they don't duplicate each other
- Battle of Waterloo wikilinked twice in consecutive sentences - only the first one needs to be linked
- Done
- In the paragraph starting "Marmont, born in 1774", you should use their full names, not just their surnames, as they haven't been mentioned before.
- Done
- Name column in the table should sort based on surname, not forename
- Done
- That's what I got on a first pass..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
@ChrisTheDude I have corrected your initial concerns. Thank you for bringing them up. BasedMisesMont Pelerin 21:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comment - the table doesn't seem to be sortable any more, just wondering why that functionality was removed......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- I must've accidentally removed it. BasedMisesMont Pelerin 18:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- If you add it back, make sure that the names are set to sort based on surname rather than forename.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:31, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- The table needs a caption, e.g. at the top of the table code add "|+ <table_caption_text>" or, if that caption would duplicate a nearby header, you can make it only for screen reader software like "|+ {{sronly|<table_caption_text>}}". Captions allow screen reader software to jump to tables by name.
- Done
- Column headers need to be marked with colscopes, e.g. "!Name" should be "!scope=col| Name". Colscopes and Rowscopes (below) allow screen reader software to properly read out tables verbally.
- Done
- The primary cell of each row should be marked with rowscopes, e.g. "|style="background:#e3d9ff;"| Louis-Alexandre Berthier†" should be "!scope=row style="background:#e3d9ff;"| Louis-Alexandre Berthier†"
- Done
- Images need alt text, which can just be e.g. "painting of Louis-Alexandre Berthier"; if it's not present, screen reader software instead reads out the file name. --PresN 14:49, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- Done
- Okay. I will get right to fixing that. Thank you. BasedMisesMont Pelerin 15:25, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments from HAl
- The lead is too short. I would recommend merging the background text into it and then expanding it further.
- Could you make the table sortable?
- For the citations with pages ranges, it should be "pp." not "p.". (I think)
- Thanks for the comments. On Wikipedia it should be p. not pp. though (normally I write pp). I'll get right to fixing those problems. BasedMisesMont Pelerin 23:16, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
That's all for now. ~ HAL333 18:13, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- @BasedMises: are you still working on this list? --PresN 21:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
- Yes. BasedMisesMont Pelerin 22:42, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
List of awards and nominations received by Breaking Bad
- Nominator(s): Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:53, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because I have added about 200 reliable sources, merged all tables into one, and expanded the lead to FL-quality. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:53, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 8 June 2021 (UTC) |
---|
;Comments
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:53, 6 June 2021 (UTC) |
Support – well-sourced and well-written, this is a very deserving list. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- All that I could pick up is that the first paragraph is unsourced -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:34, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- @RunningTiger123 and ChrisTheDude All done. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 15:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:34, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments from Dank
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- FLC criteria:
- 1. The coding at the top of the table seems fine. I checked sorting on all columns and sampled the links in the table. You've got a couple of supports already so you should be covered on prose, and if the FLC coords want another prose review, those are generally not hard to come by when everything else has been covered.
- 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
- 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
- 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems except for the external link (which is fine), 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) 01:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
John Neal bibliography
- Nominator: Dugan Murphy (talk) 16:22, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
If your local library has anything by John Neal, it's likely locked up in special collections. And yet his bibliography contains influential criticisms and creative works like the first use of son-of-a-bitch in American fiction, the first uses of natural diction in Anglophile literature, the first works of American art criticism, the constitution of the first public gym established by an American, the first hardcover novel about the Salem witch trials, the first work by an American in British literary journals, and so many more groundbreaking, before-their-time works. To document Neal's career as a poet, critic, novelist, children's author, short story writer, journalist, playwright, historian, and translator, I put together this bibliography. This is my first FLC, though I did go through FAC recently twice for another article, so I'm going into this nomination fairly confident. I'm particularly interested in hearing from reviewers on my decision to WP:SPLITOUT the section on articles in periodicals. Thank you in advance for taking a look! Dugan Murphy (talk) 16:22, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
- Initial comments
- Against "Keep Cool, A Novel", what does "M.D.C." mean?
- Reasonable question! I added a note there to answer that. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- "The best poetic description of Niagara Falls up to that time" - according to whom? There's a number of other direct quotes which would benefit from clarification of who actually said them.
- The cited book says "With 'The Battle of Niagara' he became known for writing the greatest poetic description of Niagara Falls to that time." So the cited author is not referring to any one person's pronouncement. I reworded this claim in the article to hopefully better reflect the source. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- "A Biography of Neal" - no reason for capital B
- Agreed! Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- "A Portland, Maine guidebook "so chaotic in arrangement as to diminish greatly its usefulness."" - not a complete sentence so shouldn't have a full stop
- Agreed! Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- Is it possible to clarify who John Bratish Eliovich was?
- That's reasonable. I added "alleged con man" to clarify. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- That's what I got as far as the end of the Collaborative works section. I will look at the rest later..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:15, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- Further comments
- I'd merge the second and third paragraphs under Selected articles, as both are very small
- Agreed! Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- ""a scathing satire," according to" - comma should be outside the quote marks
- Agreed! Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- ""Mrs. Farnham lived long enough to retrace her ground and accept the highest truth," according to" - and again
- Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- "published in 2 installments" => "published in two installments"
- Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- "distinct subtitles: "More Dogs," "Fact," "Cats," and "Joe Miller"" - again, commas should be outside quote marks
- Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- "Along with "Robert Steele," one of two stories" - same again - in fact, check throughout for this as it occurs in quite a lot of places
- Done. As you can see, this is the part of the Wikipedia MOS that comes least naturally to me. Thank you for finding these. I just searched for the rest and I think I have now moved all the punctuation marks within quotes that aren't part of the quotes themselves. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- Notes for "The Ins and the Outs, or the Last of the Bamboozled. By a Disappointed Man" randomly end in a semi-colon
- Deleted! Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- ""show's Neal's usual facility in Yankee dialect and Yankee psychology"" - there should not be an apostrophe in "shows"
- Agreed! Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- In the notes for "The Switch-Tail Pacer. A Tale of Other Days" there's an opening quote mark but no corresponding closing quote mark
- Added. Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- That's it from me, I think - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:19, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! I appreciate you taking the time to read through it all and bringing up all these issues. Let me know if you think any of these items still need to be addressed.Dugan Murphy (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: do you support the nomination now that the issues you raised have been addressed, do you have more issues to raise, or would you like to leave your comments as just comments? Dugan Murphy (talk) 13:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- Support - apologies, I completely forgot to check back in............. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:37, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 01:06, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay, comments below:
- Formatting
- I'm not sure what "serial biography" means—perhaps link to Serial (literature)? (if that's the correct link)
- That article describes well this use of "serial", so I just Wikilinked it. Dugan Murphy (talk) 21:50, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- recommend adding location for Harvard University, like the other refs
- Agreed! Done. I also Wikilinked Harvard. Dugan Murphy (talk) 21:50, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Reliability
- No issues here
- Verifiability
- no issues
- Well not really anything to say over all—apologies for the delay. I've left two comments but they're to minor to prevent a source review pass, though I still recommend you address them. Best - Aza24 (talk) 23:40, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- I believe those comments are now addressed. Thank you for taking the time to do a source review! Dugan Murphy (talk) 21:50, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Comments from HAL
- The lead is too short.
- Agreed. I just expanded it by about 100%. Dugan Murphy (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe link Bitch (slang)#Son of a bitch
- Sure! Done. Dugan Murphy (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
- I find the partial inclusion of articles strange. Either all articles should be included or it should be a "See also" link.
- My thinking here is that I am following the WP:SPLITOUT policy and the precedent of "Selected works" sections you see in authors' biography articles. The split-out Articles by John Neal is 160,143 bytes, compared to this article's 113,603, so putting the full list of articles back in would more than double this article's size. I see value in having a shortened list of the more important stuff here, plus the full list in another article. Thoughts? Dugan Murphy (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
More comments later. ~ HAL333 20:31, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking the time to review and write up a few comments! I look forward to more. Dugan Murphy (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
National Trails System
This article was originally just wikilinks to the trails, and there were three separate pages with simple tables for the scenic trails, historic trails, and recreation trails. I suppose I could have gotten a couple FLs and a couple GAs out of that, but sources mainly cover the system as a whole and I thought they'd be better presented together (as I do for many topics), so here they all are with descriptions, history, and details! Learned a ton of history reading way further into these than I needed to to write a few sentences each. I've hiked segments of five NSTs and a handful of NRTs and been to historic sites on five NHTs and the NGT, but now I need to see some more (Ala Kahakai next month!). My other open nomination is ready to be closed, and I appreciate your comments. Reywas92Talk 04:08, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Comment
- "Due to extent of construction of route realignments" => "Due to the extent of construction of route realignments"?
- Under El Camino Real de los Tejas, I suggest wikilinking proselytization, as it's quite an obscure word (I only know what it means because my son learnt about it in an RE lesson literally a few days ago and asked me if I knew what it meant. I didn't ;-) )
- "Native Americans whose land they intruded" => "Native Americans upon whose land they intruded"
- "Six year into the Revolutionary War" => "Six years into the Revolutionary War"
- That's all I got. Fabulous work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:18, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:17, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- The table needs a caption (e.g. "|+ National Scenic Trails" or, if you'd prefer it to only show for screen reader software, "|+ {{sronly|National Scenic Trails}}"
- Trail photos need alt text
- --PresN 03:27, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 23:13, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Formatting
- You have Washington, D.C. for ref 12 but not the others—should be for all or none
- generally all caps should be avoided for titles (ref 51)
- Reliability
- No issues
- Verifiability
- (optional) Recommend archiving links with the bot
- Seems fine in general Aza24 (talk) 23:23, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Reywas92Talk 00:30, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
I'll look into how to call the bot. Thanks!Comments by Dudley
- Links to external sites in main text are forbidden and should be changed to citations.
- You mean the laws? Those are built into a template rather than citation formats and are permitted.
- But Template:UnitedStatesCode says "This template links to an external site, the Cornell University Law School U.S. Code database. External links should not normally be used in the body of an article". Nikkimaria can you advise please? Dudley Miles (talk) 11:09, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- That's correct, ELs are not normally used inline. However, there has been some discussion around using this particular template as an exception to that rule. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:39, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- I think that in this case the templates for the acts should be moved to be citations. As things stand, the last two sentences of this paragraph are unreferenced. Do the acts support the second to last sentence? Dudley Miles (talk) 13:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Looking through the uses of this template it's very widely used inline, which I think is a reasonable exception to what is normal. I moved both to footnotes though, but further guidance about the use of these may be warranted. Yes, that sentence is supported by section 1244. Reywas92Talk 14:12, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- "Since 1968, over forty trail routes have been studied for inclusion in the system." I would leave this out. It is the trails actually created which are of interest to the reader.
- I do believe this is relevant because these studies are ordered by Congress as part of the National Trails System Act and are part of the process for creation, with a study ordered before full designation (though some did not receive that [yet]). It could be worded in better context though.
- "Most of the trails are continuous non-motorized long-distance trails". This implies that some are open to motor vehicles. It would be helpful to give an indication of how many, if available.
- An IP just changed that last month and I don't know why... Done.
- "this trail dating to the 1920s sees around a thousand thru-hikers each year,". No change needed, but do you know the standard time it takes to do the whole trail?
- About six months, I know someone who's done it and someone on the trail now!
- "They represent the earliest travels in the country in Chesapeake Bay and on Spanish royal roads". Presumably only the earliest by people of European origin?
- Ah yes; I just somewhat changed what was there before I started but have added "European".
- "Associated sites along the trail, extended in 2019 to include their preparation along the Ohio River, include their starting point Camp Dubois near Gateway Arch National Park". The second "include" looks wrong to me. I would delete it.
- Ah no, the middle part of that is a separate clause: Camp Dubois, etc. wasn't part of the extension, which only included their preparation trip. Changed the first one to "encompass" if that's clearer.
- So no trails follow traditional native American routes?
- No, two do: Natchez Trace NST and Ala Kahakai NHT.
- A first rate list. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support. I think it would be better to move the templates for the acts to citations, keeping to the rule of no external links in main text, but it is not a deal breaker. Dudley Miles (talk)
- Image review
Lots of images, but most are from Flickr or uploaded by the commons user.
- File:Yorktown VA NPS 18-pdr cannon.jpg and File:US National Trails System, 50th Anniversary map.jpg – should probably have
{{PD-USGov-NPS}}
rather than{{PD-USGov}}
- File:NRT Logo.gif – It is a copyrighted file with Non-free media use rationale. It seems to meet the 10 Non-free content criteria policy. I'll suggest to add these links in source of the rationale (1, 2)
- Rest all images are fine. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 03:57, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
List of memoirs by first ladies of the United States
I've been working on this on and off across the past few months or so. I think it is more or less at FL level, though it's been rather a while since I worked on lists. I found the topic super interesting, and hope you will too. I've created or rewritten articles on 10 of the memoirs in addition, increasing the proportion of articles substantially. Any comments welcome. Eddie891 Talk Work 23:26, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
A fascinating list! Doing this now. Aza24 (talk) 00:00, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Formatting
- Right now there are three different ways of formatting dates in the refs—they should be standardized to one or the other
- this should have gotten them
- ref 7 missing retrieval date
- Removed ref, it's cited in the other sources (which came out after the release)
- ref 1 should be in a template like the others
- Converted to cite news, which is what I think you're looking for
- the Guardian should be capitalized ('The)
- Done
- Hmm pretty sure "AP NEWS" should be "AP News"—maybe just do "Associated Press" to be safe?
- Done
- ref 9 missing author
- added
- the ", 1962" seems to be missing from the title of ref 12
- Added
- Deadline should probably be the "work" for ref 7
- Cut as mentioned above
- Recommendations:
- Put the further reading into a template so the formatting is the same as the books in the refs
- Done
- Perhaps put Reuters as the author for ref 8 since it's clear that its not just an NBC staff member writing it?
- Converted to cite news, work=Reuters via= NBC News. Does that work?
- Yeah that works too, good idea!
- Converted to cite news, work=Reuters via= NBC News. Does that work?
- Archive the links with the bot
- Loosed the bot
- Put the further reading into a template so the formatting is the same as the books in the refs
- Reliability
- Looks good
- Verifiability
- Sorry to be a nuisance, but I'm not sure its clear where the publisher and year information for the individual books is coming from Aza24 (talk) 00:24, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- I was intending the identifiers to supply sufficient information to identify the book-- we allow, for instance the books to cite themselves in 'bibliography' sections of FAs, I think-- I was thinking of it like a spread-out cite book template, though I could just cite separately if you want. Let me know. Many thanks, Aza24, should be all handled. Eddie891 Talk Work 00:50, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hmm okay, I suspected something like that. For the OCLCs I don't see a huge deal, since they link directly to World Cat which has all the information. But the ISBNs don't, making verifiability a bit hard since the reader wouldn't know what to click from there. Part of me wonders if you should include both... any ideas or thoughts? Also, I'd add a retrieval date to ref 6, since you have ones for the other ISSN and JSTOR refs. Aza24 (talk) 22:21, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
- Aza24 I mean, it's been done on FLs such as List of Maya Angelou works... I'd be happy to add OCLCs (and potentially LCCNs) to all if you think that would be better (as at Madonna bibliography). Let me know. Eddie891 Talk Work 01:46, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- For verifiability's sake, the OCLCs would certainly be helpful. LCCNs might be overkill, but up to you in the end. This isn't a huge point (and I'd be happy to pass the source review regardless), but the OCLCs are such a direct way to the information cited, it seems a waste not to include. Aza24 (talk) 03:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- Aza24 I mean, it's been done on FLs such as List of Maya Angelou works... I'd be happy to add OCLCs (and potentially LCCNs) to all if you think that would be better (as at Madonna bibliography). Let me know. Eddie891 Talk Work 01:46, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hmm okay, I suspected something like that. For the OCLCs I don't see a huge deal, since they link directly to World Cat which has all the information. But the ISBNs don't, making verifiability a bit hard since the reader wouldn't know what to click from there. Part of me wonders if you should include both... any ideas or thoughts? Also, I'd add a retrieval date to ref 6, since you have ones for the other ISSN and JSTOR refs. Aza24 (talk) 22:21, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
- I was intending the identifiers to supply sufficient information to identify the book-- we allow, for instance the books to cite themselves in 'bibliography' sections of FAs, I think-- I was thinking of it like a spread-out cite book template, though I could just cite separately if you want. Let me know. Many thanks, Aza24, should be all handled. Eddie891 Talk Work 00:50, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- The lead is very short, I'd be tempted to merge it with the history section (and move the image to the top)
- Done-- does it look OK still?
- "....FLOTUS had memoirs published in their lifetime" - why not "FLOTUS had memoirs published in her lifetime"? They are all women.....
- Done
- "Every first lady after Betty Ford has published at least one memoir." - not true - you specifically note later in the article that Melania has not published a memoir
- "Since then, every first lady has written and published at least one memoir about their life" - again, not true
- Switched the two to "most first ladies"
- Several names are linked multiple times in the history section, they only need to be linked once each
- Done
- Jill Biden's memoir was published before she became FLOTUS. Any others in this category? Worth mentioning in the text?
- Just biden, I think, had memoirs published prior to, though Clinton and Roosevelt definitely wrote about their careers outside of being FLOTUS. Sources don't really mention it, but I've added a note.
- Notes which are not full sentences should not have full stops
- done, though I may have over-corrected
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:36, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, ChrisTheDude, all points responded to, what do you think now? Eddie891 Talk Work 13:39, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:47, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Comments from Kavyansh.Singh
- Add Alt text to the image.
- Done (correctly, I think)
- In note 7, "FLOTUS" should probably be replaced by "First lady of the United States", or just "First lady".
- Done
- There is an issue with the sorting. Hillary Clinton (with the book What Happened) is sorted between Julia Grant and Lady Bird Johnson.
- Done
- Add links to newspapers, websites or journals in the Citations (various like The Washington Post, USA Today, etc.)
- Done, I guess
@Eddie891 – Ping me whenever you address those issues. Thanks for your work so far. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, Kavyansh.Singh, what do you think now? Eddie891 Talk Work 19:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Eddie891 – The changes look good. Overall, the list seems fine, and the only image is in Public Domain (published before 1926). I have made an edit to the list, making minor changes. I feel, I am in position to Support this list for promotion as a Featured list. Great work! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:49, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, Kavyansh.Singh, what do you think now? Eddie891 Talk Work 19:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- Why would the very first sentence mention published correspondence if these are not memoirs and not included in the table? Fair to discuss Adams in the lead but that shouldn't be there if it's not elsewhere too.
- The second paragaph has weird organization, going from who the first lady is to Adams's correspondence to a book that wasn't even real letters(?).
- "several First Ladies" be consistent with capitalization since this is lowercase elsewhere
- "After Taft, several First Ladies wrote their own memoirs, including Edith Wilson, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Lady Bird Johnson. In the 1930s Grace Coolidge published her memoirs as several articles in The American Magazine." This is weird, why are those three just listed by name, while Coolidge, who was between Wilson and Roosevelt, has her own sentence?
- "Memoirs by presidential spouses were uncommon until the publication of Betty Ford's in the 1970s." This seems like it should go earlier in the paragraph; you've already listed the exceptions to "uncommon" before this statement. Maybe move the first part earlier, and then say "Most first ladies since Betty Ford..."
- Why isn't there a citation for "bright, witty, delightfully entertaining reminiscences" since this is a quotation? This alone also doesn't support the previous claim that they were trivial or for women.
- "was criticized for excessively" also unsourced
- "Early published memoirs...for instance" speaks broadly, but Taft's and Wilson's were the only early published memoirs, so since the paragraph describes both it's not like you're just giving an example of several.
- Then it describes Roosevelt making a shift to politics from personal life, but her first memoir This Is My Story (memoir) is still personal and pre-politics content so maybe give that in this context.
- Barbara Bush can be linked in the lead
- Use "Memoirs" or something desciptive as the section header instead of just "List"
- No issues with the table! Very interesting overall.
Reywas92Talk 16:21, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Municipalities of Quintana Roo
I'm happy to nominate another list of municipalities in Mexico (9, nearly 10, states already have their municipality lists featured using this standardized format, along with dozens of other list of municipalities in North America). We are continuing our goal of bringing all lists of municipalities in Mexico up to a consistent, high standard. We have updated the information to reflect the most recent census and tried to incorporate changes from previous nominations. The page should be pretty standardized but there can always be improvements. Thanks to everyone who regularly reviews these lists! Mattximus (talk) 14:32, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Comments
- Opening sentence could do with a comma after "seven municipalities" to break up the flow a bit Done
- In the second sentence, twenty-fourth is spelt incorrectly Done
- "The largest municipality by population is Benito Juárez, with 911,503 residents" - no need for that comma Done
- "Cozumel is fourth largest municipality by population." => "Cozumel is the fourth largest municipality by population." Done
- The state capital indicator is against the municipality. Should it be against the city? Surely it is the city that is the capital? Done
- Note a contains "in 2011" twice, no need for both Done
- Think that's all I've got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks ChrisTheDude for the review! All changes were made, no questions, all easy fixes. Mattximus (talk) 14:39, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Southeast should be lowercase if it's just directional and not a named region Done
- "is the 19th largest" Done
- Can you clarify "administratively autonomous of the state" for me, is it any different from us counties? Can't tell from the responsibilities so I'm not sure why it would be stated that way
- Cite [6] to the handbook doesn't work, but I don't think slaughterhouse regulation needs to be enumerated, seem oddly specific among types of facilities
- Othón P. Blanco isn't the state capital, Chetumal is, right? I see this is consistent across the states but it seems the municipality shouldn't be highlighted for these. Done
- I moved the dagger to Chetumal so it matches the legend, is that sufficient?
Otherwise nice as usual. Reywas92Talk 02:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Comments from Dank
- It appears that Reywas's review is proceeding nicely ... I'll check back to make sure in a few days.
- Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
- FLC criteria:
- 1. The prose is fine. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. Most reviewers frown on linking countries (Mexico) ... I can see a reason for linking it once, and I'm not complaining, but if any other reviewer objects, then I'll agree that the link should go. The coding at the top of the table seems fine. ("rowspan=2" is unexpected, but it's not screwing anything up.) I checked sorting on all 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 article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any 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. The images add a lot, and aren't problematic.
- 6. It is stable.
- Support. Well done. (I hope you'll drop by my plant list nominations every now and then, but they tend to be long, so don't sweat it.) - Dank (push to talk) 23:46, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Comments
- "of Benito Juárez in " overlinked. Done
- "by a plurality voting system who heads" because of parenthetical interruption, this reads weird, like the "who heads" relates to the voting system, suggest a gentle re-word. Done
- You could link Federal government of Mexico. Done
- "and user fees" what does this mean?
- I think it refers to fees to use municipal facilities or programs, but I'm not sure. This was translated from Spanish by someone else so as a non-Spanish speaker cannot tell if there is an elaboration on this point or not...
- "The largest municipality.." suggest this is caveated with "As of 2020..." Done
- "12,939.30 km2 (4,995.89 sq mi)" probably don't need second decimal place of accuracy, plus the table has "4,995.5" as the sq mi conversion, so something's not quite right here.
- I don't see all those incorporation dates in ref 9. Done
- Table has more than two sort outcomes for each numerical column for me. Not done
- Seems strange to have two columns for area but to have both units in a single column for population density.
- Yep I don't have a strong opinion. I formatted this off of someone else's style but then I standardized it to dozens of featured lists, so they are all like this now. I'm hesitant to change just this one so it's different from the dozens of others just like it....
- Ref 1 needs en-dash in title, not spaced hyphen. Done
- Retrieval date formats in refs should be consistent. Done
- ISBN formats should be consistent. Done
- Ref 4, PDF is ~250 pages, so page numbers required.
- This is an interesting one, the reference is for the state having it's own constitution, not a specific page from the constitution. Any thoughts?
- Ref 8 needs en-dash. Done
- As does ref 11. Done
That's enough on a first pass. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:23, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 22:48, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Formatting
- I see you have a trans-title for ref 7, for consistency and verifiability I would recommend adding to all Done
- for refs 3 and 4 it is a little odd that the Article/Act names are only in English, while the title is only in spanish. I would recommend using both (like the titles above)
- ref 11 is missing a publisher/work Done
- You have "Mexico:" for ref 9 but not for any of the other INEGI refs Done
- Reliability
- Seems fine
- Verifiability
- recommendation: add "trans-title=" to non-english sources Done
- Is there a page number(s) available for ref 4? Aza24 (talk) 22:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- This is an interesting one and you are the second reviewer to ask this. I cited this reference to show that the state has it's own constitution. I don't refer to any not a specific page from the constitution, just the fact that it exists and if anyone wants to read it they can click it. Any thoughts? Mattximus (talk) 21:32, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the source review! I've completed all the recommendations but I have 2 questions outstanding for you. Mattximus (talk) 21:38, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- This nomination appears to have stalled, I do have two supports, but just pinging
Reywas92, The Rambling Man,Aza24who have done a review but have not indicated if their recommendations have been completed to their satisfaction. Thanks for the reviews! Mattximus (talk) 20:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
Comments by Dudley
- "municipal council (ayuntamiento) responsible for providing all the public services". But it seems not all as you say the council only assists in education etc. Done
- "The municipal council consists of a variable number of trustees and councillors" This ambiguous whether you mean variable within councils at different times or between different municipalities. Are the trustees nominated? If so, maybe "The municipal council consists of nominated trustees and elected councillors"
- You may be correct but I'm not sure myself of how they are nominated/elected so I can't with certainty change the wording, but to answer your first case variable number of trustees/ councillors. I'm happy to change this any other way, but I just want to be sure that it is accurate.
- "although more funds are obtained from the state and federal governments than from their own income." This seems wrong as funds from govts are also income. "than locally". Done
- Having three notes in four columns looks odd to me.
- Agree. Done
- Looks fine. Just a few minor quibbles. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Nominations for removal
List of Nobel laureates affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania
- Notified: Joffle, Sephiroth BCR, Ryan Vesey, WikiProject University of Pennsylvania, WikiProject Sweden
I am nominating this for featured list removal because this was article was made an FL in 2008, and no longer meets the requirements for it today. Most notably, there are no sources that verify the affiliation that some of these individuals had to UPenn. The general source at the bottom article does not cover several of the entries on the list, and notably excludes Martin Luther King Jr., who has a tenuous relationship to the institution at best. The list claims that he was a "Graduate Student, 1950–1951", but even UPenn itself only claims that he audited three philosophy courses while studying at the Crozer Theological Seminary. [9] MLK's article does not mention UPenn in any way. The lede contains little information on the list itself (I would hardly consider the exact size of the cash prize of the award over time useful for this sort of article), and leaves the criteria for inclusion on the list incredibly vague. Punctuation of degrees is inconsistent (the style guide indicates that there shouldn't be any). The article does not the accessibility requirements for FL, and none of the sources are archived. Most egregious, however, is the fact that the number of entries on the list and count presented in the article match neither the number of laureates stated in List of Nobel laureates by university affiliation or by the university itself; every other article on a specific school's Nobel laureates is presented as an offshoot of the "official" List of Nobel laureates by university affiliation page, which makes me think that this list is nowhere near comprehensive enough. Josefaught (talkM) 19:34, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
1984 Summer Olympics medal table
I am nominating this for featured list removal for a few glaring, but probably easily addressable, issues:
- Complete lack of information on the fact that Russia and other countries boycotted these Olympics, which is the primary reason that the USA and other countries were so successful. The boycott's impact on the medal table is a crucial detail that should have its own section.
- There is almost no discussion about medal records, outside of the USA. Other countries set records, especially due to the boycott.
- More recent versions of this type of list (2016 Summer Olympics medal table) identify "Changes in medal standings" as a section. This should be explored in this article as well.
- More recent versions of this type of list (2020 Summer Olympics medal table) provides maps showing medal distribution across the globe. These would be very helpful here.
- References need to be beefed up.
- The lead is quite lite, especially in comparison to current FLC standards. More should be added, especially after the details above are added. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
- Given that the 1984 Summer Olympics are my favorite edition of the Olympics and I've recently helped promote the 2012 Summer Olympics (which are my second favorite Olympics) to featured list status, I can help save this list from demotion. However, I do not know how to make a map for the medal distribution. Therefore, I will need help on that front. Nevertheless, I'll try since I don't plan on promoting a new FLC until December.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 06:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hello! I was told to visit this page and provide my rationale for keeping an updated version of the article. So, there we go:
- 1) Current version mentions Soviet boycott but instead of simply saying that the USSR did not participate, it presents Soviet government's stated reasons for boycott (that are universally questioned) as fact. As 1984 Summer Olympics boycott states, there're many versions, and the most probable of them is retaliation for the 1980 boycott. Other suggested stricter doping controls etc.
- 2) Current version fails to mention the record nature of USA’s performance, namely their 83 gold medals. 1980 Summer Olympics medal table notably mentions Soviet records.
- 3) The current version erroneously credits West Germany with 59 gold medals instead of 59 total medals
- 4) Current version fails to note the record-breaking nature of Romania's performance, namely their second-best total of 20 gold medals.
- An updated version fixes all that. Sorry for using that stupid dynamic IP, I know that creating an account makes your edits more trustworthy.109.197.205.158 (talk) 17:43, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hello! I was told to visit this page and provide my rationale for keeping an updated version of the article. So, there we go:
- Comment: Given that I am attending a funeral today, I won't be able to work on this until at least Monday.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 07:53, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Summary of changes
This section will enumerate the changes that have so far been done to the list. I will update this as I complete a major task.
- Added new table to "Changes in medal standings" which is modeled after the 2012 Summer Olympics medal table. It includes summary of the redistribution of medals, which athletes were affected, and a brief explanation of what happened in each case. Furthermore, another table was added to show how the medals re-allocations affected the medal tally.
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 08:49, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Replaced all the images with the new ones because most of the old ones were derived from sources whose links give me an error message. Thus the old images would most likely not follow fair use rules
- --Birdienest81 (talk) 09:41, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
List of counties in Kentucky
- Notified: Acdixon, Tompw, VitaleBaby, Rfd1394, WP USA, WP Kentucky, WP Politics
There is a lot of text in the lead of this article that does not appear elsewhere but is uncited, such as Later, however, politics began to play a part, with citizens who disagreed with the present county government simply petitioning the state to create a new county and the time zone stuff, the population ranges between the infobox and the table don't match for the two extremes, and the sources "Click and Learn" and "Kentucky Comprehensive Genealogy Database" are likely not RS. This is an older (2007) FL promotion that isn't quite at current standards. Hog Farm Talk 02:18, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- I've made a number of changes in the model of my recent List of counties in Washington FL, including updating populations, replacing the sources you noted with a better one for the origins, removing the time zones, and conforming the footers. I found The Kentucky Encyclopedia in GBooks, and it also cites your quoted text. There's more historical info that could be added from it and other sources I added. I can do a bit more sourcing from these, but I'm probably not interested enough in it to fully flesh out prose sections. Reywas92Talk 19:18, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- This was my project from a long time ago. I'm no longer very active, but I can probably help here. It would be helpful to have a bulleted list of issues to work from, especially as Reywas92 (talk · contribs) appears to have addressed a few of them already. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:33, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I don't believe we should be using population estimates at all, but stick with the only official census numbers as do most every city page, and list of cities pages. Has the 2020 census county count been released? If not, it should be soon. Also FIPS numbers are meaningless to >99% of all readers and should probably be removed. Mattximus (talk) 14:27, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
List of unmade Doctor Who serials and films
- Notified: Gallicus, Percy Snoodle, Sceptre, WP Doctor Who, WP TV, WP Film
This one probably should've been delisted back in 2012 - there was an old FLCR trending towards delisting that was deleted as part of the nuking of some sock contribs. This one contains significant uncited text, including some fairly bad sourcing such as a web forum and a Facebook conversation with no link to it. As I understand the FL criteria, this one would likely be quick-failed today. Large number of contributors, notifying those with over 5% authorship and the original FLC nominator. More familiar with FAR than FLCR, so please bear with me if I made any mistakes. Hog Farm Talk 02:00, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- I agree, this would need *major* improvement to meet the FL criteria. (t · c) buidhe 02:15, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- Used to be a lot smaller - Could probably actually be split now, but that's different discussion. 141.92.129.41 (talk) 15:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
- Should definitely be split by people familiar with Doctor Who. Way too large for it's own good. A few claims are also missing sources. Delist and start a split discussion.--Lirim | Talk 11:03, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- Delist - Way to long (21,000+ words), sourcing issues, etc. Hog Farm Talk 16:13, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- Delist – There is too much unsourced information for this to reach FL status again in a reasonable timeframe, especially given that there are unresolved "citation needed" tags from 2012. RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:28, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
List of dinosaur genera
This list was nominated 15 years ago and is showing its age. It also has serious scope issues. The list of dinosaurs includes both plants (!) and crocodiles. It is also a fork of “List of informally named dinosaurs”. I tried to reach a consensus on the talk page, but none was able to be made so I’m nominating for featured list review in order to get more opinions. Here are the primary concerns:
- The list is completely unreferenced. There are no in-text citations and only 4 general references included at the bottom.
- The list includes plants (!) and crocodiles. If the title is “list of dinosaurs” the list should only contain dinosaurs. Numerous people mentioned this on the talk page, but edits were reverted.
- Outdated terminology “this is a list of” shows its age.
- Images do not have alt text
- The entire scope and terminology is unsourced, and includes categories not found in the list. Mattximus (talk) 20:37, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep This is simply not correct:
- Regarding the sourcing, it clearly states Uncited genera names can be attributed to Olshevsky's "Dinosaur Genera List", clarified both in the lead and references list.
- The inclusion criteria are clear-cut: All published dinosaur names are included, including those that are now considered invalid. This also includes names that are now considered plants or crocodiles. Removing just these few cases would simply be inconsistent. Removing all invalid names requires much more WP:OR, and we would loose many popular names that people may be looking for.
- The scope and terminology is not unsourced, and I don't know what categories are not found in the list. The scope of this list is in fact based on Olshevsky's "Dinosaur Genera List", a classic outside Wikipedia; it is not even something we invented here. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:57, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- As far as the non-dinosaurs go, I see the logic for including "things once incorrectly thought to be dinosaurs", that's interesting, but they should be in their own section if it's going to be a bulleted list like this, or else more lines need more clear explanation for why they're not a currently recognized dinosaur genus.
- That said, I don't like that this is a bare bulleted list. I get that it's too long to realistically go for the talk page proposal from 2008(!) for a table like we do for modern animal families, but even a simple wikitable of name - validity - time period - citation would be much more useful to readers.
- @Jens Lallensack: Can you explain what
Olshevsky's "Dinosaur Genera List", a classic outside Wikipedia
means? Because what I see is someone's personal hobby site, and I'm confused how that's a reliable source; I see that the text says George Olshevsky is a "biological nomenclature expert", but that's a strong (and important!) claim without a citation. - Assuming Olshevsky is alright- implicitly citing their work like this is a bad idea, because the result is that if anyone adds a new genus without a citation, it's de facto sourced to Olshevsky even if it isn't there. It forces active maintenance to revert bad additions by someone who knows the history of the article's sourcing, which isn't great. --PresN 21:10, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- Having individual sections for valid and invalid names: Maybe, though the reader searching for a particular name will generally not know if the name is, at the moment, considered valid or invalid, so they would have to check both sections. I don't quite see the advantage of having them separated. Adding more explanation is a good idea, but not sure if much more than "now considered a fossil plant" is needed?
- Having this in table format is an option that was just recently discussed at the talk page.
- This paper [10] appears to contain "George Olshevsky is a widely cited authority in dinosaur classification and taxonomic nomenclature" according to Google, but I don't have access to it.
- Regarding the citation style: I don't know. What would be the better alternative? This list should still be identical with Olshevsky's list since both are regularly updated. Putting the inline citation of Olshevsky's list behind every name? Then, it might be better to cite the first description of the name directly, but this would mean we have to add around 1700 references. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:58, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- Olshevsky is not just some hobbyist; he's a notable scientist who's did much to revise the taxonomy of dinosaurs, such as his 1991 work "Revision of the Parainfraclass Archosauria", so he's definitely a reliable source. However, @Jens Lallensack:, his website has mysteriously not updated since January 13, 2021 (after adding Shri devi), so I guess we should cite all dinosaurs from Dzharatitanis onwards? In any case, our list is not identical to Olshevsky's; the latter includes Omnivoropteryx and Ixalerpeton, as it has a wider scope that ours.Atlantis536 (talk) 02:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks; if Olshevsky's list is indeed no longer updated, we have to do something about it of course. If we make sure that all our names before 2021 also appear in Olshevsky's list (which I think is the case), and henceforth cite every new name individually, this should also solve @PresN: concern about implicitly citing the list? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 06:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I guess so. But then we have to solve the problem about where the once-dinosaurs would go, as it seems like the nominator really, really, really wants them gone. Atlantis536 (talk) 10:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- We need consensus in order to make such a far-reaching change. In any case, I think we only have the choice between 1) keeping all names (status quo) and 2) remove all invalid names. I don't see how it could be justifiable to remove some invalid names (those that have been classified as non-dinosaurs since) but not other invalid names (junior synonyms, nomina nuda etc.). One more thought: The status quo list criteria are, at least, based on an external source. WP:Lists in Wikipedia reads Lists should always include unambiguous statements of membership criteria based on definitions made by reputable sources. Now I wonder: If we go with "valid names only", what would our definition of "valid name" be, and what source do we use to back this up? The nominator suggested that we should "err on the side of caution", meaning that we should keep the names unless there is an unambiguous consensus that they are invalid. But again, which source do we cite for this definition of "valid name"? In many cases, we would need to rely on primary sources here: We would need to judge by ourselves if there is consensus amongst recent papers that a particular name is valid or invalid. This is a clear step away from what a featured list should be. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 12:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Tbh, I guess we should keep the list as is. My personal definition for "valid name" is "genera with their own (non-redirect) Wikipedia pages with their taxonomy templates set to within Dinosauria", which falls into WP:Circular referencing and WP:OR. Any external source, imo, rarely touches on nomina dubia etc., and there could be synonymies that become consensus amongst scientists before being accepted here (Stygimoloch, Dracorex and Nanotyrannus come to mind). And there's also all the problems with removing or relocating the invalid taxa listed above and at the talk page. I think the list should stay. Atlantis536 (talk) 12:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- We need consensus in order to make such a far-reaching change. In any case, I think we only have the choice between 1) keeping all names (status quo) and 2) remove all invalid names. I don't see how it could be justifiable to remove some invalid names (those that have been classified as non-dinosaurs since) but not other invalid names (junior synonyms, nomina nuda etc.). One more thought: The status quo list criteria are, at least, based on an external source. WP:Lists in Wikipedia reads Lists should always include unambiguous statements of membership criteria based on definitions made by reputable sources. Now I wonder: If we go with "valid names only", what would our definition of "valid name" be, and what source do we use to back this up? The nominator suggested that we should "err on the side of caution", meaning that we should keep the names unless there is an unambiguous consensus that they are invalid. But again, which source do we cite for this definition of "valid name"? In many cases, we would need to rely on primary sources here: We would need to judge by ourselves if there is consensus amongst recent papers that a particular name is valid or invalid. This is a clear step away from what a featured list should be. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 12:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I guess so. But then we have to solve the problem about where the once-dinosaurs would go, as it seems like the nominator really, really, really wants them gone. Atlantis536 (talk) 10:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- In regards to table-ifying the list: I did a quick test for converting it via search and replace regexs ([11]), just took a few minutes. Let me know if y'all'd like me to do that to the whole list or whatever you decide. --PresN 14:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, good to know that stuff like this can be done so quickly! I would combine the "status" and "notes" fields (because, e.g., a plant or crocodile in this list can still be "valid" even though it is not a dinosaur). I also think that having the names left-aligned (rather than centred) could make it easier to read. I don't have a clear preference regarding the list style personally, though I like the bulleted list due to its simplicity; let's see what others think. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:48, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks; if Olshevsky's list is indeed no longer updated, we have to do something about it of course. If we make sure that all our names before 2021 also appear in Olshevsky's list (which I think is the case), and henceforth cite every new name individually, this should also solve @PresN: concern about implicitly citing the list? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 06:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- @SlvrHwk: Thanks for adding inline citations to the list. But please wait with adding citations to taxa described before 2021 before we have reached a consensus here. I see that the nominator added two "citation needed" templates to the article. But I think they didn't understand that inline citations are not required when the sourcing is made clear by other means, which is the case here: Names are all sourced to Olshevsky's list, and as stated above, this becomes clear enough. I think we have some consensus that taxa described in 2021 do need an extra citation, since Olshevsky's list hasn't been updated. I'm not against adding the respective first descriptions to all names, but this would mean we need to add around 1700 different references in total – I'm not sure if this is even possible technically, and if it would increase page size beyond of what is acceptable. We really need to get consensus on such things first. For this reason, I am really unhappy about the nominator adding these templates, causing this confusion! I propose to at least remove the main template for the time being; the section template I will try to action an asap. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 07:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- So sorry! I totally got a little too excited there. I honestly didn't know this page existed... I'll remove those edits now. -SlvrHwk (talk) 15:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! We do need help with adding citations to the 2021 taxa, though, if you have some time available! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 15:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- Comment - @Jens Lallensack: Olshevsky updated his list on May 23rd, so I've removed most of the citations. I did leave notes on the talk page and the edit summary that the citation exists as a sentence instead of a footnote. Atlantis536 (talk) 14:52, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! We do need help with adding citations to the 2021 taxa, though, if you have some time available! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 15:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- So sorry! I totally got a little too excited there. I honestly didn't know this page existed... I'll remove those edits now. -SlvrHwk (talk) 15:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- Comment - I don't see why this is even necessary, there is currently already a talk page discussion about how to improve the list. Nominating for removal should be a last resort, but here it has ben done prematurely, without any consensus having been reached. FunkMonk (talk) 14:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- It is not just what was talked about in the talk page about the bizarre scope (which was going in circles and needed more eyes), but there are severe sourcing issues that alone would bring this up for removal. It's my hope that the page is not removed but this is used to improve the article so that it is well sourced and similar in quality to other featured lists like List of felids. It is nowhere near that and shows its age having been nominated in 2006. Missing all inline citations is critical. Mattximus (talk) 17:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- But you did not even mention the citation issue on the talk page. Doing major rework of a list of 1700 entries, should such be required, is not something we are likely to handle within the tight time constraints of this nomination. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Comment - I think the above suggestion of cordoning off invalid names in their own section is completely untenable due to the fluid nature of this list and fact that some cases are disputed. LittleLazyLass (Talk | Contributions) 01:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- More people are commenting in the talk page wondering what plants and mammals are doing on this list of dinosaurs. This is a constant issue, it comes up every now and then and has for years... and a few people seem bizarrely fixated on keeping a plant in a list of dinosaurs, despite the confusion this is obviously creating. I give up. Mattximus (talk) 17:52, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry but I can't follow. The comment you are referring to is "They're still keeping Libycosaurus, an anthracothere mammal, so, why not a plant, too?". If anything, the author seems to suggest we should keep the plant. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:04, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Was there a conclusion on having subsections to this list? The first section could be dinosaurs, the second could be crocodiles, the third invalid names (plants)... etc? This is a compromise because it will at least contain a list of dinosaurs, but also still contain the plants/crocodiles that some users inexplicably want on this page. Would this work? Mattximus (talk) 15:29, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
- First, may I kindly ask you to stop these subliminal accusations like "few people seem to control this page page" [12] and "some users inexplicably want on this page". I am just unwilling to continue this discussion if this is not getting better, because it is just not fun. It also does absolutely not reflect reality, since nobody on this FLRC, except for you, wants to have the non-dinosaurs removed. Regarding your suggestion: I personally see more disadvantages than benefits in this. It would require a bit of WP:OR from our side to separate valid from invalid, and some famous names that users might looking for would be moved to the other list; so a user would need to check both to find them. I'm not totally sure what the advantage of your suggestion would be. If you are simply concerned with confused readers (those that don't read the lead), we could also solve it by just making the entries a bit clearer (e.g., "subsequently found to be a piece of petrified wood" instead of just "a piece of petrified wood"), would that help? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:08, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
- Fine, I won't participate anymore. But know it's not just me who is confused about plants and crocodiles being in a list of dinosaurs, it's regular occurrence on the talk page and has been for years. Which means many others that don't bother to post are confused too. It's just so bizarre that the list of dinosaurs has crocodiles on it... the reliance on a single source (that looks like a sketchy website) for a "master list" and not any academic source is also worrying. This should never have passed featured list, and would not today for being beyond the scope of the title alone. Mattximus (talk) 18:15, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
- As argued above, I do think we would violate WP:LISTCRIT, which states that selection criteria need to be backed up with reliable sources. As discussed above, we would need or own definition of what a "valid genus" is, which therefore appears to be a no-go to start with. A reference supporting the status of the "sketchy website" as a reliable source has already been added. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:35, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Jens Lallensack: I do think that changing the wording to be e.g. "subsequently found to be a piece of petrified wood" would be helpful to readers (especially those who skimmed the lead)- there's plenty of horizontal space so it wouldn't be too wordy. --PresN 20:56, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- OK, I went ahead and added those explanations throughout. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:43, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Jens Lallensack: I do think that changing the wording to be e.g. "subsequently found to be a piece of petrified wood" would be helpful to readers (especially those who skimmed the lead)- there's plenty of horizontal space so it wouldn't be too wordy. --PresN 20:56, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- As argued above, I do think we would violate WP:LISTCRIT, which states that selection criteria need to be backed up with reliable sources. As discussed above, we would need or own definition of what a "valid genus" is, which therefore appears to be a no-go to start with. A reference supporting the status of the "sketchy website" as a reliable source has already been added. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:35, 25 July 2021 (UTC)