Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 another review process 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. The featured list director, Giants2008, or his delegates, PresN and Hey man im josh, determine the timing of the process for each nomination. Each nomination will typically last at least twenty days, but may last longer if changes are ongoing or insufficient discussion or analysis has occurred. For a nomination to be promoted to FL status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. 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 process focuses on finding and resolving problems in relation to the criteria, rather than asserting the positives. Declarations of support are not as important as finding and resolving issues, and the process is not simply vote-counting. Once the director or delegate has decided to close a nomination, they will do so on the nominations page. A bot will update the list talk page after the list is promoted or the nomination archived, typically within the day, and the |
Featured list tools: | ||||||
|
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: |
Nominations
[edit]- Nominator(s): Tone 19:09, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Brazil has 24 WHS and 22 tentative sites. Some sites are very fresh and there's plenty of nature. Since the list for Argentina was my sole running nomination and just got promoted, I am adding a new one. Standard style. Tone 19:09, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- MPGuy2824
- "of the sugarcane industry".
- For "Ruins of Sao Miguel das Missoes (Brazil)" it would to add some info about the only site in Brazil along with the general info about all five missions.
- "centre of the sugar industry".
- "the Cathedral Basilica of Salvador, the Church and Convent of São Francisco, Salvador, and the Church of the Third Order of Mount Carmel."
- "The church, which is from the second half of the 18th century, is"
- " in the Italian-inspired Rococo style."
- is there a good wikilink for "ceramic-farmer societies"
- "the beach with a paving of hewn stones "
- "The park is located on the coast of the Maranhão State. It comprises a vast expanse of sandy dunes with temporary and permanent lagoons." -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:08, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks! As for the link, the most appropriate seems to be the Formative stage, but not ideal and may look like an Easter egg. Old-world equivalent would be Neolithic but that clearly does not apply to Brazil. Tone 18:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:27, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
With the list for 1969 having just been promoted and the list for 1970 having a few supports, here is the list for 1971. Lots more Carpenters and a first chart-topper for a singer who was born in England and raised in Australia but would be one of the U.S.'s favourite singers of the 1970s..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:27, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
NØ
[edit]- "The chart, which in 1971 was entitled Easy Listening, has undergone various name changes and since 1996 has been published under the title Adult Contemporary." - I generally recommend commas before and after the "since 1996" but you may want to do the other workaround you use to fix the issue instead.
- Changed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- "topped Billboard's pop singles chart" - Were non-singles still eligible to chart back then like they are now? If so, "songs" might be a better term than "singles" given the context
- No, songs which were not available to purchase as a single were not eligible for the Hot 100 until December 1998 -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- There are two instances of "followed into the top spot" so one could be something like "succeeded at the summit" or some other combination of words
- Changed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- "[7][8][9][10]" - Four refs in a row is usually considered WP:OVERKILL, it might help to move one earlier in the sentence or eliminate it
- Changed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Great stuff and pictures, as always expected and delivered by you.--NØ 13:30, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: - thank you for your kind words, all the above addressed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- ChrisTheDude, did the edit not save? Because I am not seeing the changes in the current revision...--NØ 16:13, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: Like a dumb-ass I had it open in another tab but hadn't hit "save changes" LOL. Please check now -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:15, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- I figured as much, lol. Support and I can also pass the source review as I am familiar with the sourcing on these types of lists now. Tapestry should be italicized on ref 4, though. Cheers.--NØ 16:20, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Done! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:55, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- I figured as much, lol. Support and I can also pass the source review as I am familiar with the sourcing on these types of lists now. Tapestry should be italicized on ref 4, though. Cheers.--NØ 16:20, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: Like a dumb-ass I had it open in another tab but hadn't hit "save changes" LOL. Please check now -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:15, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- ChrisTheDude, did the edit not save? Because I am not seeing the changes in the current revision...--NØ 16:13, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: - thank you for your kind words, all the above addressed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]Source review: Passed
- Reliable enough for the information being cited
- Consistent date formatting
- Consistent and proper reference formatting
- Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
- Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for
I've got nothing, you stumped me! Great stuff Chris! Hey man im josh (talk) 19:37, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 01:36, 12 August 2024 (UTC) and Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe)
Me and Tamzin cooked up just what it says on the tin; terminology associated with the body parts of trans folks.
This is pretty heterodox form for a list, but since its main purpose is to explain and list a set of terminology, I feel it's a bit closer to the list side of things, even though it could potentially fit into either camp. A demi-list, so to speak. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 01:36, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Thought from QoH
[edit]Nice work on this list by both of you. I added col headers while this list was still in draft, but was reverted as "not needed". I'd think all tables should have col headers, but couldn't find any guidnance on this and would like to hear other's thoughts. Queen of Hearts (talk) 02:01, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): TheBritinator (talk) 21:34, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Renominating this for FL since it's rejection several months ago. I have taken time to significantly improve it to fit the criteria, mostly taken from experience in my other successful nomination, and I believe it is now ready to reviewed again. TheBritinator (talk) 21:34, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Dan the Animator 20:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Since my other Crimea list FLN has gotten supports and FLNs generally take time, going ahead and nominating this one now to get it started. This list's content is already somewhat prepared, with a lot of it being indirectly reviewed in the past successful FLNs for list of cities in Donetsk Oblast and Luhansk Oblast as well as the ongoing FLNs for Zaporizhzhia Oblast and Crimea. Together with Mykolaiv Oblast, Kherson and Mykolaiv oblasts are the only oblasts with less than 10 cities so these lists will likely be somewhat shorter than the rest. That said, considering List of cities in New Brunswick was recently able to pass FLN even with only its eight cities, I'm fairly confident that this (and eventually the Mykolaiv list) will be able to be promoted too. Thanks in advance to everyone for all the feedback and excited to continue the series! :) Dan the Animator 20:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "including the cities Beryslav and Kherson" => "including the cities of Beryslav and Kherson"
- "centered on the village Oleksandrivka" => "centered on the village of Oleksandrivka"
- That's literally all I got - great work once again! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:34, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed; thanks ChrisTheDude! :) Dan the Animator 21:23, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:23, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
This is a list I've been working on alongside my revamp of Mongol Empire-related articles on WP. I am indebted to the authors of List of Chinese emperors for a considerable amount of the detail, and to the authors of the FLs for the emperors of the Han dynasty and of the Song dynasty for the layout. If successful, this nomination will be used in the WikiCup. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "Attempted to reduced the power of the minister Temuder" - remove the d from reduced
- "Briefly ruled before killed by El Temür" => "Briefly ruled before being killed by El Temür"
- Notes b and c need full stops
- That's all I got - awesome work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- All fixed ChrisTheDude, thanks for your time! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:00, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- There are two problems here, both of which I think have the same solution. The portraits don't have alt text, and the image column is the one set as the row headers but has no text to read out. Putting alt text on the images as the name of the ruler (e.g.
[[File:YuanEmperorAlbumGenghisPortrait.jpg|110px|alt=Genghis Khan]]
should sort that out, as the alt text would be read out for both cases. For the rows with no image, please add invisible text for the cell, so e.g.<span style="display:none">Oghul Qaimish</span>
. - I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 19:14, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- All done. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:45, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Arconning (talk) 09:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Another Olympic list just in time for the end of the 2024 Summer Olympics. Will probably reply a bit late for personal reasons but I promise that comments will be responded accordingly. Arconning (talk) 09:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Infobox image caption needs a full stop
- "While Cameroon, Mongolia, and Uganda won their nations' first Olympic medals." - this isn't a complete sentence
- "winning six medals with four gold and two silver medals." => "winning six medals with four gold and two silver." will suffice
- "won the most medals at the games, winning seven medals with two golds, four silvers, and one bronze medal." - as above, "won the most medals at the games, winning seven medals with two golds, four silvers, and one bronze." will suffice and avoid repetition
- "Two bronze medals were awarded in each boxing event after a competitor lost their semifinal, as opposed to fighting in a third place tie breaker." - this doesn't seem quite right, I suggest "Two bronze medals were awarded in each boxing event to the losing semi-finalists, as opposed to them fighting in a third place tie breaker"
- That's it I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:50, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude I have done all of this. Let me know if you have any more. :) Arconning (talk) 09:49, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments from Steelkamp
[edit]- "Mexico City, Mexico" is redundant, and can be shortened to just "Mexico City".
- "These games were the first games to be held in Latin America." Change to "These were the first games to be held in Latin America."
- "and 39 of them". Is this referring to 39 nations or 39 athletes?
- "Teams from Kenya,[7] Tunisia,[8] and Venezuela won their nations' first Olympic gold medals.[9] While Cameroon,[10] Mongolia,[11][12] and Uganda won their nations' first Olympic medals." I suggest merging into once sentence: "Teams from Kenya,[7] Tunisia,[8] and Venezuela won their nations' first Olympic gold medals,[9] while Cameroon,[10] Mongolia,[11][12] and Uganda won their nations' first Olympic medals."
- "...at any edition of the Olympic Games." Can be simplified to "...in the Olympic Games."
- "He and the rest of his team were subsequently disqualified..." Simplify to "He and the rest of his team were disqualified..."
Steelkamp (talk) 08:19, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Steelkamp I believe I'm done. :) Arconning (talk) 11:19, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): SnowFire (talk) 00:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
As a tool for keeping track of a blizzard of events and names, I found it useful to keep a scratch timeline in a Google Doc while I was researching some of the areas in this time period. I decided to turn it into a full proper article, and, well, here we are. There's some comments on methodology on the article talk page for what events were included and which weren't (a 600 year range means that including every single loosely related item isn't feasible), but the short version is that Lester L. Grabbe's "A History of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period" is the most important source. It's spread across 4 volumes, and is 2100+ pages discussing just about everything of importance on the era, as well as bibliographies where various feuding scholarly opinions about whether this undated line in Josephus refers to something that happened in 145 BCE or 135 BCE or didn't happen at all. This is important when quite a lot (most?) of the dates need a "circa" around them, and have a range of scholarly estimates. This is my first nomination at FLC. SnowFire (talk) 00:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Hey man im josh (talk) 14:45, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm quite excited to present my third Olympic medal table nomination, which is based largely on other recent nominations, such as 2020 Summer Olympics medal table, 1964 Summer Olympics medal table, and 2018 Winter Olympics medal table. I believe it meets all of our criteria and, as always, I will do my best to respond quickly and address any and all feedback or concerns that are brought up. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:45, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Phelps image caption needs a full stop
- "due to medals reallocation" => "due to medal reallocation"
- CAS should be written in full
- "The IOC has not yet redistributed the medals" - should be medal singular as this cell only relates to one DQ
- You mention Nijat Rahimov's DQ and the lack of reallocation of the medal to date in the prose, but not the other similar case......?
- "an 87th country was later awarded a medal at the 2008 Olympics, tying the record" - should probably also mention in this section that the figure for 2016 subsequently went down to 86 therefore the 2008 games now hold the record outright
- That's all I got - great work as ever, Josh! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:20, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Phelps image caption needs a full stop
– Done.Example text
– Done.CAS should be written in full
–"The IOC has not yet redistributed the medals" - should be medal singular as this cell only relates to one DQ
– Done. I was thinking "medals" because, if redistributed, the gold would go to second, the silver would go to... well... the thid place person is under investigation, but the idea is it would go to them, and so on. Hence, I was thinking of multiple reallocations. Never the less, for the time being, singular actually makes sense.You mention Nijat Rahimov's DQ and the lack of reallocation of the medal to date in the prose, but not the other similar case......?
– I've converted it to a note now, but"an 87th country was later awarded a medal at the 2008 Olympics, tying the record" - should probably also mention in this section that the figure for 2016 subsequently went down to 86 therefore the 2008 games now hold the record outright
– I've added to the note, I hope it makes things more clear.
- Thanks so much for the feedback @ChrisTheDude!! I very much appreciate it and I hope I've addressed all of your points. Please do let me know if I can do better. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:39, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:07, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hey @ChrisTheDude, sorry, just to follow up on this... Which version is correct? You asked me to remove a full stop from an image at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2018 Winter Olympics medal table/archive1, but you asked me to add it in this case. Both captions, the other being at 2018 Winter Olympics medal table, are formatted the same way except for the full stop. Just seeking clarity so that I can be consistent. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Image captions that are a complete sentence need a full stop e.g. "Dave Smith won the most medals at the 2064 Olympics." I misread the image caption on the 2018 article and thought it wasn't a complete sentence so didn't need one, turns out I was wrong on that. But, in short: complete sentence needs one, sentence fragment doesn't -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:37, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Source review
[edit]I'll do a source review, and add in any general comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:16, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: Only the SB Nation source is concerning. Nothing in my general comments that is a blocker. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:16, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Source review
- Is the use of SB Nation appropriate, given the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_437#SB_Nation?
- Everything else looks like a suitable source for the info supported.
- I didn't see any issues with citation formatting.
- Spot checks on "On 18 August 2016, Kyrgyz weightlifter Izzat Artykov was stripped of his bronze medal in the men's 69 kg event after testing positive for strychnine. Luis Javier Mosquera of Colombia, who had been the fourth-place finisher before Artykov's disqualification, was moved into third place" - no issues
- Spot checks on "On 8 December 2016, the CAS disqualified weightlifter Gabriel Sîncrăian of Romania after he tested positive for exogenous testosterone and boxer Misha Aloian of Russia after he tested positive for tuaminoheptane. In the men's 85 kg weightlifting event Denis Ulanov of Kazakhstan was moved into third place. In the men's flyweight (52 kg) boxing event Yoel Finol of Venezuela was moved into second place; the released bronze medal has not been awarded to anyone." - no issues.
- Spot check on "Serghei Tarnovschi of Moldova was stripped of his bronze medal in the men's C-1 1000 metres canoeing event after testing positive for GHRP-2, a growth hormone-releasing peptide." - no issues
General comments
- "The golds are purer than any presented at all preceding Olympics." - "The golds were... " for consistency? Although I suppose "are" is true.
- I like "the mint that minted" but you may want to reword to avoid repetition.
- Hey @BennyOnTheLoose, I'm so sorry I missed your review!!! I never would have let this go long without response had I realized sooner. Anyways...
- SB Nation discussions are often tainted by the fact people widely evaluate the parent site, SB Nation, along with its hundred of sub sites (typically one for every professional team). Their main site is actually typically pretty okay and doesn't *usually* have anything significantly wrong with it. That's, in my opinion, the reason why we haven't moved to actually placing them in the unreliable source category. For that specific usage of the reference, the only thing that it's verifying is the number of people that were a part of the team. I've had a real tough time verifying how many people were on the team, and it felt relevant to call out the fact that everyone that's "independent" in that context was actually from Kuwait. Unfortinately... 2016_Summer_Olympics#Number_of_athletes_by_National_Olympic_Committee was of no help since it's unreferenced.
- As for the other two suggestions, I've made relevant changes. Thanks so much for your review! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:40, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): EN-Jungwon (talk) and Explicit (talk) 11:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
This is the fifth list in this series that I am nominating for FL. The format is similar to the previous lists that have been promoted in this series. -- EN-Jungwon 11:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "Inkigayo implemented modifications for its measurements of albums" => "Inkigayo implemented modifications to its measurements of albums"
- "Chae-yeon was later replaced by actress Shin Eun-soo starting the February 17 broadcast." => "Chae-yeon was replaced by actress Shin Eun-soo starting with the February 17 broadcast."
- "Two other soloist had" => "Two other soloists had"
- "Singer Taeyeon had two singles rank number one on the chart in 2019;" - semi-colon at the end should be a colon (:)
- "The latter of which went on to" => "The latter of these went on to" (you can't use "which" in that way if you have started a new sentence)
- Itzy and Dalla Dalla are overlinked in the lead
- "making Itzy the artist" => "making Itzy the act" ("artist" can only be used to refer to soloists)
- "formed through the and fourth seasons" - is there a word missing there?
- "with their debut single "Flash" September 8" => "with their debut single "Flash" on September 8"
- That's it, I think! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:34, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude, all done. Thanks as always. -- EN-Jungwon 00:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- You now have "X1, formed through the fourth seasons of Produce 101 gained" - were they formed through just the fourth season? If so, remove the s from seasons. Oh, and you need a comma after produce 101 to end the clause -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude, thanks for catching that. It has now been fixed. -- EN-Jungwon 23:59, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- You now have "X1, formed through the fourth seasons of Produce 101 gained" - were they formed through just the fourth season? If so, remove the s from seasons. Oh, and you need a comma after produce 101 to end the clause -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:24, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 16:05, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
The Daytona 500 is one of the crown in the jewels of NASCAR. It has been held every year since 1959 and is known as The Great American Race. 43 drivers have won this prestigious race, including some of the all time greats in Richard Petty, Bobby Allison, Dale Earnhardt, Jeff Gordon, Jimmie Johnson, David Pearson and Cale Yarborough. All comments are welcome EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 16:05, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "The winner was the first race was" - typo in there
- "The 1973 oil crisis shortened by the event" - and here
- That's all I got - great work!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Both issues have been addressed EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 04:41, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Source review
[edit]I'll do a source review, and add in any general comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't have much to say on this one, EnthusiastWorld37. Overall, great work! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:55, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- @BennyOnTheLoose: Have made changes based on the points below. Let me know if there is anything else that needs addressing EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 13:08, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Sources
- St. James Encyclopedia of Popular Culture could be wikilinked
- What makes ConceptCarz a reliable source? It's been around for a long time but I couldn't see much about its editorial oversight on the site.
- Isn't it "Guinness World Records" rather than "Guinness World Book of Records"?
- Encyclopædia Britannica and Guinness have no consensus at WP:RSP. The EB entry has been written by staff and the GWR info is straightforward, so I think their use here is fine.
- Is the Tucker and Tiller ref needed at the heding of the Winners of the Daytona 500 table? It only covers up to 1994.
- Other sources all look fine for the info cited.
- I didn't see any issues with citation formatting.
- Pass for source review. All looks good now. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:12, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
General comments
- Shouldn't the wikilink at "American stock car race" exclude the "American" (i.e. be "American stock car race")?
- Looking at the source, isn't "the race has been extended through the use of overtime rules on several occasions" a bit of an understatement?
- "a large sum of money" - how about specifying the most recent amount available, rather than using this imprecise statment?
- Support: Meets the criteria in my opinion. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:12, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Yilku1 (talk) 19:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because Salamone is one of the most unique architects in Argentina, with a Metropolis-inspired style. I went to the library of the architecture school in my city to read the books to make this article. Yilku1 (talk) 19:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Drive-by comment
[edit]- What's the initial sorting order of the tables? It's not the name of the building or the date. In fact it just seems completely random..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:21, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I sorted by partidos, what would be an accepted order?.--Yilku1 (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- If that is the case, why is "General San Martín" near the bottom......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Would it be better to sort by building name? Yilku1 (talk) 01:28, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- If that is the case, why is "General San Martín" near the bottom......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I sorted by partidos, what would be an accepted order?.--Yilku1 (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I would also add that the sorting by coordinate is not working and that the "Notes" column should not be sortable. Broc (talk) 21:07, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- That is because addresses are before coordinates. Yilku1 (talk) 01:57, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 19:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
This year's ranking list continued to use the complicated system from the preceding years, and Steve Davis was once again far ahead of the rest. Penalties relating to violence and drugs affected the former world champions Alex Higgins and Cliff Thorburn respectively. The Smith book, a key resource for this article, is available to consult at Internet Archive, but I'm happy to provide relevant extracts from any of the sources to reviewers. As ever, all improvement suggestions are welcome. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Seasons are referred to inconsistently throughout. I can see both "The list for the 1986–87 snooker season was the first" and "It was first time since the rankings were instituted in 1976/1977"
- "as part of a six month ban imposed by the WPBSA" => "as part of a six-month ban imposed by the WPBSA"
- "In May 1988, Cliff Thorburn had two ranking points" - no need to relink and restate his full name as he was just mentioned in the last paragraph
- "Stephen Hendry won the other two" => "Hendry won the other two"
- "If there wasstill a tie" (sic) appears repeatedly in the criteria listing
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks, ChrisTheDude. I've amended the article per the points above. Let me know "if there isstill" anything to address. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Image review by Staraction
[edit]- All images properly sourced & licensed (AGF on self-published works)
- All images properly captioned (perhaps link Stephen Hendry again in the image caption?)
- All images have alt text
- All images relevant to the text
Support on images, nice work! Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:08, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks, Staraction. I've linked Hendry, as suggested. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments by EnthusiastWorld37
[edit]- Please state who Gavin Lightman was
- "In April 1988," - the year should be 1987 as per The Times source
- "had earlier been found guilty in court of headbutting the tournament director at the 1987 UK Championship," - I think that was the 1986 UK Championship not the 1987 UK Championship as per the source
- "Alain Robidoux received two walkovers at the 1988 World Snooker championship" - championship should start with a capital letter in this case
- "The tournaments contributing to the 1988–89 rankings were the ranking tournaments held across two seasons" - repetition of tournaments
- "the player who earned more "Merit" points 'was the most recent season was given the higher ranking." - in the most recent season
- "the player who earned more "Merit" points was the most preceding season was given the higher ranking" - in the most preceding season
- "the player with the better performance in the previous ranking tournament was given the higher ranking, going back through ranking tournaments until the positions could be established" - same issue as the fifth point
That's all I have EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 18:20, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks, EnthusiastWorld37. Hopefully I've addressed those points. Let me know if anything else is required. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:29, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Support – Note that I have a made a minor change to the list EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 20:07, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
I got to walk some of this trail and get some photos, it was awesome as a Packers fan and history buff. Hope you enjoy! As always, happy to address any concerns or issues promtly. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Packers are linked in both of the first two sentences - no need for the second
- The first link is to History of the Green Bay Packers and the second link is to Green Bay Packers. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nowhere does the lead state who/what the Green Bay Packers are i.e. an American football team
- Added. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- "All of the 25 sites have bronze commemorative plaques that connect the history of the site" - not sure what you mean by "connect the history of the site". Do you mean something like "relate to the history of the site".....?
- Reworded. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- "the plaque for Lombardi's home and the plaque for Lambeau's gravesite is located" - two plaques are mentioned so the verb should be plural
- Reworded. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- In the table, some of the entries in the "site" column are randomly centre-aligned
- Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's it, I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review ChrisTheDude! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- ChrisTheDude, was there anything else I can address? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Not based on the above, but I thought I'd just hang fire and see how the discussion below about including rationales (for want of a better term) went..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]The table needs to tell me why these sites are relevant. What is special about this church? What happened at the ballroom? Etc. Reywas92Talk 14:25, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Reywas92, the sources don't provide this information. The only place I could get this information is my physically visiting each plaque or by purchasing Christl's book, which unfortunately isn't available on Amazon.com. You could maybe make the case that I could just do some standalone research and infer why each one is significant to the Packers, but imho that pushes OR a bit too much (I would be inferring why each site was placed on the trail). I am just providing what is currently available via sources. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- [1] and [2] have images of the plaques. Citing these or the plaques directly would not be OR. Reywas92Talk 16:44, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm struggling with the size of the table. Would a new section of text explaining the sites be agreeable to you? Maybe expand the last paragraph of the lead? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think all the sites should have a blurb even if only a few words, so that's better in the table than a paragraph. It's not that big a table – or perhaps the coordinates could be moved under the addresses. Reywas92Talk 13:49, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I will get to this in the next few days Reywas92. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Reywas92, I have completed the above. Please let me know if you have any other comments or concerns. Appreciate the recommendation. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I will get to this in the next few days Reywas92. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think all the sites should have a blurb even if only a few words, so that's better in the table than a paragraph. It's not that big a table – or perhaps the coordinates could be moved under the addresses. Reywas92Talk 13:49, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm struggling with the size of the table. Would a new section of text explaining the sites be agreeable to you? Maybe expand the last paragraph of the lead? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- [1] and [2] have images of the plaques. Citing these or the plaques directly would not be OR. Reywas92Talk 16:44, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding the descriptions. I made a couple small edits. The plaque location and significance columns don't need to be sortable. I'd also suggest either merging the plaque location into the address column or the coordinates into either of those, but it's not a must-do. Otherwise support. Reywas92Talk 14:19, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Reywas92, thank you for your support. I made the columns unsortable. I'll keep looking at the possibility of merging columns. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:41, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]Source review: Passed
- Reliable enough for the information being cited
- Consistent date formatting
- Consistent and proper reference formatting
- Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
- Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for
Feedback:
- Consider adding the
{{Use mdy dates|August 2024}}
template to the top of the article under the short description in case anybody else adds references later on and they are not as careful as you've been- Done. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Why is the first item in the list not numbered? It also does not have a row scope
- It is not numbered in the source. The Plaza is not a heritage site, rather it is the commemorative "summary" of the Trail.
- Quite a few sites are not actually proper names and should not be capitalized in the "site" column, please work to convert some of these to sentence case. "Vince Lombardi's Home" for example should be lowercase.
- I am matching the source here. Seeing as they are formal titles of heritage sites along the trail, I am not sure what takes precedence. Thoughts? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Current item #18, Packers Practice Fields doesn't have an address, just a street, in the table, but the source shows an address
- Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Same as the above, but for item #21 (Indian and Acme Packing Plants)
- Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Using your regular reference formatting, shouldn't "GoPressTimes.com", a newspaper, be formatted as "The Press Times" instead? I recognize they don't have an article, at least that I could find, but this would match your typical formatting
- Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Please ping me when the above issues have been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Responded above Hey man im josh. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Gonzo fan2007:
- Perhaps we can consider a footnote or something for the number column? Or rename it to site number or something similar?
I am matching the source here. Seeing as they are formal titles of heritage sites along the trail, I am not sure what takes precedence.
– My understanding, and I'd love to be corrected if I am wrong, is that we would try to lowercase where appropriate when promoting to FA or FL.
- I think those are the last two things to iron out :) Hey man im josh (talk) 18:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I changed it to "Site #" and lower cased the ones that were more descriptive titles. Let me know if that works Hey man im josh. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:12, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:01, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hey man im josh, I just wanted to let you know that I have added a few sources since you completed the source review. Not sure if you want to reconfirm the source review or not. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good to me still, no issues. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:11, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hey man im josh, I just wanted to let you know that I have added a few sources since you completed the source review. Not sure if you want to reconfirm the source review or not. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:01, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I changed it to "Site #" and lower cased the ones that were more descriptive titles. Let me know if that works Hey man im josh. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:12, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Gonzo fan2007:
- EN-Jungwon
- "relating to the history of the Green Bay Packers, an American football in the National Football League (NFL)". Is this meant to say an American football team
- There is a stray curly bracket in the table "17}"
-- EN-Jungwon 11:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- EN-Jungwon, fixed both. Thanks! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- EN-Jungwon 00:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- EN-Jungwon, fixed both. Thanks! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because it is an unusually specific type of episode list. Most episode lists cover all episodes of a programme, or are split by year/season. However, this specific list covers a very narrowly specific group of episodes and I thought it would make an interesting featured list. I've spent a bit of time improving sources, and expanding the prose, and feel that it would make a great addition to Wikipedia's featured content. TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- As the lead mentions "1963-1989" and "since 2005" I think you should clarify that the show was off the air for the years in between
- Also, I would put the 1963-1989 bit before the since 2005 bit
- "held a record for the highest watched BBC drama from its broadcast until 2021" - this is a misrepresentation of the source. The source says the Line of Duty episode was the highest-viewed drama episode since the Dr Who episode, but it doesn't state that prior to this the Dr Who episode was the most viewed of all time. Indeed, at the point of its broadcast Voyage wasn't even the most-viewed Dr Who episode of all time (see City of Death#Broadcast and reception), let alone the most-viewed episode of any BBC drama ever. This applies to both the lead and body.
- "During the third season, the twelve-part serial The Daleks' Master Plan was broadcast weekly over the 1965–1966 Christmas period" - this makes it sound like all 12 episodes were broadcast over Christamas, which obviously isn't the case
- "When Doctor Who was revived in 2005 with Russell T Davies acting as showrunner the first proper" => "When Doctor Who was revived in 2005, with Russell T Davies acting as showrunner, the first proper"
- "A special episode aired on New Year's day in 2010" - capital D on Day
- "Moffat also returned to pen the 2024 special, "Joy to the World" being the first time the incumbent showrunner did not write the holiday special" => "Moffat also returned to pen the 2024 special, "Joy to the World", marking the first time that the incumbent showrunner did not write the holiday special"
- Rose is not linked or given a surname in the first episode description, even though other characters are
- Tenth Doctor is linked multiple times but not on first usage
- Same goes for the TARDIS
- "warns Wilfred to arm himself to before departing" => "warns Wilfred to arm himself before departing"
- "The Doctor and Wilfred become fugitives from the Masters" - plural?
- "He also crates" => "He also creates"
- "realises that Clara is the same person as Oswin Oswald" - could do with explaining who she was
- "in exchange the return of the Captain" => "in exchange for the return of the Captain"
- Link Jack Harkness
- "They rejoin with her companions." => "They rejoin her companions."
- "Ruby witnesses goblins kidnap the baby" => "Ruby witnesses goblins kidnapping the baby"
- "when it was beat by the sixth series finale of Line of Duty" => "when it was beaten by the sixth series finale of Line of Duty"
- "while others have named the best to be "The Runaway Bride",[27][28] "Last Christmas",[29][30] and "The Husbands of River Song"." => "while others have named the best to be "The Runaway Bride",[27][28] "Last Christmas",[29][30] or "The Husbands of River Song"." -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:11, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thanks once again for the review! I believe I've addressed everything. The episode summaries are transcluded from their respective series articles, which is why somethings are/aren't linked where they typically are. For that reason, I added a note for the Clara Oswin Oswald explanation, which should help satisfy that comment since it didn't need the full explanation there (the summary for Asylum of the Daleks summary is just a few episodes above on Doctor Who series 7).
- I had been working on a Line of Duty article before I wrote this, hence why the wrong information was added. I was attempting to briefly explain it, without going into as much detail as I did on Line of Duty series 6. Just for reference, The original source I had in this article actually addressed LoD 6.6, not 6.7, and from what it reads, that episode only had "average 11 million" (or 10.9 million) viewers and actually didn't exceed VotD's 11.7. It's just saying that nothing had reached that high since 2008's special. And this source specifically states that LoD 6.7 was "the most watched episode of any drama since modern records began in 2002, not including soaps", which (when simplifying) is where the accidental misrepresentation likely came in. I ultimately removed it here, just because going into that much detail seemed out of scope. TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:27, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]Source review: Passed
- Reliable enough for the information being cited
- Consistent date formatting
- Consistent and proper reference formatting
- Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
- Spot checks on sources match what they are being cited for
Feedback:
- Can you improve the alt text for the image beyond "DVD cover art"? At least say what it's the DVD cover art of.
- "story-arc" should be "story arc"
- Ref 1 – Website is not "BBC Doctor Who website", recommend changing the source of this to BBC One
- Ref 13 – Not seeing how the source is BBC Three here. Probably better to use BBC iPlayer.
- Ref 21 – Uses "Cultbox.co.uk" whereas refs 12 and 24 just use "CultBox"
- Ref 21 – No author listed, one mentioned at source
- Ref 25 – Change The Associated Press to just Associated Press
- Ref 27 – Item 4 in there should be changed from Screenrant to Screen Rant
- Ref 29 – Change "The Pop Verse" to PopVerse. This also lists a different publish date than what's used in the article
- Why should we treat "The Doctor Who Companion" as a reliable source? Seems to be a WordPress blog.
- Why should we treat "Doctor Who News" as a reliable source? It seems all of the ratings rely on this, whereas there's likely better sources that could be used.
- Why should we treat "Nerdgazm" as a reliable source? I see they have editors listed, but I'm not exactly sold on them
- Archives should be added to a number of these links where possibly
Please ping me when the above issues have been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:13, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: I believe I've addressed most everything.
- Ref 13 specifically uses {{Cite episode}} which asks for the network the episode first aired on. For Doctor Who: Unleashed that's both BBC Three and iPlayer so I added iPlayer but left Three as well.
- Perhaps @Alex 21: can help me out really quick for the reliability of Doctor Who News? I recall there being a semi-recent discussion on it, but I can't seem to locate it. Overnight ratings seem to be covered pretty widely, but from a quick search on the three most recent Christmas specials, I didn't' seem to find any better sources. I can do a deeper dive if need-be, Broadcast usually covers them, but it would take a minute to dig around there, so I'll wait and see if Alex has something to say first. I do know that Doctor Who News has passed through a significant number of GA's, including the series and some episode articles, all by separate independent reviewers. It's also been used in other featured content as well (here, here, here, and here).
- I replaced The Doctor Who Companion with DWN also pending Alex's response, but will look for something else if need be. Nerdgazm was removed as the sentence that supported had more that reference. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- @TheDoctorWho: Thanks for the reply. I looked at the other featured content that you mentioned and all of it was promoted 15+ years ago. Given how our standards have drastically changed since those times, I don't feel comfortable using those as a point in favour of accepting DWN. It looks like that's the only thing we have left to address, so I'll wait for Alex's response or for a link to a relevant discussion (please ping when replying). Hey man im josh (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: Doctor Who News has been phased out in this article. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:19, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- @TheDoctorWho: Thanks for the reply. I looked at the other featured content that you mentioned and all of it was promoted 15+ years ago. Given how our standards have drastically changed since those times, I don't feel comfortable using those as a point in favour of accepting DWN. It looks like that's the only thing we have left to address, so I'll wait for Alex's response or for a link to a relevant discussion (please ping when replying). Hey man im josh (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Support. Good stuff! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Vanderwaalforces (talk) 02:15, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
This is the list of governors of Nigeria's state of Edo from when the region was called Mid-Western renamed to Bendel and then splitted into Edo and Delta, this is focusing on Edo. I have significantly worked on this and think it meets the criteria for FL. This list looks very similar to other lists of governors. Feedbacks would be greatly appreciated. This would be part of the ongoing Developing Countries Wiki Contest which I am participating in. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 02:15, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Vanderwaalforces: You haven't completed step 5 of the nomination procedure laid out in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Whoops, done, thanks for pointing out. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- MPGuy2824
- The party colors in the Edo state table make no sense without a legend. Alternatively, you can move the party color next to the party name and skip the legend.
- When images aren't there for a particular person, you can add a centered emdash.
- Some of the refs are missing archive links.
- In order to avoid cluttering the table with references, you could move them all to a new column at right-end of the table.
- Every image should have alt text. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Please can you suggest how I can add a legend? Where to place it? templates I can use? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- If you are going with that option, you can either use {{Legend}} or just a normal table. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Oh, I think there's no need for that. Because I just put the colours before the party names. That makes sense now. Do you think the table is currently cluttered with refs right now? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
I just put the colours before the party names
Yup, no need to add a legend now.Do you think the table is currently cluttered with refs right now?
I had noticed refs in quite a few columns at the time, but now I see that each ref is supporting a particular piece of data. I think this is fine as is. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Oh, I think there's no need for that. Because I just put the colours before the party names. That makes sense now. Do you think the table is currently cluttered with refs right now? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:02, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- If you are going with that option, you can either use {{Legend}} or just a normal table. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Please can you suggest how I can add a legend? Where to place it? templates I can use? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- SnowFire
Nice work. However, I'm not so certain on the prose. I made some sample edits to the lede that you should feel free to adjust to try to "tell a story" more, as the old lede bounced around in time. In general, it's not good to replicate the table in prose - it's better to indicate something that isn't already in the table, ideally, rather than just name-drop people. A few other questions:
- Was Osadebay's title really "Civilian Premier"? https://nigeriareposit.nln.gov.ng/items/fd2b27ce-45c7-4a60-9459-afcd4fc9a566 just calls him "premier" and that seems an unusual title.
- Similarly, it'd be one thing if this was only post-1991 leaders, but being that the earlier pre-1991 stuff is included... the obvious starting point seems like it'd be independence, but the article doesn't discuss 1960-1963 at all. How was the region organized in that period? Even if the answer is "as an insignificant part of a much larger unit" or "not at all", it would still be good to mention what structure did exist.
- Feel free to restore if it's a quirk of Nigerian English, but I don't think "civilian" titles are used typically on Wikipedia per MOS:CREDENTIAL. It's fine to mention military titles mostly to quickly signify the role was military, but "Prof." or "Dr." is more questionable unless it's also a COMMONNAME.
- Why is "Deputy governors represented the same party as their governor." a footnote to the Deputy column? That seems like something more for prose in the table introduction to explain the role of Deputy Governor.
- First, I'm not sure the birth & death dates for governors is really relevant to include at all, but I know lots of similar lists include it, so if you want to include it that's fine. That said... I'm not a fan of ???? for unknown dates. Just omit them, IMO (but feel free to push back if this is in fact the standard). And is Baba Adamu Iyam really dead at an unknown year? His article suggests he is alive. SnowFire (talk) 07:12, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- @SnowFire
- I removed the Civilian
- I am confident that this list is as concise and inclusive as it should be right now. I don't want to come up with information I have no source for. Which is why I am sticking to information from sources that are available.
- This is okay by me.
- Please can you explain further what you mean?
- I could omit the birth/death dates that are unknown, but I don't think it is not really necessary to not include their birth/death dates at all. I have seen similar lists in formats like this. Iyam's article does not suggest he is alive, his death date is unknown.
- Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:46, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Is there really no information on how the 1960-1963 Western Region was governed and who by? I get that sourcing can be tough for these topics, but I don't really see a reason why the chart should start in 1963 but not 1960, so this seems a clear gap. If the records were lost or the region really was in chaos and had no governor, then fine, we can say so ("the governors of the Western Region in 1960-63 are unknown"), but that seems like it'd be surprising if really true.
- I don't feel like the Deputy Governor party footnote makes the most sense as a footnote rather than prose. If you disagree, that's fine, it's not mandatory, but I would suggest explaining the Deputy Governor in the prose introduction is preferred if it's going to be included in the table. This can include the way they're elected and why they usually match the party of the Governor.
- The guideline is that for anyone who would be older than 115, if there isn't an explicit source saying they're alive, we assume they're dead. But otherwise, we assume they're alive, because falsely reporting someone as dead is much worse than falsely assuming a dead person is alive. So maybe ???? is fine for people born in 1909 and before in charts, but we should use "born 19XX" or "b. 19XX" when it's unknown. (And Iyam's article has no death date listed and has him in Category:Living people?). If you have a source saying Iyam is dead, then let's update his article, but if we're not sure on his status, we should default to only showing the known birth date and no marking implying a death date.
- There are still some prose concerns. I suppose I can just make the changes myself but see the example on the lede - the body still has stuff like "Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole," without it being clear that these are COMMONNAME titles. SnowFire (talk) 17:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Lapadite (talk) 12:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Revisiting this nomination. I've had time now to properly address the previous recommendations, as well as update the formatting to comply with recent FL standards and update the references. This film is widely acclaimed and has made many best of lists. It received nominations from all major awards. Most of its award wins were from critics and festival organizations, so the lead focuses on that in the final paragraph. Lapadite (talk) 12:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "Carter Burwell score" => "Carter Burwell's score"
- "The actresses also received Screen Actors Guild Award nominations" - in the image caption you call them the more gender neutral "actors"......?
- Palm Springs International Film Festival awards for Blanchett and Mara sort incorrectly in the recipient column
- "Organizations without a Wikipedia page are not included in the list of accolades" => "Organizations without a Wikipedia article are not included in the list of accolades"
- That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Done, thank you. Glad to have fresh eyes on this finally, my eyes burn from working on it for too long hah. Lapadite (talk) 17:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:58, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- MPGuy2824
- For cells like "AACTA Awards" which span multiple rows, the scope should be "rowgroup", not "row".
- A few refs are missing archive links.
- "Organizations without a Wikipedia article are not included in the list of accolades." Replace "Organizations" with a word that encompasses film festivals, orgs and awards. e.g. "AARP Movies For Grownups Awards" is an award managed by the org AARP.
- That's all I got. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:26, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824: Thanks, added the missing archives. I left "organizations" there as awards from the industry, critic groups, film festivals, and AARP are all from organizations; but then there are also magazine awards and one from Frankfurt Book Fair, which appears to be a business/commercial entity. Do you have a suggested term, or should that note be removed?
- Regarding the scope parameter, several of the recent FLs I looked at didn't use "rowgroup" (Dunkirk, Black), that's why I left it like that. Before I start changing all the scope's here please let me know if "rowgroup" is necessary or optional. Lapadite (talk) 07:47, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Regarding "organization", I think you can remove the note.
- Regarding rowgroup, MOS:DTAB says it is needed: " Use ...
! scope="rowgroup" rowspan="2" |
if a row header spans a group of rows, adjusting the span count as needed." -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)- @MPGuy2824: Removed and done. Lapadite (talk) 14:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. If interest and time permit, please comment at my FL nom. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:20, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824: Removed and done. Lapadite (talk) 14:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 00:12, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Another Ukraine oblast city list; this uses a similar format to the one from List of cities in Donetsk Oblast, and its northern counterpart and FL, List of cities in Luhansk Oblast, and is also an oblast of which the majority of its territory (and cities) is occupied by Russian troops. Much of the formatting and prose was honed in Dantheanimator's FLC entry Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of cities in Donetsk Oblast/archive1, and thus should be mostly fine already. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 00:12, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "Russian forces occupied all cities located in the Berdiansk, Melitopol, and Vasylivka raions, and three cities in Polohy Raion" - any reason why Raion is capitalised at the end there, when it isn't anywhere else?
- That's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Raion is capitalized at the end because it is part of the name of the district (i.e. Polohy Raion and not Polohy raion), and not before as it is a common noun and only a descriptor, not trying to act as a part of the name of either of the three mentioned raions. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 10:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying, now happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:36, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Raion is capitalized at the end because it is part of the name of the district (i.e. Polohy Raion and not Polohy raion), and not before as it is a common noun and only a descriptor, not trying to act as a part of the name of either of the three mentioned raions. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 10:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Suggestions
[edit]As stated in the nom, a lot of the content is derived from the already promoted FL List of cities in Luhansk Oblast and the currently open FL List of cities in Donetsk Oblast so a lot of the material in this list has gone through considerable oversight/editing. I also went ahead with the support of Flemmish Nietzsche and fixed/improved everything I noticed in the article (mostly just minor things like ce and expanding refs). That said, here's the only thing I could think of to suggest adding:
- When viewing the list from desktop, at least from my laptop device, it looks like there's enough space for one additional image next to the table. I think this is completely optional but I feel like it would be a great addition to include this image of Enerhodar with a caption along the lines of "Enerhodar, fourth most populous city and site of the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant"
Having thoroughly reviewed the page and having a deep familiarity with the quality of the content, I support promoting this to FL! Thanks Flemmish Nietzsche for your work on this list!! :) Dan the Animator 20:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Image added. I also made a minor change to one of your edits, as the two captured cities specifically mentioned, Meltitopol and Berdiansk, are not in Polohy Raion, (the last mentioned raion where Russia has captured cities) but as the "including" refers to all prior mentioned occupied raions, are actually in the eponymous Melitopol and Berdiansk raions. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 23:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Flemmish Nietzsche! About the wording for that sentence, how does this sound?
After 24 February 2022, during Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russian forces occupied three cities in Polohy Raion, and all cities located in the Berdiansk, Melitopol, and Vasylivka raions. In the oblast's occupied territory, de facto Russian officials use the same five raions as Ukraine, while Melitopol (the oblast's most populous city controlled by Russia) serves as the capital for the Russian administration.
- I don't think its necessary to explicitly state that Melitopol and Berdiansk are occupied by Russia since that's already indicated by the previous sentence (e.g. "all cities located in Berdiansk, Melitopol" includes Berdiansk & Melitopol). Also don't think it's necessary either to say in the lead that they're the third and second most populous cities considering the table already shows this clearly.
- For the reasons mentioned on my last reply on the article talkpage, its useful to state that Russian officials use the same subdivisions so I added in that part. I haven't done the most thorough source search but I think this source (taken from ref #56 under the Administrative divisions subsection in Russian occupation of Zaporizhzhia Oblast) should be sufficient to verify/support the claim about Russia using the same five raions. Let me know what you think about the above and please ping me on reply for anything! Cheers, Dan the Animator 03:10, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Flemmish Nietzsche! About the wording for that sentence, how does this sound?
- Nominator(s): Tone 06:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Pharaohs! Pyramids! And ... ancient whales, wow! Egypt has 7 WHS and a series of tentative sites. Standard style. The nomination for Argentina is already seeing support so I am adding a second nomination. Tone 06:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments from Alavense
[edit]- "The latter is also the only natural site in Egypt, the other sites are listed for their cultural properties" --> "The latter is also the only natural site in Egypt, the other sites being listed for their cultural properties"
- Is the capitalisation really needed in "Ruins of town of Elephantine" and "Stone quarries and Unfinished obelisk"?
- "around the tomb of Menas of Alexandria who died in 296" - A comma is missing.
- No need for the capital c in "Classical antiquity".
- "Mount Horeb - the place where" - Use {{endash}}.
- "the latter has been listed as a World Heritage Site in 2002" - That one should also by preceded by an {{endash}}.
- "It was first used by Sneferu of the Fourth Dynasty who constructed the Bent Pyramid" - A comma mising before "who".
- "and statues.|"
- In "The monasteries of the Arab Desert and Wadi Natrun", the description reads a bit convoluted. Maybe something along the lines of "Other monasteries include those of Saint Paul the Anchorite, Saint Pishoy" and so on?
- Shouldn't it be "a 30-inch reflecting telescope"?
- The references are used not only for the description, but also for the other columns, so I think it would make more sense to have them isolated in another column to the right of the description.
That's all I saw. Thanks for your dedication to the list, Tone. Kind regards. Alavense (talk) 07:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks! As for references, the table is already rather busy, so additional column would make it worse, stylistically. I think it is rather clear for the reader what they refer to. The capitalizations are per source. The rest I've fixed. Tone 07:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Support. Alavense (talk) 08:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- MPGuy2824
- "The monuments are: Abu Simbel (commissioned by Ramesses II, relocation pictured), New Amada, New Wadi Sebua, New Kalabsha, the Philae temple complex (on Agilkia Island, from Greco-Roman period), Qubbet el-Hawa (Old and Middle Kingdom Tombs), Ruins of the town of Elephantine, Stone quarries and Unfinished obelisk, the Monastery of St. Simeon, and the Fatimid Cemetery."
- "It was a major city during the Islamic Golden Age and beyond," It isn't clear if beyond means before the golden age OR after OR both.
- "The main buildings were constructed in".
- "stability of the clay-based soils," Also end this sentence with a full stop.
- "oldest Christian monastery still in function" to "oldest functioning Christian monastery"
- wikilink "oracle temple"
- "comprises the Temple of Serabit Khadem"
- "military expeditions in both ways" to "military expeditions in both directions"
- "Feiran Oasis has" to "The Feiran oasis"
- "to the dorcas gazelle" in two places
- wikilink "humid periods".
- plularize "dugong".
- There seems to be a lot of overlap between "Southern and Smaller Oases, the Western Desert" and "Kharga Oasis and the Small Southern Oases", An explanatory note would be good here.
- That's all I got. Please ping me when you fix these. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Done, thanks! Great comments. Tone 14:02, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "First sites in Egypt were listed in 1979" => "The first sites in Egypt were listed in 1979"
- "The latter is also the only natural site in Egypt" => "The latter is the only natural site in Egypt"
- "resulting in threats to structural integrity of the monuments" => "resulting in threats to the structural integrity of the monuments"
- "Main monuments date from the period from 1500 to 1000 BCE" => "The main monuments date from the period from 1500 to 1000 BCE"
- "Ruins of the town of Elephantine," => "the ruins of the town of Elephantine,"
- "Stone quarries and Unfinished obelisk," => "stone quarries and an unfinished obelisk,"
- "The latter has been listed as a World Heritage Site in 2002" => "The latter was listed as a World Heritage Site in 2002"
- "on a mountain at the height of 2,150 m (7,050 ft)" => "on a mountain at a height of 2,150 m (7,050 ft)"
- "The complex contained two basilicas, an oil press, rooms for monks, and was surrounded by defensive walls" > "The complex contained two basilicas, an oil press and rooms for monks, and was surrounded by defensive walls"
- "Alexandria was founded in 332 BCE by Alexander the Great and was an important centre of arts and learning in Classical Antiquity," => "Alexandria was founded in 332 BCE by Alexander the Great and was an important centre of arts and learning in classical antiquity,"
- "There used to be a large lake in the Antiquity" => "There used to be a large lake in antiquity" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:20, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed all, thanks! I was not sure about the Nubian monuments capitalizations but since you are the second reviewer that pointed that out, I fixed is as suggested. Tone 08:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:13, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Hey man im josh (talk) 12:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
As a follow up to my nomination of the 2018 Winter Olympics medal table, I decided I wanted to complete a Summer Olympics medal table as well. It's based on other Summer Olympics medal tables that have also been promoted to featured list status, as well as the feedback provided at the other Summer Olympics medal table nomination. As always, I will do my best to quickly respond to and address any and all concerns that are brought up. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments from Arconning
[edit]- "With 18 total Olympic medals, Latynin", should be Latynina.
- "for most Olympic medals," could be reworded as "for the most Olympic medals for an individual".
- "She also became, and still is, the record holder for most gold and total Olympic medals by a female athlete.", would this need an "As of,..."?
- The caption in the image should probably specify "at these games", as "competing athlete" could probably sound like an active athlete.
- Could add a footnote explaining "United Team of Germany".
Here are my comments, ping me once you're done! Arconning (talk) 16:52, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
"With 18 total Olympic medals, Latynin", should be Latynina.
– D'oh... fixed."for most Olympic medals," could be reworded as "for the most Olympic medals for an individual".
– Ehhh, I felt it was implied, but I've tweaked it."She also became, and still is, the record holder for most gold and total Olympic medals by a female athlete.", would this need an "As of,..."?
– Do we? I would think that's only really necessary if there's frequent changes in the rankings. I don't love the idea of this having to be updated every year, as opposed to being updated as necessary.The caption in the image should probably specify "at these games", as "competing athlete" could probably sound like an active athlete.
– I personally don't read it this way. I think it's clear enough based on the context of "... at the 1964 Summer Olympics, the most of any competing athlete"Could add a footnote explaining "United Team of Germany".
– Done.
- I hope I've addressed all of your concerns. Thank you so much for the review @Arconning! Hey man im josh (talk) 19:14, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support, good luck! Arconning (talk) 02:49, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]The only thing I can suggest is changing "over Taiwan's (Republic of China) participation" to "over the participation of Taiwan (Republic of China)", which just seems to read a bit more elegantly to me....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hey Chris, an IP actually added the names in brackets, which I felt were unnecessary and also interrupted the flow. I've also implemented your wording, which is definitely more elegant. Thank you very much for taking a look and providing feedback! Hey man im josh (talk) 12:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:53, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
NØ
[edit]- Source review - pass
- The sources all look reliable for the purposes they are used and the references are filled out with the necessary details. Spotchecks not done but I could upon request.
- Image review - pass
- The source link for the file works, and since it ought to have been taken in 1964 (over 60 years ago), the copyright information at the file page applies and makes sense.
- Overall, support on those and the prose as well. No issues there.--NØ 19:14, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for the review! Hey man im josh (talk) 11:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- EN-Jungwon
* "relating to the history of the Green Bay Packers, an American football in the National Football League (NFL)". Is this meant to say an American football team
- There is a stray curly bracket in the table "17}"
-- EN-Jungwon 10:50, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- @EN-Jungwon: I think this was meant as a reply to another nomination? Hey man im josh (talk) 11:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh, now that's embarrassing. Yep this was meant for Packers Heritage Trail. I had both nomination pages open and didn't look at the title before adding my comments. I have stricken my comments. Now I'll definitely come back and review this list too. Again sorry for the confusion. -- EN-Jungwon 11:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- @EN-Jungwon: No worries at all! I happened to have reviewed the exact same list and knew exactly what you were talking about, gave me a good laugh :P Hey man im josh (talk) 12:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Ref 26 the title has changed
- @Hey man im josh, now that's embarrassing. Yep this was meant for Packers Heritage Trail. I had both nomination pages open and didn't look at the title before adding my comments. I have stricken my comments. Now I'll definitely come back and review this list too. Again sorry for the confusion. -- EN-Jungwon 11:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Reference formatting is consistent. Link checker shows no issues. -- EN-Jungwon 00:24, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hey @EN-Jungwon: Sorry for the delay in responding. I've updated the title of the article, and updated the date of the archive. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:40, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- EN-Jungwon 23:46, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hey @EN-Jungwon: Sorry for the delay in responding. I've updated the title of the article, and updated the date of the archive. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:40, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Birdienest81talk 08:56, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating the 2024 Oscars for featured list because we believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I followed how the 1929, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1984, 1986, 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, 2021, 2022, and 2023 ceremonies were written. Please note that this list has been greatly rewritten since the first unsuccessful nomination to format it similar to the other Oscar ceremony pages that were promoted to featured list status. Birdienest81talk 08:56, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "Raj and Hamish have been incredible Oscars collaborators" - Hamish hasn't been mentioned in the body so clarify here who he is
- "Comedian and journalist Amelia Dimoldenberg served as a social media and red carpet correspondent where she interviewed nominees at events including the Oscars nominees lunch and hosted" - "where" doesn't really work after the bit before so I suggest "Comedian and journalist Amelia Dimoldenberg served as a social media and red carpet correspondent, interviewing nominees at events including the Oscars nominees lunch and hosting"
- "In September 2020, the Academy announced that starting with the 96th awards, all films" => "In September 2020, the Academy announced that, starting with the 96th awards, all films"
- "which involves creative heads in an films production" => "which involves creative heads in a film's production"
- "In addition, Academy FAQs stated that British films that have complied with the British Film Institute's inclusion and diversity standards will also be deemed" => "In addition, Academy FAQs stated that British films that have complied with the British Film Institute's inclusion and diversity standards would also be deemed"
- "Furthermore with its win for Best Picture, Oppenheimer became" => "Furthermore, with its win for Best Picture, Oppenheimer became"
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Done -- I have read your comments and have made the suggested changes as noted in your feedback.
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]Source review: Passed
- Reliable enough for the information being cited
- Consistent date formatting
- Consistent and proper reference formatting
- Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
- Spot checks on sources match what they are being cited for
Feedback:
- Ref 3 – Needs a date
- Ref 31 – Add Associated Press as the agency
That's all I've got, good stuff. Ping me when the above has been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: Done -- I've made the corrections based on your comments.
- --Birdienest81talk 08:34, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. I really struggled to critique anything, this is very well sourced. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:09, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- --Birdienest81talk 08:34, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Sgubaldo
[edit]- Does Ref. 23 have a url or something that can be linked?
- Add an archive link for Ref. 22?
- Italicise "In Memoriam" (to this ==> In Memoriam) in the section heading and the first sentence ("The "In Memoriam" tribute, which featured....")? I'm not familiar with these lists, but that's how I've seen it displayed in the other FLs you've listed.
- Could Ref. 25 be moved into Ref. 24?
- In response, Kapoor and Mullan released a statement saying, "As a Canadian boy of South Asian descent and a girl from London who grew up watching the Oscars, dreaming of being part of it, this is a 'pinch me' moment!” said Kapoor and Mullan. “This has been an exceptional year for the movies, and it's an absolute privilege to be leading the team celebrating the global film industry and the astounding talents that bring these cinematic stories to life. We're dedicated to making it a remarkable celebration for all." ==> You might need to remove 'said Kapoor and Mullan'.
Sgubaldo (talk) 17:25, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): XR228 (talk) 16:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Keeping up with my trend of getting ice hockey lists to FL, this time, I'm doing Coachella Valley Firebirds players. I think this list meets all the criteria. Thanks. XR228 (talk) 16:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- I would change "54 players, 8 goaltenders and 46 skaters (forwards and defenseman), have worn a Firebirds jersey in at least one regular season game" to "54 players have worn a Firebirds jersey in at least one regular season game, comprising 8 goaltenders and 46 skaters (forwards and defenseman)," to remove any potential confusion that it's 54+8+46 rather than 54=8+46
- "The Firebirds have yet to win the Calder Cup." => "The Firebirds have yet to win the Calder Cup, the trophy awarded to the AHL champions."
- "who is "the only team members" - not grammatically correct
- That's it, I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:29, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 23:26, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead. - Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.!style="background-color:#FF670C; color:#000000;"rowspan="2"|Skater
becomes!scope=col style="background-color:#FF670C; color:#000000;" rowspan="2"|Skatery
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. - Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding
!scope=row
to each primary cell, e.g.! {{sortname|Max|Andreev}}*
becomes!scope=row | {{sortname|Max|Andreev}}*
. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use!scope=rowgroup
instead. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 22:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- @PresN: I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 04:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Staraction (talk | contribs) 17:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Up next in the United States congressional delegations series from me is the state of Colorado! Previous lists included Utah, Indiana, Hawaii, Connecticut, and Arizona. I've tried my best to implement all the suggestions provided in previous nominations (in particular, with referencing; thank you EN-Jungwon!). Looking forward to hearing more of those suggestions! Thanks! Staraction (talk | contribs) 17:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "The current dean of the Colorado delegation is" - what does this mean?
- "eight representatives comprising of five Democrats and three Republicans" - either "comprising" or "consisting of" would be grammatically valid but "comprising of" is not
- You have two consecutive sentences which start with "Many senators from Colorado" and "Many of Colorado's senators". Reword to avoid repetition......?
- Schroeder and Polis image captions need full stops
- "Colorado was apportioned with two seats" => "Colorado was apportioned two seats"
- THat's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:03, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @ChrisTheDude, I believe I've fixed all the issues you've pointed out. Thanks as always for your prompt feedback! Staraction (talk | contribs) 21:10, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:25, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- MPGuy2824
- In the "2003–2023: 7 seats" table, the header cells "1st" through "7th" need to have "scope=col". Please check the other tables for this issue too. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:49, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @MPGuy2824, thanks for your feedback, as always. I've fixed this issue where it occurred. Staraction (talk | contribs) 23:04, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. If interest and time permit, please comment at my FL nom. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:24, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @MPGuy2824, thanks for your feedback, as always. I've fixed this issue where it occurred. Staraction (talk | contribs) 23:04, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Source review and general comments
[edit]I'll look at sources and add in any general comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:41, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Sources
- I'm not too familiar with all the sources, so give me a little time to investigate. No immediate red flags, though.
- Newspaper citations are inconsistent, e.g. whether publisher and/or loction are specified. Is there a rationale for this (e.g. based on how well known the papers are?)
- New York Times citations are inconsistent, e.g.'"Congressman Vaile Dies in Automobile". The New York Times. New York, New York.' has the location but '"Lawrence Lewis, Congressman, Dies". The New York Times.' doesn't.
- In the Current U.S. representatives from Colorado table, what's the soure for "Incumbent since"?
- United States Senate- I think it would be better to have the refs for Henry M. Teller and Ken Salazar at the end of the sentence, as the sources jointly verify the whole sentence. Same for John F. Shafroth and Edwin C. Johnson - but feel free to point me to policy/precedent/consensus for the current positioning of the references.
General
- I would find it useful to have a bit more detail about the CPVI ratings in the Current delegation section (not too much, just a sentence or two), to help interpret "D+29", "D+4" etc.
- The Current U.S. representatives from Colorado table has "residence" but the source has hometown. Are these equivalent in American English? (To me, a hometown is where one was born or is from, not necessarily the current residence.)
All in all, it's looking good, Staraction. I will have a further review for consistency of the citations, but it would be helpful to have your replies on the points above first. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:21, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- @BennyOnTheLoose Hi, thanks for your review and apologies it took so long to respond! I believe I've fixed everything you've pointed out so far. (Note: my rationale is that if published originally online, I'm not including the city published for NYT. But I fixed all the other issues with that). Thanks again! Staraction (talk | contribs) 16:37, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Image Review
[edit]- File:Diana DeGette official photo (cropped).jpg- Image not found in source link, but can be verified here.
- File:Joe Neguse, official portrait, 116th Congress.jpg- Image not found in source link, but can be verified here.
- File:Jason Crow, official portrait, 116th Congress.jpg- Image not found in source link, but can be found in the archived link.
- File:TAYLOR, EDWARD T. REPRESENTATIVE LCCN2016861347 (cropped).jpg- Source mentions that the image is dated 'between 1905 and 1945'. In the image summary, the date mentioned is 1905.
- File:PatSchroeder.jpg- I think it'd be better to add link to specific page in source for reader's convenience.
- File:Jared Polis Official 2012.jpg- Source link broken, but can be found in the archived link.
- If you wish, you can add archived links for those images where source link is broken.
- All images have alt text.
- All images appropriately captioned.
- All images relevant to text. Nitro Absynthe (talk) 13:33, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Let's power on into the '70s in the history of Billboard's "music for the moms and dads rather than the kids" chart. In this particular year, the Beatles topped this chart for the first time just in time to split up, and a young woman with the voice of an angel and her brother began to establish themselves as one of the pre-eminent acts of all time in this sort of music. Feedback as ever will be most gratefully received and very swiftly acted upon..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Image review by Staraction
[edit]- All images properly sourced & licensed
- All images captioned properly
- All images relevant to the text
- All images have alt text
Thanks for your wonderful work as always! Support on images and prose. Staraction (talk | contribs) 17:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- EN-Jungwon
- Ref 16 is missing an archive link.
That's all I could find. -- EN-Jungwon 01:13, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- @EN-Jungwon: - I ran the bot again but for some reason it refused to archive that link..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I went ahead and added it manually. Support -- EN-Jungwon 08:03, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- @EN-Jungwon: - I ran the bot again but for some reason it refused to archive that link..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]Source review: Passed
- Reliable enough for the information being cited
- Consistent date formatting
- Consistent and proper reference formatting
- Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
- Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for
Feedback:
- Two instances of "Simon and Garfunkel" should be "Simon & Garfunkel", based on the source and based on the article itself
- "Everything is Beautiful" in the lead, and in the image caption, should be capitalized to "Everything Is Beautiful", based on the target and for consistency with the table
That's literally it. Almost got me this time Chris, but I found something! Good stuff as always, support because I've interacted with you enough to confident you'll make the fix when you see this. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: - thanks, I fixed those two points -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:26, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
NØ
[edit]- "and in the same week moved in the top spot on Billboard's pop music chart" - Does "music" need to be part of the text? Feel like "Billboard's pop chart" gets the point across
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- "Thomas and Jones returned to number one later in the year with "I Just Can't Help Believing" and "Daughter of Darkness" respectively, and were two of the four acts to achieve two Easy Listening number ones in 1970." - Probably there should be a comma before "respectively"
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- "Let It Be" also topped the Hot 100, as did "Bridge over Troubled Water" by Simon & Garfunkel, and "Everything Is Beautiful" by Ray Stevens." - Second comma is not necessary
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late review; been busy doing more on the content side lately.--NØ 22:16, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: - no need to apologise, I really appreciate the review! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support--NØ 13:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): PresN 15:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Back with another mammal list, #42, and we turn the page to the 2nd-to-last order of mammals: Chiroptera, or bats! I took a break before starting this to adjust the scripts I use to generate the initial tables to make it easier on myself to deal with recent taxonomic revisions, and also went out and bought a 10-pound, 800-page reference book so that I can stop pawing through google books results. The result is bat family #1/20: the hipposiderids. This list follows conventions for the previous lists, with two changes: these bats all eat roughly the same things, so it's just listed in the lede instead of every single row; and I've added the arm/wing length, because it's relevant to flying creatures (and I had a consistent source!). In any case, thanks for reviewing! --PresN 15:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "A member of this family is called an hipposiderid" - is it really "an" hipposiderid? Not "a".....?
- Maybe link "cicada"? Not sure this is a commonly understood word on a global level.....
- That's all I got - awesome work as ever! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:02, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Done and done, thanks! --PresN 16:20, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]- Source review: Passed
- Reliable enough for the information being cited
- Consistent date formatting
- Consistent and proper reference formatting
- Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
- Spot checks on sources match what they are being cited for
Looks good! Support Hey man im josh (talk) 15:53, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:51, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Another snooker list. For once, the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association decided not to mess about with the system from the previous year, obviously finding it was already adequately complicated for their tastes. A couple of players got lost in a later version; from sources I'm able to account for one of them. Once again, Steve Davis was the clear leader at the top. Number one for six seasons when the rankings started, Ray Reardon (R.I.P.) was out of the top 16 for the first time. As ever, I'm happy to provide relevant extracts from sources to reviewers. Thanks in advance for your improvement suggestions. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:51, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "White, who won two ranking titles in the 1986–87 season had been" => "White, who won two ranking titles in the 1986–87 season, had been"
- "of which those ranked 121 or lower became "(NT)" denotes a "non-tournament" players, meaning....." - this is a bit mangled. I think what you mean is "of which those ranked 121 or lower became "non-tournament" (NT) players, meaning....."
- "1986 & 1987 world championships" => "1986 and 1987 world championships"
- The note needs a full stop at the end -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Many thank, ChrisTheDude. I've made those amendments. Let me know if anything else is required. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:31, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:39, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments from Alavense
[edit]- 1986–87 snooker season is linked twice in consecutive paragraphs.
- "Discussing the rankings for 1987–88, the snooker journalist Terry Smith asserted that "Every player in the lower ranks has one immediate aim – a place in the top 16 ... that elite top group."" - Can {{ndash}} be used?
- "Players in the top 16 were seeded into the last-32 round of the 1988 World Snooker Championship, and received invitations to the 1988 Masters" - I don't see the need for that comma.
- "John Parrott, Mike Hallett and Dean Reynolds moved into the top 16 for the first time, while Kirk Stevens, Tony Meo and Ray Reardon fell out of the top 16" - The second "the top 16" could be replaced by an "it".
- "published in snooker magazines in June 1987" reads a bit vague, I think. What are "snooker magazines"? How many of those were there? Is it a set list? Maybe a bit more of information could be provided in a note.
- I've taken that out. The list was published around 18 May 1987 (given that it got press mentions on 19 May), but I'm pretty sure that no source would have published anything beyond the top 20 before Snooker Scene and Pot Black both had the full list in their June issues. Let me know if you think I should add something back in. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- As per MOS:LISTBULLET, "Use the same grammatical form for all elements in a list, and do not mix sentences and sentence fragments as elements, for example when the elements are". Sentences and fragments are mixed here, but I don't think that's a problem here. Anyway, given that there are full sentences, I think final periods would be more appropriate, and then the capitalization at the beginning of each element makes more sense.
- There's only one "Smith 1987", so there's no need for the "a".
- "Smith, Terry (19 May 1987). "Hendry makes giant leap". The Daily Telegraph. p. 25." is treated as a "Smith 1987" and taking out the a's produces "Harv error: CITEREFSmith1987 has multiple targets (2×)." BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- As far as I can see in the examples given in MOS:ALT, I don't think the alternative text has to be that vague. "A man" could be replaced by "Steve Davis" in the first one and "Jimmy White" in the second one.
That's all I saw. Thank you for your effort, BennyOnTheLoose. Kind regards. Alavense (talk) 09:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks, Alavense. I've implemented the changes, except where noted above. Please let me know if anything else is required. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your prompt responses, BennyOnTheLoose. I did this to avoid having the "a" alongside the year. You can revert it if you don't like it. Support. Alavense (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I've made a note of that! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your prompt responses, BennyOnTheLoose. I did this to avoid having the "a" alongside the year. You can revert it if you don't like it. Support. Alavense (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- MPGuy2824
- Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! Year
becomes!scope=col | Year
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. In particular, "1985–86 season" and "1986–87 season" header cell should have scope as colgroup, and the various cells under it "MT" to "WC" should have scope=col. - "'(New)' denotes a player who was new to the tour for the 1987–88 season." - This can be removed since it isn't referenced in the table. Please ping me when you have fixed these. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks, MPGuy2824. Hopefully I've implemented the changes correctly - let me know if not. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support promotion. P.S. Given that the cells have numbers, there is no need to add "data-sort-type=text" to the various header cells. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Also, I'd appreciate comments at my FL nom. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:17, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support promotion. P.S. Given that the cells have numbers, there is no need to add "data-sort-type=text" to the various header cells. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks, MPGuy2824. Hopefully I've implemented the changes correctly - let me know if not. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Image review by Staraction
[edit]- All images self-published, AGF.
- All images have alt text.
- All images properly captioned.
- All images relevant to the text.
Support on images. Staraction (talk | contribs) 16:50, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Arconning (talk) 03:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
A short list compared to my other FLC, this is a list about the medals earned by nations that competed at the 1956 Winter Olympics. Waiting for some comments, and etc etc! Arconning (talk) 03:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- In the image caption, I believe there is a word missing in "Toni Sailer of Austria won the gold medals at the 1956 Winter Olympics"
- "Overall, athletes from 13 nations received one medal" => "Overall, athletes from 13 nations received at least one medal" (unless literally every medal winner only won one)
- "At their debut, athletes from the Soviet Union won" => "At their first Winter Olympics, athletes from the Soviet Union won"
- "The Soviet Union's team won their nation's first Olympic gold medal" - they'd never won a gold in the summer? I think this sentence and the one after it are confusing as it's unclear if you mean these countries won their first Winter Olympic medals specifically or they won their first Olympic medals period and it just happened to occur at the winter games
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:51, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude I believe I'm done. :) Arconning (talk) 13:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude Pinging again. :) Arconning (talk) 07:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude I believe I'm done. :) Arconning (talk) 13:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:32, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
MrLinkinPark333 verification/copyvio check
[edit]Lead
[edit]- "A total of 821 athletes from 32 nations participated in 24 events in 4 sports across 8 disciplines." - The sentence needs to be rewritten a bit to pass WP:LIMITED as it's too similar to the Olympics flying start source in terms of word order.
- The number of athletes differs between the sources. Olympics factsheet says 821. However, Olympics flying start says 923 total but the math doesn't add up there as 132+751=883. Which of these sources is correct?
- "while athletes from Finland came third with 3 gold medals and 7 medals overall." - The CBC source sorts the countries by the total number of medals, not gold medals. Therefore, third would be Sweden with 10 overall and 2 gold medals.
- "won their nation's first Winter Olympic gold medal and Winter Olympic medal of any color" - the sentence sounds like first Winter Olympic medal ever was a gold medal. However, this isn't the case as the first Winter Olympic medal for Soviet Union was bronze. Therefore, the sentence could be rewritten to something like "won their nation's first Winter Olympic medals in every color"
- "all three gold medals available in the men's alpine skiing events" - needs a bit rewording to avoid similar phrasing with The Los Angeles Times.
- "winning four medals with one gold, two silvers, and one bronze." - extra source needed here as CBC does not specify which medals Jernberg won, only that he won 4.
Medal table section
[edit]- "where a nation is an entity represented by a National Olympic Committee (NOC)" - This part can be removed as Sergeyev does not mention a NOC.
- "The number of silver medals is taken into consideration next and then the number of bronze medals." - This sentence was added in 2004, while Sergeyev's source is from 2014. Template:Backwards copy should be added to the talk page so this article doesn't get flagged as a copyvio of Sergeyev.
- Is the entire 30+ pages being used for the Contemporary European History source to verify "hesitation by the International Olympic Committee to recognize both National Olympic Committees formed by each nation"? If not, specific page/pages are needed instead.
- Also, it should be |issue=4 not |edition=4 for Contemporary European History. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 I've removed the Olympics flying start source, I've also changed the medal table header. For the third comment, I don't see how it is an issue to use the CBC source as the article uses the IOC's method of arranging medal tables, it's sourcing the medal count for the nations? Other than that, I believe I'm done with the rest of your comments. :) Arconning (talk) 07:58, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- In regards to CBC, I'm confused in the wording of sentences it is cited for. The first sentence starts out with "athletes from the Soviet Union won the most medals overall". Therefore, I'd assume that the next sentence would follow the same format: Austria 2nd with 11 medals (4 gold) and Sweden 3rd with 10 medals (2 gold). If the sentences are supposed to be ordered as gold first then total, then I think the Soviet Union part could be reordered with 7 gold medals first then 16 total medals. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:16, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 I have done this. Arconning (talk) 01:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just a few more points left:
- "where a nation is an entity represented by a NOC." - neither source mentions a NOC. This quoted part could be removed.
- The first Unified team was at the 1956 Winter Olympics, not 1952 Summer Olympics. Per Olympia, only the FRG competed in 1952 even though "titularly a combined German team".
- "and the hesitation by the International Olympic Committee to recognize both National Olympic Committees" - This isn't exactly correct. FRG was recognized in 1950 while GDR was recognized in 1955 per Olympia. This would need rewritten as they started to compete as an Unified team after both NOCs were recognized.
- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 Done. Arconning (talk) 06:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Still needs correction on when the first Unified Team competed per above.
- "National Olympic Committee of the GDR (East Germany) would be recognized if both nations competed in the same team at the Olympics" - Might need a little bit of rewording with the bolded part to pass WP:LIMITED
- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 Done. :) Arconning (talk) 06:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support - thank you for the changes. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 Done. :) Arconning (talk) 06:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 Done. Arconning (talk) 06:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just a few more points left:
- @MrLinkinPark333 I have done this. Arconning (talk) 01:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- In regards to CBC, I'm confused in the wording of sentences it is cited for. The first sentence starts out with "athletes from the Soviet Union won the most medals overall". Therefore, I'd assume that the next sentence would follow the same format: Austria 2nd with 11 medals (4 gold) and Sweden 3rd with 10 medals (2 gold). If the sentences are supposed to be ordered as gold first then total, then I think the Soviet Union part could be reordered with 7 gold medals first then 16 total medals. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:16, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 I've removed the Olympics flying start source, I've also changed the medal table header. For the third comment, I don't see how it is an issue to use the CBC source as the article uses the IOC's method of arranging medal tables, it's sourcing the medal count for the nations? Other than that, I believe I'm done with the rest of your comments. :) Arconning (talk) 07:58, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]- Source review: Passed
- Reliable enough for the information being cited
- Consistent date formatting
- Consistent and proper reference formatting
- Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
- Spot checks on sources match what they are being cited for
Feedback:
- Ref 2 – It should be "Athletes, Medals & Results"
- Ref 4 – It's often annoying for me to tell whether I should be using CBC or CBC Sports, but I think CBC Sports is a better choice for this ref, given the author is listed as CBC Sports
- Ref 11 – The article requires a subscription or free trial in order to view the rest of the article. Please add the url-access parameter to the ref and specify it
- Ref 12 – Title in reference doesn't match the title on the page or the title when the page's tab is hovered over. Seems to have had some slight editorialization.
That's what I've got. Please ping me when you reply. Hey man im josh (talk)
- Hey man im josh I believe I'm done. :) Arconning (talk) 15:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh Pinging again. :) Arconning (talk) 07:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:50, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh Pinging again. :) Arconning (talk) 07:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 13:07, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because I feel the list has been written with the FL criteria in mind. "All sorts of suggestions and inputs are welcome. Thank you. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 13:07, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments by Alavense
[edit]- "a state presidents is tasked"
- "including the appointment and coordination of leaders at various levels viz" - What is that supposed to mean? I don't understand the "viz" at the end.
- "District committee, block committee and for each panchayat development block or panchayat samiti." - Is that sentence missing a verb or something?
- "As of now" reads a bit vague.
- "the INC has state and UT presidents for all states and union territory in India" - If I'm not mistaken, there are several union territories in India, so why say "union territory"?
- Conversely, the abbreviation in the second table should read "Union territory" instead of "Union Territories", as there's only one in each row.
- In the tables, the name of the incumbent should be moved to the second column, leaving the portrait for the third one.
- Could anything be said about those vacancies?
- Actually their appointment date is not available at this time. Hence, I have added a note.
- All the article titles read like this: "X Pradesh Congress Committee". Why then, in the tables, do we sometimes have "Andhra Pradesh" and sometimes just "Assam"?
Thanks in advance for your responses, 25 Cents FC. Kind regards, Alavense (talk) 11:05, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Dear Alavense, I have addressed all the issues you raised. If you have any further questions, please feel free to include them in your response. Thank you for your attention and cooperation.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:46, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Older nominations
[edit]- Nominator(s): Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 17:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
I went all of June without nominating anything to FLC, so here's a second July nom to compensate 🤠 The 1995 Pacific hurricane season was the quietest in 16 years and heralded the start of an era of lower activity for the basin (some particularly active seasons during the 2010s be damned). Even so, the season still featured three Category 4 hurricanes on the Saffir–Simpson scale (out of only 10 storms overall, which I'd say is a rather impressive ratio), as well as the deadly Hurricane Ismael, whose name was retired the following spring. "Only" a Category 1 at its peak intensity, Ismael used the element of surprise as a weapon, thrusting itself into the Gulf of California and onto the Mexican coast sooner than anticipated. As a result, many on land and at sea were unprepared for the storm, and over 100 people were killed. I do have another nomination currently open, but it already has a couple supports, and there are presently no concerns that have not been addressed. As always, I look forward to the community's feedback, and will aim to rectify any qualms as quickly as possible. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 17:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments by AndrewPeterT
[edit]Hello, Dylan. I plan on commenting on both this nomination and your other active nomination further shortly. For now, I will note that there is a red link to what should be the article for the timeline on the 1996 Pacific hurricane season in the lede navigation box. Are there plans to create this article in the near future? If not, I would suggest adding a redirect link to the timeline on the main 1996 Pacific hurricane season article.
Also, while only tangentially related to this subject, the name that replaced Ismael (i.e. Israel), had to be itself removed because of negative reception (which given current events, makes one wonder how no one even thought about those negative implications until half a decade later). AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 23:19, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Andrew, it's good to see you! I'll switch out the link shortly – I do intend to create a timeline for the 1996 season in the near-ish future, but I'm not quite sure what near-ish is because there are other projects I have in the pipeline. As for the Ismael–Israel issue (which I agree with you is utterly baffling), I thought about including it, but just didn't quite think it was relevant enough to mention in the lede. The paragraph where Ismael's impacts are described is already pretty beefy, and I wanted to make sure I had room to mention Flossie and Henriette's impacts, too. I see you also have an FLC up – I'll be sure to take a look in the next couple days or so! Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 00:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Oh, hey, forgot to do one of these for a while. Here's another one for Heritage New Zealand's registry of historic sites; still got a long way to go to get through all of these! Upper Hutt is a small commuter town outside Wellington, but it has a suprising amount of cool historic architecture, including a number of fashionable houses by James Chapman-Taylor, one of New Zealand's most notable architects. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments from Alavense
[edit]- The table needs a caption.
- It has one, no? - G
- I don't think the sticky header is working.
- I realized I don't really need the sticky header for this one, since it's a fairly short list. - G
- No issues with the prose.
- Wouldn't it be better to use a <br> between "List" and "number"? There seems to be an excessive gap in between.
- Ooh good point. Fixed. - G
- In the source, it reads "Historic area". Why capitalize the "a" in the text and in the table?
- That's a good point, decapitalised. - G
- In the caption of the first image, again: is it necessary to capitalize "Historic Place"?
- Ditto. - G
- There's no reference for Remutaka Incline Rail Trail.
- Oops. Fixed. - G
That's all I saw. Nice and thorough work, Generalissima. Alavense (talk) 09:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Alavense: Fixed! Thank you very much. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:34, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- One more thing, Generalissima. "Upper Hutt City is a city" reads a bit redundant. I think "Upper Hutt is a city" would be better. Thanks for your edits. Alavense (talk) 06:29, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Alavense Ah, good point! fixed. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 09:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your prompt responses, Generalissima. Support. Alavense (talk) 11:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Alavense Ah, good point! fixed. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 09:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- One more thing, Generalissima. "Upper Hutt City is a city" reads a bit redundant. I think "Upper Hutt is a city" would be better. Thanks for your edits. Alavense (talk) 06:29, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- " jail, private residence, and scouting center" - given that we are dealing with a Commonwealth country, I think the last word should be spelt "centre"
- Oop, yep. - G
- "although plaster and jarrah timber was also heavily used" => "although plaster and jarrah timber were also heavily used"
- Fixed. - G
- "the area became a mobilization camp" => "the area became a mobilisation camp"
- Fixed. - G
- "A veterinary center constructed " => "A veterinary centre constructed "
- Fixed. - G
- "It served as the main veterinary research center" => "It served as the main veterinary research centre"
- Fixed. - G
- "Now owned and managed by the Golder's Homestead Museum Society." => "It is now owned and managed by the Golder's Homestead Museum Society."
- Fixed. - G
- That's all I got - nice work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:55, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thank you so much, fixed! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:24, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]Source review: Passed
- Reliable enough for the information being cited
- Consistent date formatting
- Consistent and proper reference formatting
- Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
- Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for
Feedback:
- Let's Wikilink New Zealand in the lead
- Downcase "(Former)" in the name column
- Downcase "(Library)" in the name column
- Trentham isn't linked in the location column for the St John's Church entry, link it there for consistency
- Golder's House Food Store – Link Upper Hutt in the location column for consistency
Please ping me when the above issues have been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:14, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: Fixed! Thank you very much. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 17:04, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): 金色黎明 (talk) 04:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because that has fulfill the condition 金色黎明 (talk) 04:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Link Roosevelt in the lead
- "Ref" column header should be "Refs" as there are multiple refs on every row
- "For the purpose of this list, other candidates are defined as those who finished in third place in the state" - did nobody at all finish third in 1944, 1960, etc?
- Note b is missing the word "the" before "ballot" and also needs a full stop
- That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your guidance! Upon investigating the source, I have confirmed that only two candidates received votes in the elections of 1944, 1956, 1960, and 1964.--金色黎明 (talk) 08:26, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Bergland's results in 1984 are erroneous: 12,000 votes would be more than 6% of that election. Presidential elections, 1789–1996 gives his vote total as 2,357.
- The sources are well formatted. For consistency's sake, I'd put Menendez 2005 into an SFN; I know you only cite it once, but that way all the books will be in the works cited section.
- Additionally, this is the only one you have a location for; I'd remove it or add locations to the other books.
- Wikilink Walter Dean Burnham in the citation.
That's all from me. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 01:42, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your advice, I have addressed all the mentioned issues.--金色黎明 (talk) 03:35, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good to me! Support. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 03:48, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your advice, I have addressed all the mentioned issues.--金色黎明 (talk) 03:35, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "Wyoming was the first place in America to grant women the right to vote, in 1869, well before it joined the Union in 1890." --> "Wyoming granted women the right to vote in 1869, prior to joining the Union, and was the first place in America to do so." It already states that Wyoming joined the union in 1890 the sentence prior. Feel free to modify this sentence as you see fit as my prose usually isn't the best either but it felt a little clunky to read.
That's it! Well done & thanks for your work. Staraction (talk | contribs) 02:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Staraction:Thanks for your advice, I have revised this sentence--金色黎明 (talk) 03:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good, support on prose! Staraction (talk | contribs) 06:12, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Staraction:Thanks for your advice, I have revised this sentence--金色黎明 (talk) 03:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- The "Winner", "Runner-up" and "Other candidate" header cells need to have colgroup as their scope.
- There is no need to add "text-align:left;" for the party color cell since it has no text. This can be removed from all of those cells.
- Given the note, you could just replace "Other candidate" with "Third-place candidate". Please ping me when these issues are fixed. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824:Thanks for your advice, I have modified according to your suggestion. 金色黎明 (talk) 00:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824:, i have modified ---金色黎明 (talk) 02:44, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support on accessibility and prose. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Dan the Animator 21:08, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Been working on this list for some time now and have done waves of overhauls to try to get it at the FL level. Given the recent promotion of my FLN for Cities in Luhansk Oblast and my completion of everything I can do from my end for my FLN for Cities in Donetsk Oblast, I thought I'd move ahead and get this nomination started. It's not perfectly ready and I plan on editing it more during the nomination period but considering the lengthy timeframe of the FL process and the benefits of getting feedback while editing, thought it'd be better to get it started now and continue to work on it simultaneously with the nom. Unlike the other two FL noms for Donetsk and Luhansk, this list is unique in that it represents a geographic area with two distinct legal entities: the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and city with special status Sevastopol. Given this and its occupation by Russia since 2014, this list has a larger scope and will naturally be more complex/detailed and longer than the other lists. Imo the legal particulars of Sevastopol can get really confusing so feel free to post questions on this nom or reach out if it helps! Thanks in advance y'all for the suggestions and excited to get this nom started! :) Dan the Animator 21:08, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]This is really interesting! I do not speak Russian or Ukrainian, so I cannot speak for the sources, but
- The lede is well-written. Don't really have anything to add here.
- Thanks! :)
- Table formatting seems good to me — great job incorporating a bunch of different complicated info with the dual administrative schemes.
- Thanks again!!!
- My only real qualm is that we don't have any information on Balaklava; would there be a way to incorporate that into the list while marking it's only recognized as a city by Russia? I feel it's worth including as a de facto city on the peninsula.
- I considered this and tried it out but I don't think it's practical. Both the 2001 Ukrainian and 2014 Russian censuses include Balaklava's stats as part of Sevastapol's population numbers (as stated in the efn note next to Sevastapol's numbers), so to have Balaklava included separately would suggest that its counted separately from Sevastapol, which isn't the case. There are also no separate population statistics of Balaklava itself from 2001 as far as I can tell and its unclear what the only 2014 number I found for Balaklava is actually for (my understanding is that it actually represents the population of Balaklava city council (which includes multiple nearby villages/settlements that aren't actually part of Balaklava itself) so it's not ideal to have that number here either). Given this, the only information that would be included in the table for Balaklava would be its alternate names (which are simply all variations of Balaklava) and its de facto/de jure subdivisions, which doesn't really add anything since it's already explained in the lead that Russia and Ukraine both consider Balaklava as part of Sevastapol. Hopefully my explanation makes sense but feel free to let me know if you still think it should be added to the table. I don't feel particularly strongly about it but I also don't see any compelling reason for including it either.
That's all from me for now. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:05, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, that makes sense with Balakalva; I feel free it's fine to leave it out of the table. Support. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:33, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "The territory of Crimea, including Sevastopol, has been" - this reads a bit weirdly, because Sevastopol hasn't been introduced, so it's unclear why it gets singled out from the rest of the region here. It also isn't linked until the second usage.
- Fixed: removed "including Sevastapol" so it flows better
- The lead uses both "recognized" (US spelling) and "recognised" (Commonwealth spelling) and there's a similar inconsistency with other words. Pick one variety of English and use it consistently.
- Fixed: standardized to the American spelling and added the Eng-var template too
- Sevastopol is overlinked in the lead -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed
- Thanks Generalissima and ChrisTheDude for the reviews and apologies for the very belated reply! Let me know if there's anything else I can do to improve the article and also: based on a suggestion in the recently closed FLN for List of cities in Donetsk Oblast, I decided to go ahead and switch out the infoboxes on all these oblasts lists with coordinate maps with links & locations for each city. For the other articles I feel it adds tremendously but given the .png map image for Crimea is already so detailed and in many ways better than the coord map, let me know which option this list should use (the coord map, the infobox with image, or just the image). I also kept the infobox commented out so feel free to preview it in visual editor too if it helps. Thanks again in advance for all the help! :) Dan the Animator 06:15, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
I have a new list for FLC: List of Green Bay Packers Associated Press All-Pro selections! This list follows the same format as List of Green Bay Packers Pro Bowl selections. As always, happy to resolve any issues in a timely fashion. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "The All-Pro recognition is more prestigious" - suggest "The All-Pro recognition is considered more prestigious"
- "The AP All-Pro Team includes a first-team and second-team" - don't need those hyphens
- "Pro Football Hall of Famer Don Hutson in in 1940" - two things here. Firstly, he wasn't a Hall of Famer in 1940, secondly the word "in" is repeated
- "The most recent AP All-Pro selection for the Packers was kick returner Keisean Nixon for 2023 AP All-Pro Team" => "The most recent AP All-Pro selection for the Packers was kick returner Keisean Nixon for the 2023 AP All-Pro Team"
- "Don Hutson's six AP All-Pro selections were all on the first-team." - lose the hyphen again
- Note a: "The position which the player was selected as an All-Pro." => "The position for which the player was selected as an All-Pro."
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you ChrisTheDude, I think I have addressed all your comments here. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:14, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]Source review: Passed
- Reliable enough for the information being cited
- Consistent date formatting
- Consistent and proper reference formatting
- Appropriate wikilinks where applicable (note that Gonzo follows a different format, which I am trying to adhere to, as opposed to my standard format)
- Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for
Feedback:
Various news agencies identified All-Pro teams dating back to...
– Should we consider something like "selected" as opposed to identified? It also contextually may make more sense.- This isn't a hard line for me, but I believe, in regards to ref 14, AP News would be a more appropriate link. I recognize Associated Press News is appropriate, but it was my understanding that that sect of the AP typically goes by "AP News".
That's all I've got. Good stuff! Please do ping me when you reply. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you Hey man im josh! I made the necessary changes. I must have copied that AP link from somewhere else, since it didn't really match my typical reference formatting. I changed it to website = APNews.com. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:09, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:36, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- For the years, where there are more than one players, the header cell's scope should be rowgroup. e.g. 1941.
- In the "Most selections" table, the "All-Pros" and "Team" cells in the header should have the colgroup scope. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks MPGuy2824, I think I got them all fixed! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support promotion on prose and table accessibility.
- I'd appreciate a comment at my FL nom, if you have the time and inclination. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:22, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks MPGuy2824, I think I got them all fixed! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): EN-Jungwon (talk) and Explicit (talk) 11:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Yes it's another Inkigayo list. The fourth one that I am nominating in this series. This list follows the same format as the previous three and the nine Music Bank lists. -- EN-Jungwon 11:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "The chart measured digital performance in domestic online music services" => "In 2018, the chart measured digital performance in domestic online music services"
- "Three boy groups had ranked two singles at number one in 2018" => "Three boy groups ranked two singles at number one in 2018"
- "The four song spent" => "The four songs spent"
- "making them the artist with the most wins of the year" => "making them the act with the most wins of the year" ("artist" can really only be used to refer to a soloist)
- That's all I got - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:12, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude, all done. Always appreciate your comments at FLC. Thanks again. -- EN-Jungwon 05:44, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Image review by Staraction
[edit]- All images properly sourced & licensed
- All images properly captioned
- All images relevant to the text
- All images have alt text except for the two with Paul Kim and Jennie
Thanks for your work again @EN-Jungwon and @Explicit! Staraction (talk | contribs) 16:21, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Alt text added. Thanks for catching that. -- EN-Jungwon 01:30, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Staraction pinging. -- EN-Jungwon 00:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support on images! Staraction (talk | contribs) 01:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Staraction pinging. -- EN-Jungwon 00:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comments by MPGuy2824
- Since the key is a table, it too would need to follow MOS:DTAB. In particular there need to be row scopes added to the columns with the symbols. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:39, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Done. -- EN-Jungwon 00:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- "were announced as new hosts beginning the February 18 broadcast." to "were announced as new hosts from the February 18 broadcast."
- Support in advance, since I think you'll get this fixed. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks for the support. -- EN-Jungwon 15:00, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Done. -- EN-Jungwon 00:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): XR228 (talk) 08:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
I think this list enough sources and enough prose to earn a spot as a Featured List. Feel free to review. XR228 (talk) 08:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- I think the lead image should be right at the top of the lead. This seems to me to be the norm.
- Are there appropriate links for play-by-play announcer and color analyst?
- "Olczyk would maintain his job at TNT as the lead color commentator and would call the Kraken's games as his schedule allowed" => "Olczyk maintain his job at TNT as the lead color commentator and called the Kraken's games as his schedule allowed"
- "did the same for Olczyk and Piper Shaw for the 2022–23 season onward" - who's Piper Shaw? This is the first mention of them.....
- Root Sports Northwest should be linked on first use in the body
- That's it for me I think. The US model of sports broadcasting is rather alien to me over here in the UK but nonetheless I found this a clear and easy read -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 15:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey man im josh
[edit]- Columns have no scopes
- What is "most games" supposed to mean? This needs to be defined in some capacity
- What are the tables sourced to? It's not clear to me.
- Add Wikilinks to sources in the publisher/website/work fields for consistency (several include links, while others do not)
- Image of Alison Lukan should probably be cropped since it looks like the focus is on the hockey player
- Date formatting in a number of these references are inconsistent, consider adding the
{{Use mdy dates|July 2024}}
template to the top of the article under the short description - Consider adding archive links the archive bot is back up
- KPUG has apparently been an affiliate since 2022, according to the tweet used as a source. Can we do any better than this tweet? Given how long it's been, I would hope/expect that it's also sourced elsewhere.
- Based on the source for the 2023–24 season, would this then mean that KPUG's FM station is no longer an affiliate? Or is this specifically citing stations which are part of the iheart radio network?
Throughout their history, Kraken games have been televised on Root Sports Northwest and radio broadcast primarily on KJR-FM.
– This sentence is rather clunky. I'm sure they've been televised plenty of places, but was the intent to say they're primarily televised on Root Sports as well? Or just "radio broadcast primarily" on KJR-FM?- Image alt texts could be improved. "Man holding microphone" would be better as "John Forslund holding a microphone". These are meant to be a description of the image, we don't need to go into serious detail, but it's better that we note who's in the image when we can for someone who's visually impaired.
- Additionally, if you don't want to crop the image, "Woman wearing headphones" is not a good alt description for File:Los Angeles Kings at Seattle Kraken - November 19, 2022 - Brandon Tanev and Allison Lukan (52519198214).jpg.
- Add author to ref 15
Please ping me when you reply. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:00, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: I have made the changes. For the issues with the section about radio affiliates, I decided to completely redo it according to the source from iHeartRadio. (see here) XR228 (talk) 11:15, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh XR228 (talk) 09:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm fine with the changes that have been made. Althought I would encourage the removal of the width=100% attribute, as I think it makes the table wider than it needs to be. That's a personal preference and nothing that would hold up this nomination.
- Refs 12, 13, and 17 still need to be specified as needing a subscription. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: I have made the changes. Personally, I think having the tables' with be 100% looks better aesthetically. Just my opinion. XR228 (talk) 17:44, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Personally I find the extremely wide "play-by-play" column to be off putting and to look like the table is improperly formatted, but it's not a deal breaker. Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:36, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: I have made the changes. Personally, I think having the tables' with be 100% looks better aesthetically. Just my opinion. XR228 (talk) 17:44, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh XR228 (talk) 09:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Minor note: the scope=col tags make the header cells bolded, so you don't need to bold them again (right now the column headers are double-bold). --PresN 15:37, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @PresN: Fixed. Thanks. XR228 (talk) 23:53, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Skyshiftertalk 01:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
This is the discography of the Canadian electronic duo Crystal Castles, which has quite a cult following. This is my first ever FLC, so I believe there will be some mistakes, but I'll do my best to address them in the course of this nomination. Skyshiftertalk 01:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support on prose & images (relevant to text, captioned, properly licensed, alt text present). Well-written & comprehensible to me. Only thing - maybe elaborate a bit on the abuse allegations? I had to dig a little more to understand those and it left a little more to be desired. Otherwise, great work and well done! Staraction (talk | contribs) 03:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your support! So that's the main thing I'm unsure about, considering WP:BLP and WP:UNDUE. I believe that it's relevant to cite the allegations, as that's why Glass left the band and why it is on hiatus. It's definitely important enough to be cited here. However, because of these policies I mentioned, I think going into detail would be too much. Skyshiftertalk 03:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- It reads a bit weirdly to say things charted in "Scotland and the United Kingdom" given that Scotland is part of the UK. It would be like saying a song charted in "Texas and the United States". But I can't think of a way round this........
- I'd say it makes sense, as Scotland and the UK have their respective national charts. I understand how it could be confusing, but like, it's not wrong..
- "Crystal Castles later released a cover of that album's "Not in Love"" - it's not a cover because it was their own song to begin with. You can only cover someone else's song. "Re-recording" would be the appropriate description.
- Fixed
- "charting in multiple countries and being certified gold by Music Canada." => "which charted in multiple countries and was certified gold by Music Canada."
- Fixed
- "The band has been on hiatus since Glass' abuse allegations against Kath in 2017" - appreciate you don't want to elaborate on this but the choice of wording makes it sound like the allegations have already been mentioned when they haven't. Suggest changing to "The band has been on hiatus since Glass made allegations of abuse against Kath in 2017"
- Fixed
- That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: All responded! Skyshiftertalk 21:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: All responded! Skyshiftertalk 21:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments from TechnoSquirrel69
[edit]One review coming up. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Citation numbers from this revision. Let's do this!
- Neither of the references after "... allegations of abuse against Kath in 2017." verify that the band is on hiatus.
- Changed to "inactive", which I guess is factual due to the band not releasing or saying anything since then. Apparently there are no sources explicitly saying that the band has not done anything since then, which kinda sucks, because it is pretty obvious.
- Yeah, it can be hard to prove a negative with things like this. Good change; it addresses my concern. —TS
- Changed to "inactive", which I guess is factual due to the band not releasing or saying anything since then. Apparently there are no sources explicitly saying that the band has not done anything since then, which kinda sucks, because it is pretty obvious.
- Might be worth a mention in the prose that the 2010 album was re-released as II and/or also known with the number in the title.
- Done
- Also, what a coincidence that I was listening to American Football, who also have multiple eponymous albums, while writing this up! —TS
- Good taste!
- What's the distinction being drawn between the "versus" remixes and the other ones? That stylization was used in electronic music circles back in the day to denote collaborations or remixes, but it doesn't seem to impart much information here.
- I think it's valid to mention how they were credited when there's a difference. Not all of their remixes from that era are like this, such as "Atlantis to Interzone", which is just "Crystal Castles Remix".
- Lists and tables are exempt from MOS:REPEATLINK, so I would encourage linking things like the singles and featured performers wherever they appear, which is generally considered beneficial for readers.
- Done
- Change the sub-sections in § Notes to use true headers per MOS:PSEUDOHEAD.
- Done
- In note (lowercase) a: Saying these singles are "sometimes referred to as EPs" is vague and opaque. Why is this the case? Which other songs featured on these EPs? Please add sources as necessary. It would also be nice to expand the initialism since we're in a footnote.
- Added sources and information
- Are the "To access ..." notes in citations 7 and 8 necessary? It's not exactly common practice to include navigational tips for the website in references.
- I think information like this is present in some chart references from {{Album chart}} and {{Single chart}}.
- Any reason why links to Ultratop are piped as "ultratop.be"?
- Changed
- I suppose the URLs are inevitable in citations 9 and 10, but "irishcharts.com" should be "irish-charts.com". I would also format them with the
|website=
parameter and add|publisher=Hung Medien
.- Done
- There seems to be more citations in title case than sentence case, so so I would make them all consistent to that. This script might be able to help.
- Good script! But other than two sources that I had forgotten, I've already made them sentence case, and all of them should be now. You might be referring to things like "Official Scottish Singles Chart Top 100", but I'd say these are proper names.
- In citation 19: remove the name of the website from the title.
- Done
- I don't think the exact stylization of the YouTube channel names are necessary, and would just format them with their proper names.
- Done
That's all I've got for now; I might be back with more comments after another read through. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- @TechnoSquirrel69: All responded! Skyshiftertalk 19:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Source review
[edit]Now working from this revision.
- No further suggestions on the citation formatting, and the sources are all reliable enough to verify their claims.
- Assuming good faith for offline sources.
- Since this is the nominator's first FLC, I conducted some spot-checks. Citations 1–5, 9, 10, 16, 19, and 55–57 revealed no issues.
- Citation 18 doesn't verify the Flemish Heatseekers chart placement.
- It's on the archive; set "url-status" to "dead".
- Several links in citation 24, such as for "Air War" and "Courtship Dating" don't seem to verify their claims. "Baptism" is also listed with a peak at 87th, while the source claims 83rd.
- I don't know why some of these links refer to 2002... I'll fix these links later. Corrected placement for "Baptism".
- Citation 11 doesn't verify the chart placement of "Baptism".
- Removed
- "Sad Eyes" is listed at 139th, while citation 39 claims 89th.
- Fixed
I plan to do a more in-depth check of the sources, but I will have to oppose at the moment. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Added a bit more. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:01, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Responded; some changes pending. Skyshiftertalk 22:14, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- @TechnoSquirrel69: all fixed. Skyshiftertalk 00:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Seen; thanks! Oppose struck, but I will be doing another full pass of the article on account of the number of errors I identified the first time around. I'm sure you're doing so already, but I'd ask that you do the same to make sure there are no further hiccups in the review. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:58, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- No further issues that I can find, so I'm going to go ahead and support conditional on the implementation of MPGuy's suggestions below. I would encourage another reviewer to check my work if they have the time to make sure nothing gets missed. Good luck with the rest of this candidacy, Skyshifter! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Seen; thanks! Oppose struck, but I will be doing another full pass of the article on account of the number of errors I identified the first time around. I'm sure you're doing so already, but I'd ask that you do the same to make sure there are no further hiccups in the review. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:58, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @TechnoSquirrel69: all fixed. Skyshiftertalk 00:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
- Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! Year
becomes!scope=col | Year
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. This is for the "Extended plays" and "Music videos" tables. Additionally, the "Peak chart positions" header cell (in quite a few of the tables) needs to have "colgroup" as its scope. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. Please ping me when you fix these issues. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:32, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824: done! Skyshiftertalk 18:05, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support promotion based on prose and table accessibility. If interest and time permit, please comment at my FL nom. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:29, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Sgubaldo (talk) 14:52, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Parasite was released in 2019 and made history by becoming the first non English-language film to win Best Picture in 2019. The style is the same as other existing FLs of this kind. Sgubaldo (talk) 14:52, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support - I got nothing. Awesome work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:33, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you as always for the reviews. Sgubaldo (talk) 19:42, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead. - For header cells (like "AACTA International Awards") which span multiple rows, the scope should be "rowgroup" and not "row".
- Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824, done. Sgubaldo (talk) 09:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Found a few more issues:
- Most of the dates are in dmy format, but i noticed "March 14, 2020" in one of the notes.
- There is a CS1 - multiple authors error in one of the refs.
- The director's image in the infobox is missing alt text. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824; done the first and last point. Could you point out which ref the error is cropping up on? I can't seem to find it for some reason. Sgubaldo (talk) 10:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- The sports.donga.com one. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- I've changed it, and hopefully that should fix it. Sgubaldo (talk) 11:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support promotion. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:25, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've changed it, and hopefully that should fix it. Sgubaldo (talk) 11:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- The sports.donga.com one. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Found a few more issues:
- @MPGuy2824, done. Sgubaldo (talk) 09:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Question—is it normal practice for both the infobox and list to overlap this much? I'm a newbie to these kinds of lists. It feels a little redundant; the win/count info per award I feel could just be merged into the table. The totals I feel maybe could be left in the infobox. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 02:05, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Also the show/hide button in the infobox doesn't seem to be working for me; I tried a Chromium and Safari browser on Mac and neither worked. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 02:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's really odd, I'm not having this issue on either browser. Also, to me the infobox appears collapsed by default, so that only the totals show, not each individual nomination. Sgubaldo (talk) 09:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm, to verify we're talking about the same things, I'm talking about the [show] button next to the Accolades header in the infobox. Also, I know each row in the infobox has only the totals, I'm saying listing the totals for each individual award circuit (I.e. AACTA Awards, AACTA International Awards, ARP Movies... etc) feels a bit redundant with the list in the body. I'm asking what you think about, if possible, only showing the totals bit at the bottom of the infobox: Wins 219 and Nominations 353. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 09:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, the [show/hide] button works fine for me; the issue has been brought up on the template's talk page. I think it's fine to show the individual totals, particularly as the infobox is (at least supposed to be) collapsed by default.
- Sgubaldo (talk) 09:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ah! Ok, that all makes sense. Looks good to me then! 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm, to verify we're talking about the same things, I'm talking about the [show] button next to the Accolades header in the infobox. Also, I know each row in the infobox has only the totals, I'm saying listing the totals for each individual award circuit (I.e. AACTA Awards, AACTA International Awards, ARP Movies... etc) feels a bit redundant with the list in the body. I'm asking what you think about, if possible, only showing the totals bit at the bottom of the infobox: Wins 219 and Nominations 353. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 09:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's really odd, I'm not having this issue on either browser. Also, to me the infobox appears collapsed by default, so that only the totals show, not each individual nomination. Sgubaldo (talk) 09:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments by Birdienest81
[edit]- Regarding the Guinness World Records distinction of being the most awarded foreign-language film at the Oscars alongside Fanny and Alexander and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, the 2022 version of All Quiet on the Western Front has also now tied the record according to this article from Slash Film. I know Guinness World Records noted the record back in 2020, but I'm wondering if it should be denoted that All Quiet on the Western Front has matched that record. I can see arguments in favor and not in favor, but I just want to get your take on it.
- Also, all movie titles in the references should be italicized as well per MOS:CONFORMTITLE.
That's all I have for now.
- Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because all of the information has been properly sourced and tables have been formatted to comply with Wikipedia's MOS. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Image review by Staraction
[edit]- All images are relevant to article
- All images appropriately captioned
- All images have appropriate licensing, AGF on self-published works
- Images need alt text - see MOS:ALT for more information
- Images need to be resized using scaling instead of specifying px. See WP:SCALE for more information
Thanks for your work @Bgsu98. Staraction (talk | contribs) 13:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- These should all be addressed. Thank you so much for your input! Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good. Support on images. Staraction (talk | contribs) 01:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Comment
[edit]- How come you used so many external links for sources for some of these tables? The international tables, except for the cancelled international competitions, are all pointing to external sources instead of following the format (references in that row instead) used by the rest of the article
- Date formats are inconsistent in references, consider adding
{{Use mdy dates|July 2024}}
to the top of the article under the short description - Inconsistent linking of works in references, an example of this is
- Access dates missing for a number of sources
- Links should be archived once the bot is back up
- A number of references use "ISU results" as the website and "International Skating Union" as the publisher. It makes more sense to use just "International Skating Union"
- Some refs need to be downcased, such as 74, 76, and 77, so the names are not entirely capitalized
- A lot of these references to social media posts are dead with no archive link available, such as refs 7, 10, 16, and 24
I think there's a fair bit of work that still needs to be done on this article. Please ping me when you reply. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hey man im josh, with regards to your first question, I don't know. That is how these season articles have always been set up. Is there any benefit to providing a link versus an imbedded source? If not, I will convert them all over to sources. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delayed response @Bgsu98, I missed yours when catching up on my pings yesterday. See WP:CS:EMBED, which is about avoiding embedded links. Additionally, I think it makes sense to be consistent throughout the list and for the tables to not have different reference styles. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:10, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- That makes sense. I have begun replacing the links with proper sources. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:17, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hey man im josh, thank you for improving the source formats. I will finish converting the dance links over this weekend; I had new teacher orientation all this week and haven't had much time for Wikipedia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delayed response @Bgsu98, I missed yours when catching up on my pings yesterday. See WP:CS:EMBED, which is about avoiding embedded links. Additionally, I think it makes sense to be consistent throughout the list and for the tables to not have different reference styles. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:10, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 15:36, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- PresN, those captions should all be included now. Thank you for catching those for me! Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this article for featured list because it is well-sourced and, IMO, meets the basic requirements of a featured list. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Great work and a topic kinda close to my heart as my son currently attends one of the formerly all-female colleges, but I feel like you need to explain the set-up of these women receiving degrees for the first time in a bit more detail, specifically the fact that the first degrees were awarded in 1920 but the women in the table "graduated" anything up to 41 years earlier. Presumably the degree awards were in essence retrospective? Also, how did the women originally "graduate" without receiving a degree (most people reading the article would understand the concept of "graduating" as "receiving their degree". Did the earlier women essentially just, I dunno, leave.....?)
- Some more nit-picky comments:
- Image caption: "First women colleges at Oxford" => "First women's colleges at Oxford"
- "Before 1920, it is estimated that around 4,000 women studied at Oxford" => "Tt is estimated that around 4,000 women studied at Oxford before 1920"
- " The first woman unofficial accepted at Oxford" => " The first woman unofficially accepted at Oxford"
- "The last survivor of the 1920 conferral ceremonies was Constance Savery who graduated in 1920" - last four words are redundant given how the sentence starts
- Image caption starting "former" needs a full stop
- Suggest linking "jurisprudence" in the table as it's a rather obscure word -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude, I've gathered and added as much info as I could in a "History" section. I've also made the minor edits you have suggested and added the links too. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:14, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Omnis Scientia, thank you for writing the article and expanding the coverage of women at Oxford. In response to ChrisTheDude's question, the exams available and taken by women changed during the period. From 1876 the university's Delegacy for Local Examinations (DLE) offered Women’s Examinations, equivalent to Responsions, and pass or honours final examinations.[1] By 1894 women could take university examination papers through the DLE, which awarded a certificate of the results of the exams.[2] From 1896 Somerville or the Association for the Education of Women issued a diploma listing the exams a student had passed at the end of her studies.[3]
- Suggest replacing Graduation date with Final examination in the table, if that is what the date represents
- Suggest another paragraph explaining about the exams available and the certificates and diplomas mentioned above
- LMH, Somerville and the Home Students all opened in 1879. LMH uses a foundation date of 1878 as its founding committee was set up in that year, but I think that is not relevant to this article
- I believe that in "By 1895, Oxford and the University of Cambridge were the only universities in the United Kingdom to deny women degrees" the UK means GB and NI, as Trinity College, Dublin was not awarding women degrees. Suggest replacing United Kingdom with Great Britain
- Suggest that "The five women's colleges were not given equal status to men's colleges until 1959" should say "the men's colleges" as it refers to the group of existing fully accepted colleges, not men's colleges in general.
St Catherine's College, OxfordSt Peter's College, Oxford and St Catherine's College, Oxford did not get full college status until 1961 and 1962. TSventon (talk) 19:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)- @TSventon, thank you for the additional info! Being honest, I didn't FULLY understand the whole exam diploma/certificate system so I wrote in one line that they were given certificates at the end of examinations, along with a reference. You're welcome to expand on the examination process if you want.
- I've also added most of the rest of your suggestions. I do think graduation is correct term since they did complete their studies. They were just not given a degree. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:49, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @TSventon, would like an update on this. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:08, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Omnis Scientia apologies for the delay. I have expanded the sentence on exams and certificates as requested, please copy edit as necessary. I have looked up "graduation" e.g. at Collins and it has at least two separate meanings, 1 completion of studies and 2 degree ceremony, so the way it is used in the table is correct, but confusing. That is a detail so
- @TSventon, would like an update on this. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:08, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support TSventon (talk) 01:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- @TSventon, thank you! Much appreciated! :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
References
Comments by Alavense
[edit]Excellent work, Omnis Scientia. I saw nothing other than maybe a comma missing in "was Constance Savery who died"? Support. Alavense (talk) 07:41, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Alavense, I've fixed the comma. Thank you for the kind words! :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments by UC
[edit]An enjoyable article on an important topic. Some points below. UndercoverClassicist T·C 09:14, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- The lead seems terribly short -- I don't see that it includes much from the history section, which would seem to break MOS:LEAD -- unless things work differently for lists?
- A pedantic one -- matriculating is something that the student does -- therefore, people aren't matriculated, they matriculate.
- The history of the Oxford women's colleges is a bit complicated, and I must admit to not understanding it very well. However, I'm looking with some confusion at the sentence In June 1878, the Association for the Education of Women (AEW) was formed, aiming for the eventual creation of a college for women in Oxford. The first women's colleges at Oxford opened the following year: Lady Margaret Hall, Somerville Hall and the Society of Oxford Home-Students (later known as St Anne's College).. St Anne's didn't technically become a college until the 1950s, and the Society of Oxford Home-Students needs a bit of explanation as to what it actually was -- it certainly wasn't formally a college, but was practically quite a different beast as well (this may need an EFN when it comes to the table). Both Somerville and LMH were also technically halls of residence instead of colleges (Somerville formally changed over in 1894), but I'm not sure how important the distinction was. Were they, however, always strictly colleges of the university rather than permanent private halls?
- The five women's colleges were not given equal status to the men's colleges until 1959: what does equal status actually mean, in this context?
- For accessibility, better to move the Times blockquote to the right, to maintain a consistent left margin.
- I'm a little uncomfortable with the sourcing in the history section -- it's almost entirely publications from the university itself, and for that matter, almost all a self-published, non-scholarly web page -- whatever we think of the quality of Oxford's research, we shouldn't extend the same deference to their PR team. This doesn't meet the "independent" site of WP:HQRS -- we shouldn't allow Oxford to mark their own homework.
- This was a huge step towards women being granted full membership: both a cliché and perhaps a bit back-patting?
- the statute which established the Delegacy acknowledged women as Oxford members for the first time as well as the five women's colleges, with the University assuming formal control and supervision over them: this is a run-on sentence, and it becomes quite unclear as to whether it was the colleges or the women who were formally controlled.
- It would be another ten years of campaigning before women were finally admitted as full members: we haven't really talked about this campaigning at all.
- Notable women conferred degrees in 1920: what's the criteria for inclusion here?
- I would make the college and degree subject columns sortable.
- Being pedantic again, is it a graduation year if you didn't receive a degree (gradus)? I do see the Collins point above, but in this particular context it's clear that nobody -- including the women themselves -- would have seen themselves as "graduating" in e.g. 1886 (otherwise, why turn up to "graduate" again?). Suggest "Final year of studies".
- The citation to "Dorothy L Sayers: A Biography" is oddly formatted, and the link is broken. Her ODNB page says that the degree was in modern French (it brackets 'medieval', but to me that sounds like Sayers got her degree in 'modern' (post-Latin) French by offering papers in medieval French, like someone might get a degree in Archaeology and Anthropology by studying human evolution).
- The citation formatting is a bit inconsistent -- check dashes for ranges, dashes or no dashes for ISBNS, dots and spaces after p, and the other little pedantic things. Using citation templates throughout would help.
- @UndercoverClassicist: I have posted a link to your questions on @Omnis Scientia:'s talk page and will try to answer your questions about colleges.
- what does equal status actually mean, in this context? The University of Oxford currently has three types of “colleges”. Most are colleges of the University of Oxford (full colleges), which have royal charters and are governed by their fellows. There are also permanent private halls, which are governed by religious institutions, and societies, which are neither colleges nor PPHs.[1] The women’s halls were not recognised by the university at all until 1910. A college head said they “are in Oxford, but they are not of Oxford, and are no more known to the University, as such, than Holloway College, many of whose students pass University examinations but will be jealously excluded from degrees.“ [2]: 272 In 1910 they became “recognised societies” and in 1920 “societies of women students”. [3]
- In 1959 the women’s societies became full colleges, which meant that they were accepted as equal to the existing (men’s) colleges. A prerequisite for the status of a college of the university of Oxford was that governance was in the hands of the principal and fellows rather than external trustees. Also, according to the Oxford Magazine, college heads could be appointed as vice-chancellor.[4] The next colleges to be recognised were St Peter's College, Oxford in 1961 and St Catherine's College, Oxford in 1962.
- Were they, however, always strictly colleges of the university rather than permanent private halls? The women's colleges were recognised as societies from 1910 until 1959, rather than halls or full colleges.
- LMH, Somerville, St Hugh’s and St Hilda’s opened as halls of residence, without any teaching staff (see chapters of the Victoria County History). As student numbers increased they started to employ tutors and, apart from LMH, take the name of college. For example Somerville changed its name “in the belief that it would not only improve the educational status of Somerville in the eyes of the public, but would be understood as implying the desire of the Governing Body to raise it above the level of a Hall of Residence.“ [5] The four women’s colleges received royal charters in 1926 (see chapters of the Victoria County History).
- The home students were supervised by the AEW from 1879 to 1910, but only given their own principal and committee in 1893. From 1910 they were supervised by the Delegacy for Woman Students and from 1920 by the Delegacy for Home-Students. In 1942 The home students took the name St Anne’s Society and in 1952 they received a royal charter and took the name St Anne’s College.[6] TSventon (talk) 16:28, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for this -- it certainly helped me clarify things, and I hope it will find its way as necessary into the article. UndercoverClassicist T·C 16:34, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @UndercoverClassicist, I will add on that "notable women" are women who have article on Wikipedia.
- Also want to thank @TSventon a lot for their contribution here. They know a lot more about this topic than I do. I started this list in part to listify a category and learned about the subject as I was creating it. Quite a bit of info was added by TSventon and he provided a lot of missing names to add on. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I searched Wikipedia for all the women who graduated in 1920–1921 academic year according to the Oxford University Gazette and found 69 names. The is as complete as I can make it but I may have missed a few cases where the names in Wikipedia and the Gazette are different for some reason. TSventon (talk) 22:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- If the ambition is to make this a complete list (even if that ambition may never be fulfilled, because some of the women won't have good sources about them), I think we should cut the word "notable" in the subhead, which implies that it's only ever going to be a curated one. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:14, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Done. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:31, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- @UndercoverClassicist and Omnis Scientia: I have expanded the section about women's colleges as discussed.
- As to completeness, the list currently includes about 65 names out of about 650 graduations in the first year and I don't think there is any ambition to increase that significantly.
- On sourcing, I agree that we should not over rely on university websites. Within those, some pages are written by academics, especially firstwomenatoxford.ox.ac.uk, which names a team of academics and archivists. I think that is a high quality source, but not an independent one. TSventon (talk) 09:41, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- @TSventon, great work, thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:46, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Done. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:31, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- If the ambition is to make this a complete list (even if that ambition may never be fulfilled, because some of the women won't have good sources about them), I think we should cut the word "notable" in the subhead, which implies that it's only ever going to be a curated one. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:14, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for this -- it certainly helped me clarify things, and I hope it will find its way as necessary into the article. UndercoverClassicist T·C 16:34, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Organisation". University of Oxford. Archived from the original on 28 January 2016. Retrieved 2024-06-14.
- ^ Brock, Michael G.; Curthoys, Mark C., eds. (2000). "10 'In Oxford but…not of Oxford': The Women's Colleges". The History of the University of Oxford, Vol. 7: Nineteenth-Century Oxford, Part 2. Oxford University Press. pp. 237–308.
- ^ "Somerville College, Woodstock Road". Kelly's Directory of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire. 1939. p. 206.
- ^ "Gaudeamus Nuffieldenses". The Oxford Magazine. 1957. p. 502.
it will , as a New Foundation , not be listed on the roll of those eligible to present for the Vice-Chan-cellorship
- ^ Salter, H. E.; Lobel, Mary D. (1954). "Somerville College". The Victoria History of the County of Oxford. Vol. 3: The University of Oxford. London: British History Online. pp. 343–347.
- ^ Salter, H. E.; Lobel, Mary D. (1954). "St Anne's College". The Victoria History of the County of Oxford. Vol. 3: The University of Oxford. London: British History Online. pp. 351–353.
Source review
[edit]I'll do a source review, and add any general comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Looks like there are quite a few tweaks needed, but nothing fundamental - mainly consistency across citations. Please feel free to challenge or to ask for clarifications. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:59, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Sources
- I think that where there is no author stated, there should be a blank rather than "_____,", but let me check.
- Not all online sources have access dates (e.g. Constance Savery". Bethlehem Books; "1894-1896". University of Oxford; "1896 Towards Degrees for Women". Somerville College.)
- There should be consistency in whether sources are linked. (e.g. St. Anne's College, Oxford is linked in ref 8, but Somerville College isn't in ref 17)
- There shoud be consistency in whether publication loctions for books are given.
- Shuld be consistency in how page numbers are given (like "p.12", not like "p10")
- Surprisingly, 'They couldn't go on the river with a man on their own' - the changing lives of Oxford's female students" requires registration, so it should have a url-access=Registration parameter
- Who's Who (refs 35, 53, 112) is considered "generally unreliable" at WP:RSP
- Repetition in " 'University Intelligence', The Times, 26 June 1912, p.12; 'University Intelligence', The Times, 27 June 1912, p.6." - is it one article continued across pages 6 and 12? (I have access to the Times Digital Archive, so can check this if you're not sure)
- Doesn't look like "(Following the Oxford custom a BA not a BSc.) University Intelligence, The Times, 28 June 1920, p10" is formatted quite correctly.
- Brittain, Vera (1960). The Women at Oxford. appears three times, with inconsistent details.
- Sure thing, will fix these issues. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:15, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, I think I've gotten most of them, @BennyOnTheLoose. If I missed something, make sure to ping me.
- I should add that most of inconsistancy and repetativeness is because I took the sources from the articles themselves and their formatting was varied. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:56, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
@Omnis Scientia: Thanks for the responses so far. I've made a few formatting tweaks suggested by scripts; please review these and revert any which you disagree with. "Rx" below refers to "reference number x". I'll take another look after you've replied to the points below, and haven't forgotten that I said I would check about ""_____," Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk)
- Not a requirement for FL, but you could use https://anticompositetools.toolforge.org/hyphenator/ to standardise the formatting of the ISBNs.
- Not a requirement for FL to change it, as far as I'm aware, but it's unusual to see FLC citations not using a citation template (e.g. the first five refs)
- Oxford Dictionary of National Biography citations are inconsistent. (e.g. Not all have the red padlock, some have authors, R27 has a date, some don't have the doi, not all have accessed date, R98 doesn't have the wikilink, R104 has the abbreviation)
- R12 - missing ISBN
- R14 - missing publisher
- R15 - missing ISBN
- R17 - Missing access date
- R22 - Missing access date
- R33 - incomplete details (missing page title)
- R44 - Missing access date
- R46 isn't this published by "Somerville College" rather than by "University of Oxford WWI Centenary" ?
- What makes melaniespanswick.com a reliable source? (I see lots of books, but wasn't fully convinced)
- Authors don't all use first/last parameters:
- last=Parkes, Susan M.
- author=Mavis Curtis
- first1=Catherine M. C. Haines with Helen M.
- author1=Dimand, Robert William|author2=Dimand, Mary Ann|author3=Forget, Evelyn L.
- author=Frances Lannon
- Fernanda Helen Perrone (not in a citation template; surname should appear first)
- Constance Savery (R51; not in a citation template; surname should appear first)
- Giles Brindley (not in a citation template; surname should appear first)
- Philip E. Bennett (not in a citation template; surname should appear first)
- last=Parkes, Susan M.
- Vera Brittain could have an author-link
- Rosemary Mitchell could have an author-link
- Textile History could be wikilinked
- National Library of Wales could be wikilinked
- Pitt Rivers Museum could be wikilinked
- Book titles are inconsistently capitalised. I think these should be amended: A danger to the men? : a history of women in Trinity College Dublin 1904–2004, A biographical dictionary of women economists, Brief biographies of British mycologists, Traditions of social policy : essays in honour of Violet Butler; International women in science : a biographical dictionary to 1950. Also "Oxford dictionary of national biography"
- R68 - publication is via isuu, not by it
- As far as I know, we usually omit "Ltd/Limited" from the publisher name in citations
- A couple of web citations have the url displayed in the citation, e.g. trowelblazers.com, www.newulsterbiography.co.uk. I think just the site name should be shown.
- Still some inconsitency in whether sources are wikilinked.
General comments
- Michaelmas term could be wikilinked, rather than Michaelmas
- Ticking the ones as I finish them. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- @BennyOnTheLoose, okay I think I've gotten most of them. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because of the recent success of Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Football Academic All-America Team Members of the Year/archive2. I think this list is of similar quality and preparedness.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Drive-by accessibility comments
- Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding
!scope=row
to each primary cell, e.g.| 1987
becomes!scope=row | 1987
(on its own line). If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use!scope=rowgroup
instead. This is needed for both tables.- OK.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:21, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! Year
becomes!scope=col | Year
. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use!scope=colgroup
instead. This is for the 4-division table.- I think this is what you want.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- You cannot only use bolding or a background color to indicate something. Use a symbol. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- User:MPGuy2824, when I added scope row, why did the second column get bolded?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:29, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- The header cell needs to be in its own separate line. i.e. move the University winner's name to a new line. This should fix the problem. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thx.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:36, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- The header cell needs to be in its own separate line. i.e. move the University winner's name to a new line. This should fix the problem. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- User:MPGuy2824, when I added scope row, why did the second column get bolded?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:29, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): The Herald, ~ Matthewrb Talk to me · Changes I've made 05:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because I still believe it's of Featured List quality. My co-nominator, The Herald, took time to address many of the issues since the last FLC. ~ Matthewrb Talk to me · Changes I've made 05:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Drive-by comments
- Since the list is about missions, the mission column should be made the primary one in the "Alphabetical mission types".
- That same table should be made sortable on par with the other tables in the list.
- Also, the tables that I checked didn't have table captions.
- In the cancelled missions table, Apollo 12 planning seems to be the same as the "As flown" data. What makes this a cancelled mission?
- That same table is missing row and column scope for the header cells. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Done. I added a note about Apollo 12, since it doesn't seem there was a formal designation change but rather a change in plans. ~ Matthewrb Talk to me · Changes I've made 04:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
In addition to MPGuy2824's comment above:
- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead. You have it on the alphabetical table but not the others. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 13:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Vanderwaalforces (talk) 07:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
The national symbols of Nigeria represent the country's identity, heritage, and values, reflecting its cultural diversity and historical journey. These symbols include the national flag, coat of arms, anthem, and pledge, as well as the national flower, animal, currency, etc. This list is intended to be part of the Developing Countries Wiki Contest, which I am participating in. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 07:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- MPGuy2824
- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead. - Do you need to put the previous National Bird at all?
- The scope for "National days" needs to be "rowgroup".
- The images in the table need alts.
- Most of the refs are missing archive links.
- Unless you can find some official source for this, you should remove the row about the National Dish. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:41, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Thank you so much for your feedback. Please can you make bullet 1 clearer for me, I couldn't quite understand that one. Heh, you literally read my mind for the national dish, I, for one, wanted to remove it initially, but I just thought I should hear from others. I'm taking that off and doing the other fixes you pointed out. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:47, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Edit the section which has the table. Right at the top of the code for the table you'll see a line "|+". Add the table caption after the two symbols. Hope that explains it. If my explanation isn't clear then try looking at a recent FL promotion with a table. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Thanks for explaining, I've fixed that and every other thing you pointed out at this time. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- I haven't checked the rest, but some archive links are still missing. Consider installing User:Lingzhi2/reviewsourcecheck-sb.js, at least temporarily. It shows that and other problems with references. (Once you install it, there will be a "Show ref check" in the tools section of any wikipage. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Thanks for suggesting that tool, it helped me figure out the missing ones. I have fixed them now. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- "calls upon Nigerians to stand".
- "where the country is considered a public matter with officials being elected." - needs a rewrite.
- "was re-adopted on 29 May 2024,"
- "colloquially called October First, " - can be eliminated from the sentence.
- "subsequent detention and death became symbols of the struggle for democracy" - according to the source's headline, Abiola became the symbol, not his detention or death.
- "military parades, religious services, and public speeches are common on this day." - Make this a separate sentence.
- wikilink "decimalisation".
- The scope for the National bird should be "row", not "rowgroup".
- The notes section of the Naira should be reduced IMO.
- "found abundantly in Nigeria's forests and on its riverbanks."
- That's all I got. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Thank you so much, I fixed all now except for I don't think the notes section of the Naira is too extensive. I hope you'd be okay with that. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Any updates on this one? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:04, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- To clarify my objection in the section below (SafariScribe's comments), I think you need to define the scope of this list somehow. It should be clear to a future editor whether a new symbol (whatever it is) should be a part of this particular list or not. Based on that definition, it will be clear whether to remove or keep the National Theatre. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Commenting on the completeness of this list, I'd say that let's take, for example, the National dish which I removed already, while not an officially declared national symbol, a President might just come tomorrow and declare it to be so, maybe not now. This also applies to any of those other symbols that some sources listed (which are not official national symbols yet). So, maybe indicating that the list might be expanded in the future would help?
- For the national theatre, like I said earlier, I am inclined to removing it because of several research I have done. I found two sources, this one at page 179, section "Official symbols", and this one at page 295, section 3.0. These two sources mention two more symbols which I will add to this list now, but none of them mentioned either the Seal of the President or the National Theatre as a national or official symbol. I, as a matter of fact, consider these sources more reliable than Legit.ng's list, because Legit.ng actually mentions the arm forces flag as a national symbol (while also mentioning the seal and the theatre), which is not exactly so, based on my current compilation and research. Legit is the only one that mentions the National Theatre as a symbol, while I found a source from a predatory journal which mentions the Seal of the President, but well, like I said, "predatory", I can't cite that in the first place. I'd be pinging @SafariScribe: in this regard because there is a clearer ground on removing the seal and the national theatre and adding the Constitution of Nigeria, National Identity Card, and the Nigerian Passport as national/official symbols. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:34, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Vanderwaalforces, if there is a consensus to remove them, then proceed. However, I have supported this list because it looks good to me and meets FL guidelines. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 17:48, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- To clarify my objection in the section below (SafariScribe's comments), I think you need to define the scope of this list somehow. It should be clear to a future editor whether a new symbol (whatever it is) should be a part of this particular list or not. Based on that definition, it will be clear whether to remove or keep the National Theatre. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Thanks for suggesting that tool, it helped me figure out the missing ones. I have fixed them now. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- I haven't checked the rest, but some archive links are still missing. Consider installing User:Lingzhi2/reviewsourcecheck-sb.js, at least temporarily. It shows that and other problems with references. (Once you install it, there will be a "Show ref check" in the tools section of any wikipage. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Thanks for explaining, I've fixed that and every other thing you pointed out at this time. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Edit the section which has the table. Right at the top of the code for the table you'll see a line "|+". Add the table caption after the two symbols. Hope that explains it. If my explanation isn't clear then try looking at a recent FL promotion with a table. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 Thank you so much for your feedback. Please can you make bullet 1 clearer for me, I couldn't quite understand that one. Heh, you literally read my mind for the national dish, I, for one, wanted to remove it initially, but I just thought I should hear from others. I'm taking that off and doing the other fixes you pointed out. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:47, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Drive by comments
[edit]- Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't see how Ref 1 is verifying this sentence- "The national symbols of Nigeria represent the country's identity, heritage, and values, reflecting its cultural diversity and historical journey."
- Author name is missing for Refs 11, 24, 26, 36, 40.
- Ref 2 has two authors. Adrianna Simwa is not mentioned in the citation.
- Author names for Ref 25 might need some change. There are 2 authors- Shehnaz Khan and Trish Adudu.
- Central Bank of Nigeria is wikilinked in Ref 38, but not in Refs 10 and 14. Nitro Absynthe (talk) 16:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Nitro Absynthe Thank you so much for the comments. I have fixed all these as of this time. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
SafariScribe
[edit]- Interesting!
The Naira symbol, ₦, is derived from the initial letter of Nigeria with a double stroke.
needs a source- Are you certain the symbols are complete? You seemed to be missing "The National Theatre"
- Also the "Seal of the Nigerian President": It was first used in 1979 during the regime of Shehu Shagari, and was not used from 1983 to 1999. The seal was then reinitiated in 1999. (Cited to this source)
- Thank you for your comments.
The sky is blue
for example, does not need a source, right? I'm not sureThe Naira symbol, ₦, is derived from the initial letter of Nigeria with a double stroke.
is something that needs a source because it is obvious, but I have a source I can cite for that. The National Theatre and the seal of the President are not "national symbol" per se. The source you mentioned is the only that claims that. For example, the seal of the Nigerian President is more or less a child of the coat of arms, so I'd rather call the coat of arms the national symbol, than the seal. I was actually going to mention the seal in the coat of arms notes BTW, but I think I later changed my mind. --Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:13, 20 July 2024 (UTC)- @Vanderwaalforces, when you want to respond to a comment like his, you may want to reply each review, that the reviewer mayn't have to check them. Sometimes general review like the one above doesn't necessarily give the reviewer reply to a certain comment. One of the best markup is "*:". Cheers. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 18:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments.
- The Seal and the theatre are national symbols, and I will like to see them in the list before concluding. Aside that, the rest of the article looks good.
- @SafariScribe: Thank you for your comments. I have addressed all these by now. --Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me. I am happy to support.Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 00:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Safari Scribe: I don't see why the seal of the president and the national arts theatre are there in this list at all. We wouldn't put the Taj Mahal in a similar list for India, or the Saint Basil's Cathedral for Russia, even though they are popular cultural symbols. In addition, the seal of the president is essentially the national Coat of arms. What stops us from adding the flag of the Nigerian Navy to this list? -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 I literally disputed SS, because I thought exactly the same thing you just said. But I later saw a source that claimed the Seal was a national symbol, but it was from a predatory journal I couldn’t cite. I definitely would not consider the Nigerian Navy’s flag as a national symbol.
- Correctly pinging @SafariScribe. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824, of course the Nigerian Navy flag cannot be considered a national symbol. According to this source, a national or official symbol is something that makes a country unique and identifies it among others. While I am certain that the National Theatre is a national symbol, I have some doubts about the Sea of the President. However, since it identifies the President who is the supreme authority in the country, it can be considered a symbol as well (official). For example, many bishops have their own coat of arms, which helps identify them, just as the Pope does. I have no objections if anyone disputes the Seal of the Nigerian President as a national symbol. @Vanderwaalforces, the source I cited herein contains comprehensive information about these national symbols, so I recommend it during source reviewing. Cheers! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 09:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @SafariScribe perhaps you’re not careful. The source you mentioned is one of the publications I cited already, while that source not only said “Here are some”, it also does not even mention the Seal of the Nigerian President nor the National Theatre as a symbol, at least, based on page 295. Like I said earlier, I found a source (which is not the one you mentioned) that mentioned the seal (not the national theatre) as a national symbol, but it is from a predatory journal and I couldn’t cite it. I am very inclined to revert back to my original version (without the seal and theatre), but let me hear from others. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Vanderwaalforces, provided that the Seal and National Theatre are properly sourced to a reliable source, I am good to go. If there is any argument about the Seal and Theatre, it should go to the talk page. Reverting to the original version may be disruptive as it was from a reviewer. Objections therefore should be a matter of whether the article meets the FL guidelines or not. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 10:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @SafariScribe perhaps you’re not careful. The source you mentioned is one of the publications I cited already, while that source not only said “Here are some”, it also does not even mention the Seal of the Nigerian President nor the National Theatre as a symbol, at least, based on page 295. Like I said earlier, I found a source (which is not the one you mentioned) that mentioned the seal (not the national theatre) as a national symbol, but it is from a predatory journal and I couldn’t cite it. I am very inclined to revert back to my original version (without the seal and theatre), but let me hear from others. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
The 4th nomination in the constituency series. I've improved the lead, added a history section, and converted the list into a table with more information than was present before. I've modelled it on similar FLs like Tripura and Mizoram. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- How are the constituencies formed? Why is there an enormous difference in size among them? Does Zambia have governance and representation issues because of this severe malapportionment?
- Would it make sense to list the Districts of Zambia covered in addition to the Province they're in?
- Why does Template:Zambian constituencies have a Sinjembela listed?
- I know this is a straightforward topic that might not have a ton of information, but the lead is still quite short and the table is just from a single source. Is there anything else that can be added to make this the best of Wikipedia? Reywas92Talk 15:01, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Reywas92, question: I am slightly new, but would that make it fail WP:CFORK? sorry if this is stupid 48JCL public (talk) 19:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure it's a cfork, but List of members of the National Assembly of Zambia (2021–2026) already has the names of constituencies, along with the incumbents, so there's some duplication there. This should have enough info to justify a separate page and a gold star. Reywas92Talk 14:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Formation of constituencies: Added info to the lead.
- I've added a district column to the table.
- Sinjembela is a former constituency. Since it would pass NGEO, I didn't remove it from the template, but moved it to its own section.
- I have an explanation for the disparity in constituencies, but it would be WP:OR, so I'm not adding it to the article. I'll provide my explanation here for folks who might be interested: The rule is that a constituency cannot cover more than a district. This wouldn't be a problem if there were 4 or 5 times the number of constituencies as districts, but Zambia has 116 districts and 156 constituencies. The highly populated districts cannot be divided into a lot of constituencies because of this. This was interesting to find out, so thanks for asking the question. I tried to look for studies about the disparity in constituency size, but came up with nothing, unfortunately.
- If there is any other information that you or someone else can think of that is relevant to the list, I'm happy to do the research and add to the lead. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Reywas92: Forgot to ping. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:04, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Reywas92, question: I am slightly new, but would that make it fail WP:CFORK? sorry if this is stupid 48JCL public (talk) 19:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Drive by comments
[edit]- Alt-text for File:Zambia National Assembly Building.jpg is missing.
- Infobox could be expanded. Information like voting system and number of seats, which are mentioned in Tripura and Mizoram, could be included here as well.
- Ref 1 and Ref 10 (
|archive-date=
) follows ymd date format, while the rest of the citations follow dmy date format. Nitro Absynthe (talk) 19:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking. Fixed all of these. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Nitro Absynthe: Forgot to ping. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments from Lapadite
- The content in the [a] note should be cited.
- As this is an international topic, the article should include the corresponding templates for the English variety and date format used. Lapadite (talk) 23:58, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Lapadite: Done both. Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Staraction's comments
[edit]- "The seat of the assembly is at the capital of the country, Lusaka and" -> "The seat of the assembly is at the capital of the country, Lusaka, and"
- "the Vice President, the Speaker and one of the deputy speakers" -> "the Vice President, the Speaker, and one of the deputy speakers" (this one is optional considering MOS:OXFORD
- Perhaps add alt text to the seal of Zambia within the Politics of Zambia template?
- Add caption to infobox image - what is that building?
- Link first-past-the-post, President in body
That's it from me. Nice work, @MPGuy2824 Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Staraction: Fixed all. Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Well done. Staraction (talk | contribs) 12:52, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Gonzo_fan2007 comments
[edit]- I know this is a pain, but the information in the "Name" column being centered while the "Province" and "District" columns are left-align isn't consistent. Choose one or the other.
- I feel like the image order is weird. I would recommend the Infobox and {{Politics of Zambia}} be place d consecutively in the lead, and then move the Location of Zambia and the Constituencies image to the "List" section
- On that topic, "List" seems like a weird section title. Why not just "Constituencies"?
The National Assembly of Zambia is the unicameral legislature of Zambia.
, the duplication of "Zambia" sounds bad. I think this is fine:The National Assembly is the unicameral legislature of Zambia.
- On that note, it would be nice to have some context for the country. Something like:
The National Assembly is the unicameral legislature of Zambia, a landlocked country at the crossroads of Central, Southern and East Africa.
(note, that text is from Zambia). Of them, 156 are elected
I thinkOf those
is the appropriate term here.every census, by the
comma isn't needed.
That's what I got, nice work! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:48, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Gonzo fan2007: Fixed all. The country's locator map was added to give some geographical context to the reader, but I think duplication in the text is useful. Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:25, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support nice work! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:27, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Image review
[edit]Excellent work.
- Zambia National Assembly Building.jpg has an appropriate CC tag and review.
- Coat of arms of Zambia.svg has an appropriate PD tag.
- Location Zambia AU Africa.svg has an appropriate PD tag. Following the comments above from Gonzo_fan2007, would be it be possible to locate this near the mention of Zambia's location?
- Zambian National Assembly constituencies.svg has an appropriate PD tag. The image lacks any key to show which constituency is which. If that would be too complicated, would be separate maps for each province showing the locations of the constituencies be an alternative?
- All images have ALT text (as noted by Nitro Absynthe above).
- Are there appropriate thumbnail images that could be used in the table as it is quite stark? simongraham (talk) 11:52, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): B3251(talk) 16:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Nominating in similar fashion to my previous nomination for List of cities in New Brunswick. Please let me know if I should expand upon or change anything and I'll be more than happy to do so. Thanks, reviewers! B3251(talk) 16:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- "are formed under the 1996 Municipal Act" => "are formed under the terms of the 1996 Municipal Act"
- "In order to label an urban municipality as a city in Manitoba" => "In order for an urban municipality in Manitoba to be labelled as a city"
- "the municipal governments of each city contains a mayor;" => "the municipal government of each city contains a mayor;"
- "the two largest cities has wards," =>"the two largest cities have wards,"
- "in both population and by land area" => "both in population and by land area"
- "which has 749,607 residents and spanning 461.78 square kilometres" => "which has 749,607 residents and spans 461.78 square kilometres"
- "The most recent incorporated city in the province was Morden," => "The most recent city to be incorporated in the province was Morden,"
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Verification check MrLinkinPark333
[edit]Prose
[edit]- "sixth largest by land area" - Needs an extra source to specify the territories as it's eighth overall. Stats Canada combines the provinces with the territories
- "Cities, towns and villages... minimum population of 7,500" - Needs page numbers (page 1 and page 27).
- "although Flin Flon, part of which is in the neighbouring province of Saskatchewan," - Stats Canada lists this as Flin Flon (Part) but does not specify the other part is in Saskatchewan.
- Manitoba's capital and largest city -> Manitoba's largest city (as Stats Canada doesn't specify that Winnipeg is the capital of Manitoba).
- the two largest cities has wards," -> two cities have wards (as the election source doesn't state population).
Table
[edit]- Citation #9 (MHS Resources: Manitoba Communities) doesn't mention any of the incorporation dates and can be removed. The source next to each date are sufficient enough for verification.
- The Regions need a citation.
- Citation needed for the note saying Flin Flon is in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.
- Pop. densities need a slight fix based on Stats Canada source: Flin Flon 376.1, Morden 609.6, Winkler 663.1
--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 Partially done: I've gone ahead and made some changes, but I could not find an extra source in land area. Please let me know what can be done about that. Regarding the regions, my assumption is that it would be WP:SKYBLUE because this can be verified just based on their geographic locations, and is what I'm guessing to be the reason why my also recently-nominated List of cities in New Brunswick passed without requiring citations for the counties each city belong to in there. B3251(talk) 23:12, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- In regards to land area, I think an extra source that specifically states the names of the 10 provinces could help. This could be placed adjacent to the Stats Canada source, as it says Canada, provinces and territories. For the regions, I'm not sure if it's pass common knowledge per "easily verified by a non-specialized map". This doesn't have regions while this uses different regions..Otherwise:
- The Government of Manitoba source also needs page 1 to show the 1996 Municipal Act..
- sixth largest by land area" -> might want to reword to "sixth largest province by land area" to avoid confusion.
- The Canadian Encyclopedia source can be reused for the note for Flin Flon in the table.
- The Population densities still need adjusting.
- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:52, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333:
Done B3251(talk) 16:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- You're almost there:
- The archived Government of Manitoba source from 2009 doesn't list Winkler and Morden as cities of Pembina Valley.
- The archived Government of Manitoba source uses Northern and Winnipeg Capital regions, instead of Northern Manitoba and Winnipeg Metropolitan. Perhaps an extra source with these names can be added here, especially since Winnipeg Capital was renamed Winnipeg Metropolitan.
- I'm not sure if the archived Government of Manitoba source is 100% clear that Selkrik is also in Winnipeg Capital. The two sources showing Interlake & Winnipeg Capital could help here.
- Still need a source about sixth largest province to show the ten provinces. This can be placed next to the Stats Canada source.
- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333
- The archived Government of Manitoba source from 2009 doesn't list Winkler and Morden as cities of Pembina Valley.
- If I were to guess for this situation, the map was most likely initially created before both cities were incorporated. I just used the Pembina Valley region map to clarify this because it shows both communities.
- Regarding the other sources, I'm having a difficult time with finding sources for specifically the names and I'm both confused and unsure of what to do. One moment please. B3251(talk) 14:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- @B3251: Have you addressed all of @MrLinkinPark333's concerns yet? Just following up, not pressuring or rushing you. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:47, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Hey man im josh, almost. I've had trouble with finding sources to address the following of MrLinkinPark333's concerns:
- Source for Manitoba being the sixth-largest province in land area, with a specific focus on the ten provinces.
- Source that specifically names certain regions exactly like their article counterparts: Winnipeg Metropolitan Region and Northern Manitoba.
- B3251(talk) 20:32, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- With the sixth-largest province in land area, yoo can keep the Statistics Canada source and add a source naming the ten provinces next to it. If you're having trouble finding sources using Winnipeg Metropolitan Region and Northern Manitoba, you could use the Government of Manitoba naming instead and pipe them to the article names. I have been in your situation before with having difficultly finding exact sources. It's not just you :) MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 thanks for the advice, will try to do soon B3251(talk) 10:26, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- With the sixth-largest province in land area, yoo can keep the Statistics Canada source and add a source naming the ten provinces next to it. If you're having trouble finding sources using Winnipeg Metropolitan Region and Northern Manitoba, you could use the Government of Manitoba naming instead and pipe them to the article names. I have been in your situation before with having difficultly finding exact sources. It's not just you :) MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Hey man im josh, almost. I've had trouble with finding sources to address the following of MrLinkinPark333's concerns:
- @B3251: Have you addressed all of @MrLinkinPark333's concerns yet? Just following up, not pressuring or rushing you. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:47, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333
- You're almost there:
- @MrLinkinPark333:
- In regards to land area, I think an extra source that specifically states the names of the 10 provinces could help. This could be placed adjacent to the Stats Canada source, as it says Canada, provinces and territories. For the regions, I'm not sure if it's pass common knowledge per "easily verified by a non-specialized map". This doesn't have regions while this uses different regions..Otherwise:
Hey man im josh
[edit]- Could you add a reference that helps verify note a? I understand you explain it in the lead, but it could be beneficial to name the references and add them to the note
- Consider changing 2021 Census of Population to 2021 Canadian census, so match the target article
- Can we come up with a better title than "total cities" for the row that sums up the stats?
- Consider adding a note, possibly in a note next to "Manitoba" in the bottom row of the table, that explains the total population includes xyz
- Ref 9 – Inconsistent when compared ot the other city website sources, move the entry for the "publisher" parameter to "website" for consistency among similar references
- Ref 10 – Publisher is unnecessary and adding it makes it inconsistent with ref 1.
- Ref 1 – Move the entry for publisher to the website or work parameter (based on Template:Cite web, this seems more appropriate)
That's what I've got for now. Please ping me when you reply. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh: Partially done: first three done, please let me know what you think. I have a couple of questions:
- Regarding your request to add a note explaining total population including 'xyz', do you mean that the total population of Manitoba includes the listed cities?
- Ref 9 can be replaced with news sources such as 1 / 2 (same agency). Let me know if you think this would be preferable.
- I'll get everything else done once I hear back just for extra clarity. Thanks! B3251(talk) 17:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @B3251: Sorry, I had a lot of pings and I missed a few I needed to respond to. As for the point of clarification, I was suggesting a note to clarify where the rest of the total, not including the listed cities, comes from. For ref 9, the source itself isn't the issue, it's that you used publisher, which default to non-italicized text, whereas your other citations to city websites used the website/work parameter, which defaults to italicized. I made the change myself though, which means the references to City of X are now consistently italicized. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:56, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh Hi josh, thanks for clarifying for me and also making that adjustment. Regarding the clarification note for Manitoba's total population, would you consider it acceptable for the note to state that the rest of the population comes from Manitoba's other municipalities etc? Thanks, B3251(talk) 16:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah that's fine @B3251. I just want a note that answers the inevitable question of "where's the rest of that population number come from?" Hey man im josh (talk) 18:45, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @B3251 as a follow up. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh Sorry, I haven't gotten around to making updates. I'll try finishing this tomorrow. B3251(talk) 13:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh Sorry for being late in notifying you, but I did finish this soon after I made the comment. B3251(talk) 14:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:00, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh Sorry for being late in notifying you, but I did finish this soon after I made the comment. B3251(talk) 14:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh Sorry, I haven't gotten around to making updates. I'll try finishing this tomorrow. B3251(talk) 13:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @B3251 as a follow up. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah that's fine @B3251. I just want a note that answers the inevitable question of "where's the rest of that population number come from?" Hey man im josh (talk) 18:45, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh Hi josh, thanks for clarifying for me and also making that adjustment. Regarding the clarification note for Manitoba's total population, would you consider it acceptable for the note to state that the rest of the population comes from Manitoba's other municipalities etc? Thanks, B3251(talk) 16:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- @B3251: Sorry, I had a lot of pings and I missed a few I needed to respond to. As for the point of clarification, I was suggesting a note to clarify where the rest of the total, not including the listed cities, comes from. For ref 9, the source itself isn't the issue, it's that you used publisher, which default to non-italicized text, whereas your other citations to city websites used the website/work parameter, which defaults to italicized. I made the change myself though, which means the references to City of X are now consistently italicized. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:56, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 02:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Additional background context for those unfamiliar with subject matter
| ||
---|---|---|
Imagine traveling back 200 years in time. If you had done so to tell a young northern German prince that he would become the father-in-law of Europe, he probably would have said you were being nonsensical. After all, this German prince, whose parents were only distantly related to European royalty, came from a simple background. However, life had its surprises for this German prince. An extremely polemic debate arose over who would eventually rule his homeland and nearby Denmark. This German prince happened to have a wife with close family connections to Danish royalty. Consequently, with the support of multiple European nations, this prince was chosen to be the next king of Denmark. And when the time came in 1863, he and his wife became King Christian IX and Queen Louise. Nevertheless, it was not enough for Christian and his eldest son to secure their place on the Danish throne (especially in the eyes of Louise). First, Christian’s eldest daughter married the most eligible bachelor in all of Britain. Second, Greece needed a new king because they had shown the door to their last one. As a result, the Greeks victoriously voted to install Christian’s second son on their throne. Third, Christian’s second daughter married the most eligible bachelor in all of Russia. Fourth, Christian’s youngest daughter married the throneless heir of the German Kingdom of Hanover. Their shared bond was that both of their families had lost territory at the hands of an even stronger German kingdom. And finally, Christian’s youngest son spent his life sailing the seas with a French princess by his side. More than a century after Christian’s death, the story continues. Like an exponential function in mathematics, his grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and further progeny have increased the number of his descendants more quickly with each passing generation. These descendants have wed into royalty all around Europe. Because of this, six of the ten current heirs to European thrones can claim Christian IX as their ancestor! Can you guess which ones?
|
This list on Christian IX’s descendants helps to tell the story of a Danish king, his queen, his children, his grandchildren, and his great-grandchildren. I will note that this list was vetted both at Articles for creation and at Did you know.
This nomination is significant for various reasons. Personally, this is my first attempt to create a featured list on Wikipedia, and its success would demonstrate that I am capable of producing exemplary content. Second, I note that at the time of this nomination, only 10 royalty-related lists, and none on descendants of individuals, are of featured status. I hope that this article can serve as a model to all Wikipedia editors of what a great royal and genealogical list can look like. Finally, and above all, I hope to show a general audience that there is far more to (European) royalty than just the House of Windsor! Everyone is welcome to give feedback to make these goals a reality!
Thank you, AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 02:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments by Borsoka
[edit]Reading through the list and its sources, I am not convinced that it is fully in line with Wikipedia:Notability, and I think its subject is not verified by a reliable source. Borsoka (talk) 03:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, its DYK was held for a very long time, and I wasn't entirely sure it passed WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:NOTGENEALOGY. — 48JCL 12:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Very similar concerns were raised at the Did you know nomination. I responded to this inquiry by noting that Aronson 2000 and Lerche and Mandal 2003 established notability. The objector then conceded the point (in my eyes). Both of the aforementioned sources (albeit the 2020 version of Aronson's text) are also listed in the "Further reading" section of this article.
- That being said, I will not object if the consensus of this discussion is to merge or delete this stand-alone list. If so, I ask that the tables be merged into the "Issue" (or corresponding) sections of the articles on Christian IX and his children. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 16:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank your for the links. I am not sure that works written by Theo Aronson are reliable sources. Miranda Carter did not write of Christian's descendants, but of three cousins who ruled three great powers during WWI. Lerche and Mandal do not seem to be historians. Borsoka (talk) 02:14, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
(unindenting to ensure collapse template works properly) So that my thought process in writing the article is clear both to you and to everyone else commenting, I will qualify the notability of the subject matter further:
Detailed explanation of (potential) reliability of Further reading texts
|
---|
|
Although I personally believe these backgrounds on the authors sufficiently qualify the topic for a Wikipedia article, I will leave it to this page's consensus to see if this is truly the case. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 17:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- With these sources, surely these should replace the "Royal Family Tree" sources (which appear to be SPS) could be replaced, right? I am still not going to warrant an oppose, but I would suggest withdrawal, there is a lot of work that could be done. 48JCL public (talk) 19:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have removed all of the self-published sources in the article that I could find, and I have replaced the citations with references to more reliable sources. If I missed a source and/or I should still use the Further reading texts more exhaustively in the article, please let me know. Also, with respect to WP:NOTDATABASE, the only criterion I could realistically see being used against this nomination is #3, as creative works, song lyrics, and software updates are not listed in this article. To make all of the lifespan information encyclopedically relevant, I have written prose that accompanies each table elaborating on the family life of Christian/Louise and the families of their children. Please let me know if that prose should be more comprehensive. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 00:07, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
48JCL
[edit]- Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding
!scope=row
to each primary cell, e.g.|[[Name]]
becomes!scope=row |[[Name]]
. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use!scope=rowgroup
instead. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions.
- All "primary" columns in the tables have been defined. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 16:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Adding a minor note on to this- the row and col scopes by default bold the text in those headers, so since you did so as well right now they're double-bolded, which should be fixed. --PresN 13:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for noting this. I have removed the excess bolding both in the table headers and elsewhere in the article. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 01:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Adding a minor note on to this- the row and col scopes by default bold the text in those headers, so since you did so as well right now they're double-bolded, which should be fixed. --PresN 13:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- All "primary" columns in the tables have been defined. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 16:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
I don't think a list should have "This article describes the children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren of Christian and Louise." at the end of the list
- @48JCL: Could you please suggest how this sentence should be replaced? Per WP:SALLEAD, the inclusion criteria of a stand-alone list should make a direct statement about the inclusion criteria. This is the purpose of the text you quoted. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 16:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have rewritten that sentence to attempt to make the inclusion criteria as explicit as possible without actively self-referencing the article. Please let me know if I should further modify the text. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 23:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Issue with sources
I am noticing Blogspot and Wordpress being cited. What makes them reliable? More to come. 48JCL 12:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have replaced the Blogspot and WordPress sources. That being said, my rationale for including them was that the specific authors appeared to have professional credentials in their field. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 16:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, but that does not exactly make it reliable, still being a SPS. I'm still not sure whether or not this article should be supported, but thanks for addressing my concerns. 48JCL 17:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Dylan620
[edit]Hi Andrew – I've just started working on a review that will focus primarily on prose and images, and should be done by the end of the day Monday at the latest. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 23:38, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- A quick update: while I have been making quite a bit of progress with this review, I've unfortunately been slowed down by real-life stuff, so I'm running a bit behind schedule. I get out of work fairly early tomorrow, so knock on wood, I should be able to finish in the next 24 hours or so. I do have a few preliminary comments:
- File:Princess Dagmar of Denmark.jpg – the source URL provides a completely different image
- File:Louise Princess Royal.jpg – the source just circles back to the ENWP page for the upload
- File:Princess Princess Maria of Greece and Denmark with her parents and siblinsg.jpg – uploader partial-blocked from the article and draft namespaces for copyright violations
- File:GustavDenmark.jpg – uploader indefinitely site-blocked for copyright violations
- Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 23:42, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Welp, I thought I was nearly finished, and then I realized I would have to look through a 119-page PDF to verify sourcing for one of the images, which is missing its page number on the Commons upload page. I recall seeing at least a couple other similar cases elsewhere in the listicle. Unfortunately, that means this review is going to take quite a bit longer than I had anticipated. I'm going to try to complete it within the next five to seven days – please accept my apologies. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 23:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your work so far in reviewing the images, Dylan. Please let me know when you have completed your review. In the meantime, I have made the following changes:
- I have replaced the portrait of Dagmar with an image of the coat of arms of Denmark at the time she died (to be consistent with the entries on other royals with no available portrait).
- I have replaced the portrait of Louise with the one used in her article's lede infobox.
- I have removed the portrait of George I's family altogether. In any case, his youngest son, Christopher, was not yet born when the image was taken.
- I have likewise replaced the portrait of Gustav with an image of the coat of arms of Denmark at the time he died. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 03:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi again Andrew – I've finally finished the review, and I'm sorry it took so long. This was probably the most challenging image review I've done since I started tackling them earlier this year, since I'm not super familiar with European public domain laws and needed to give myself something of a crash course. The majority of images check out for licensing and sourcing. I took it upon myself to add missing US public domain tags on Commons in cases where I felt comfortable doing so (see my edits there). A few images are sourced to offline refs, which I'm choosing to accept in good faith. However, there are some issues:
- I am pleased that every image has alt text. However, in the slot where Gustav's portrait was replaced with the coat of arms of Denmark, the old alt text describing Gustav is still being used.
- On that note, is a "portrait of a coat of arms" really a portrait? This is super nitpicky, but the portrait article states that a portrait is a painting, photograph, sculpture, or other artistic representation of a person, in which the face is always predominant. Every coat of arms usage here has alt text that describes the coat as a portrait.
- File:Christian IX of Denmark and family 1862.jpg – uploader partially blocked on ENWP from article and draft spaces. (Coincidentally, this is the same user who uploaded the now-removed photo of George I's family.) This image seems to be an alternate version of File:Christian IX Denmark and family 1862.jpg, which, per that file's description page, was apparently part of a legal dispute between the NPG and the WMF. Maybe I'm worrying too much, but I would be wary of including either image here.
- File:Family Photo.jpg – The source URL is dead. There is an archived link available, but it's not loading the images on my end.
- File:Alexander russia.jpg – The source URL is dead.
- File:Ernstaugusthannover.jpg – Uploader indefinitely site-blocked from ENWP for copyright violations. (This is the same user who uploaded the now-removed photo of Gustav.)
- File:Xenia, russian grand duchess.jpg – The source URL does not contain this image.
- I am pleased that every image has alt text. However, in the slot where Gustav's portrait was replaced with the coat of arms of Denmark, the old alt text describing Gustav is still being used.
- The prose is good overall, but I do have a few queries/suggested adjustments:
- Moreover, he nearly abdicated... – I don't think the "moreover" is needed here; indeed, this could probably be merged with the previous sentence by using a semicolon.
- Moreover, through her charity work... – I don't think the "moreover" is needed here.
- Is there anything about Valdemar that could be added to the second paragraph of §Children?
- They then married in October 1866 – "Then" feels extraneous here.
- Moreover, both Nicholas and Michael, along with Nicholas's five children, were killed during the Russian Revolution. – I think this would read more smoothly as "Nicholas, Michael, and the former's five children were killed during the Russian Revolution."
- Quite impressive work overall, Andrew. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 03:14, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your work so far in reviewing the images, Dylan. Please let me know when you have completed your review. In the meantime, I have made the following changes:
- Welp, I thought I was nearly finished, and then I realized I would have to look through a 119-page PDF to verify sourcing for one of the images, which is missing its page number on the Commons upload page. I recall seeing at least a couple other similar cases elsewhere in the listicle. Unfortunately, that means this review is going to take quite a bit longer than I had anticipated. I'm going to try to complete it within the next five to seven days – please accept my apologies. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 23:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Robbiegibbons (talk) 00:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
I think it's a fairly comprehensive list of the best-documented Eureka Stockade rebels Robbiegibbons (talk) 00:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Noting that this nomination was not transcluded to WP:FLC until now. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Charles Ross is a link to a disambiguation page Dajasj (talk) 19:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Drive-by comment
[edit]- Per MOS:THISISALIST, the article should not start with "This is a list..." -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments from Steelkamp
[edit]Oppose. This list is heavily reliant on www.eurekapedia.org. That website is written by just two people, with no indication of fact checking or quality control by someone else like what would happen in a newspaper or a non self-published book. As a list relating to history, I would expect to see more scholarly sources. Steelkamp (talk) 11:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Using a user-submitted wiki as a source is a deal-breaker, yeah, and if there isn't some movement on this soon I'm going to close the nomination. @Robbiegibbons: do you intend on addressing this concern? --PresN 13:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @PresN and @Steelkamp, I would like to disagree on this issue. Eurekapedia seems to be written by two domain experts, works by both of them have been cited in this article. Also, while looking through some of the pages there, they seem to be reliable and have proper citations. I'm a little busy at this time, so I can't check the h-indices or peer reviews of the two writers' works, but I think academia would also have found them reliable sources. Also, just because a site uses MediaWiki, that doesn't mean it is unreliable and user generated. See the discussion at the FAC for Sher Shah Suri, where Banglapedia is considered a reliable source as it has been compiled by scholars. I think we can allow this here, though I could be wrong as well. Please let me know what you think. Cheers Matarisvan (talk) 08:00, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- You could convince me to rescind my oppose by showing that the authors of that source meet the requirements at WP:EXPERTSPS, i.e.: "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." Steelkamp (talk) 09:03, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, looking closer, it does appear to basically be a selfpub source by Clare Gervasoni & Dorothy Wickham, and not publicly editable, which clears that up, but a) the references should then have the author's name(s), and b) they need to be shown to meet EXPERTSPS, like Steelkamp said - right now the only used source that has them as authors is The Eureka Encyclopedia, which appears to also be a self-published work. It's possible they are, I'd just like to see some proof. --PresN 15:01, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @PresN and @Steelkamp, Gervasoni & Wickham seem to run the Ballarat Heritage Service and its associated publishing arm, the latter is notable enough to have its own Wikipedia article. The authors seem to have okish h-indices for a subject this niche, I'll have to check academic reviews of their books or papers published in notable journals to further confirm this. What further proof would be required for establishing reliability? Matarisvan (talk) 14:18, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I've been thinking about this. The Eurekapedia source has marginal reliability at best. It's still a self published source, even if written by experts. I would find that ok if it is used to source minor parts of the whole list, but it is being used to source large parts of this list. For that reason, my oppose still stands. Steelkamp (talk) 08:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @PresN and @Steelkamp, Gervasoni & Wickham seem to run the Ballarat Heritage Service and its associated publishing arm, the latter is notable enough to have its own Wikipedia article. The authors seem to have okish h-indices for a subject this niche, I'll have to check academic reviews of their books or papers published in notable journals to further confirm this. What further proof would be required for establishing reliability? Matarisvan (talk) 14:18, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, looking closer, it does appear to basically be a selfpub source by Clare Gervasoni & Dorothy Wickham, and not publicly editable, which clears that up, but a) the references should then have the author's name(s), and b) they need to be shown to meet EXPERTSPS, like Steelkamp said - right now the only used source that has them as authors is The Eureka Encyclopedia, which appears to also be a self-published work. It's possible they are, I'd just like to see some proof. --PresN 15:01, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- You could convince me to rescind my oppose by showing that the authors of that source meet the requirements at WP:EXPERTSPS, i.e.: "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." Steelkamp (talk) 09:03, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @PresN and @Steelkamp, I would like to disagree on this issue. Eurekapedia seems to be written by two domain experts, works by both of them have been cited in this article. Also, while looking through some of the pages there, they seem to be reliable and have proper citations. I'm a little busy at this time, so I can't check the h-indices or peer reviews of the two writers' works, but I think academia would also have found them reliable sources. Also, just because a site uses MediaWiki, that doesn't mean it is unreliable and user generated. See the discussion at the FAC for Sher Shah Suri, where Banglapedia is considered a reliable source as it has been compiled by scholars. I think we can allow this here, though I could be wrong as well. Please let me know what you think. Cheers Matarisvan (talk) 08:00, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Gonzo_fan2007
[edit]- Oppose as an unnecessary content fork of Battle of the Eureka Stockade. Only five of the entries in the list are notable enough for their own Wikipedia articles. This could easily be added to the Battle article, possibly with a summary table and some brief mentions of key aspects of the defenders. Doesn't appear notable or relevant enough for a standalone list. All of this also goes for List of detainees at the Eureka Stockade. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Magentic Manifestations (talk) 16:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC) and The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
This is my first featured list nomination and I am nominating this post improving the article. This is a list of the national symbols of India. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 16:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Dajasj
Thanks for working on the list and nominating it! Some first thoughts:
- Have a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Data tables tutorial. Let me know if you have any questions!
- "Adopted" column is not really sortable (while other columns have the option to sort but are not really meant to be sorted)
- Random Capital letter in "The first two verses of the song were adopted as the National Song of India On 24 January 1950 by the Constituent Assembly of India."
- Try to minimise the text in the Notes column. Focus on what is relevant for it as national symbol. I think it is also good for accessibility if you don't change font size.
- I'm missing context for what is up with Hockey. Dajasj (talk) 16:58, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review and comments. I have addressed the comments (MOS, sorting, caps and font size) except the notes part, which I will work on trimming it to keep it relevant.
- For the last point, Hockey is listed as a national game in government websites, text books etc. but as per an official note, there is no declared national game. Not sure whether to omit this altogether or keep it with mentioning the same in comments. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 18:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Kavyansh
I appreciate you nominating the list and I respect the efforts that must have been made to improve the list to this extent. That being said, I have a few fundamental issues with this nomination. The official Nation Portal of India lists only these 8 national symbols. Our list has 21 official symbols. Even if me make an exception for the "official name", the other alleged national symbols are being cited by an archived version of this site. It is a site hosted by "International Institute of Health and Hygiene,New Delhi" and sponsored by "Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change Govt of India". Does that make it an official site of the Government of India (as claimed in the citation)? For the other alleged national symbols, our article cites various news articles like TOI or HT. While these news articles do confirm the claim, wouldn't it be much better to cite an official source? For example, rather than this news article, why not directly cite this official declaration. But that leads me to the next question: if there are actual official symbols not specified in the Nation Portal of India website, what steps have we taken to ensure that the list is comprehensive? It is claimed by a HT article that Ganga is the national river of India. I am not able to find an official reliable source for it! The closest I can find is this audit report from the CAG, which again isn't an official declaration. So what criteria are we exactly using to determine which symbol gets to be in this list and which doesn't? How exactly are we justifying keeping Hockey as the National game? – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 19:26, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Kavyansh.Singh Thanks for the comments. I understand that your question broadly focuses on the comprehensiveness of the symbols and the verifiability of the same.
- As there is no clear definition of what constitutes a official/national symbol (either officially or as an agreed consensus in WP), I am afraid that the list can neither be comprehensive nor be exhaustive. The article covers symbols that are generally regarded as official/national symbols as per various given sources. For the question of whether these 21 symbols are verifiable as official, let us classify into three categories for the discussion at hand.
- a. Fifteen symbols with official sources:
- Eleven symbols, which are quoted as such directly in the official source: Official name and the nine symbols (motto is part of the emblem, described in detail in the same site) listed here officially are clear. National days are mentioned in the same official site here. These are fairly straightforward.
- Four symbols, where official press releases available. These have official sources, so verifiability should not be a concern. (Aquatic Animal: Official source by the Ministry of Environment here, Heritage animal: Official press release by the Ministry of Environment here, River: Apart from news sources, official press release from PMO here and official website of NMCG, Ministry of Jal Shakti also states so here, Microbe: Official press release by the Ministry of Environment here)
- b. Four symbols, where Government affiliated sources and other citations are available. As there are multiple government affiliated sources and independent sources backing the same information, they are verifiable plus there are no sources stating anything to the contrary.
- Pledge: Apart from the general news sources, it is mentioned as such in Government sources (From Ministry of Education here, other here) and in a discussion in Parliament as a pledge (here).
- Tree and Fruit: These are quoted here in a site maintained by ENVIS, a government organization functioning under the Ministry of Environment. While not officially the Government website, it is affiliated to the Government. There are multiple other government affiliated sources/court mentions (For fruit: here, here, here and for tree: here, here, here, here) + independent news sources.
- Reptile: Apart from the general news sources, it is mentioned as such in Government exams(here), question papers (here), text books (here) and third party sources (here)
- c. Two symbols, with contradictory sources.
- Flower: ENVIS source here and other government affiliated source here + was part of the official symbols here. It was not mentioned as a national flower in an RTI query in 2017 and in Parliament in 2019 (here), but was part of the official website till 2021, referenced as such in official statements in 2019 (here) and by ministers in 2022 (here, here)
- Game: As I had mentioned in the previous revert, I am not sure whether to keep hockey or not. An RTI reply in 2012 said that officially there is no national game here and it was reiterated in 2020 here. While the ENVIS source still lists it here.
- For both the above cases, can remove/keep with a note based on consensus here.
- I have tried to address the points raised in your queries. Please do let me know if you have further comments/clarification on the same. Thanks again! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 10:44, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Apologies for the delayed response. I understand that it is wrong to hold our editors accountable for information that is simply not available or unclear, but I am still not entirely convinced. In the lead of the list (which I believe needs to be more elaborate), we claim, "The Government of India has designated official national symbols that represent the Republic of India." However, the instances here unfortunately show that there are symbols that are not officially designated. As things stand, if the list can neither be comprehensive nor exhaustive, then we need to set clear criteria for what is to be included and what is not. In my opinion, that criteria should be based on what reliable official sources say. Alternatively, given the lack of available information, we can set the criteria based on the opinions of the major contributors to this list or through a talk page discussion (RfC if required). I won't oppose the nomination merely for this reason, but in my opinion, government exam question papers, privately published grade 6 textbooks, and even sites affiliated with the government aren't entirely reliable for such extraordinary claims. As a side note, I have filled a RTI application regarding this awaiting response from the Ministry of Home Affairs. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Kavyansh.Singh I do agree with your point on the criteria and I am open to take it to a discussion as there seems to be no precedent or agreement on what is consisted as a national symbol (apart from these, there are symbols which are termed as national announced by private organizations as well!). If your RTI gets a revert, nothing like it as it will probably help clarify things from the official perspective. Then the question is whether we split into two sections or keep only the official symbols recognised. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 13:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Apologies for the delayed response. I understand that it is wrong to hold our editors accountable for information that is simply not available or unclear, but I am still not entirely convinced. In the lead of the list (which I believe needs to be more elaborate), we claim, "The Government of India has designated official national symbols that represent the Republic of India." However, the instances here unfortunately show that there are symbols that are not officially designated. As things stand, if the list can neither be comprehensive nor exhaustive, then we need to set clear criteria for what is to be included and what is not. In my opinion, that criteria should be based on what reliable official sources say. Alternatively, given the lack of available information, we can set the criteria based on the opinions of the major contributors to this list or through a talk page discussion (RfC if required). I won't oppose the nomination merely for this reason, but in my opinion, government exam question papers, privately published grade 6 textbooks, and even sites affiliated with the government aren't entirely reliable for such extraordinary claims. As a side note, I have filled a RTI application regarding this awaiting response from the Ministry of Home Affairs. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead. - Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 13:37, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- @PresN Thanks for the comment. Have addressed the same! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 13:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Brindille1 (talk) 03:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm following up my previous MLS featured lists (List of New England Revolution seasons, List of New England Revolution managers) with a list about the defunct club Chivas USA. This poorly-run team existed for ten unsuccessful seasons. I've created and improved this list, and believe it now meets the Featured List criteria. Brindille1 (talk) 03:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
MrLinkinPark333
[edit]- Verification check (Table):
- As Chivas competed from 2005-2014, the page range for the conference & overall positions should be 41-50, not 32-59.
- For 2009, they were overall 5th not 6th. As they were tied with Chicago in points, they'd be ranked higher as they had more wins per MLS.
- Chivas's USOC appearances is on page 179, not 178.
- I see instances of both R3 (2006) and Round of 16 for the USOC. Only one of these should be used for consistency. MLS uses third round instead of Round of 16. Looking at links like 2006 U.S. Open Cup, third round is used. I think all of Ro16 should be switched to R3.
- 2005 USOC was R4.
- 2013 USOC was also R4.
- 2005 would need a source to show Chivas did not enter any Continental competitions, instead of not qualifying.
- The attendance is blank at FBRef. It used to be there per Google search. However, there is no archived copy of the Chivas Stats page at FBref. I also checked individual seasons at FBref and the attendance is blank, such as 2005.
- 2008 top goalscorer needs the 2008 FBRef source to show Razov was tied for first. The overall Chivas source at FBRef only shows Eskandarian and Kljestan due to lack of space.
- Needs a source for the nationalities of the top goalscorers. Otherwise, the flags can be removed.
- Verification check (Prose):
- "Chivas USA participated in the annual U.S. Open Cup tournament organized by the United States Soccer Federation" - ESPN doesn't specifically mention Chivas but verifies the rest of the sentence. MLS 2024 could be reused here to show Chivas's participation while keeping the ESPN source for the rest of the sentence.
- "MLS regular season typically runs from February to October" - MLS doesn't say the regular season doesn't alway ends in October. Don't think typically is needed here.
- " which was a postseason tournament that culminates in the MLS Cup" - is a postseason tournament (as it's still being held per the 2023 MLS + Washington Post sources)
- "annual international competition between league and cup champions in North America, Central America, and the Caribbean." - not seeing the bolded part in Los Angeles Daily News for Champions League. Maybe rephrase to between teams.
- "a new expansion team in Los Angeles was announced, which eventually became Los Angeles FC." - needs a bit of trimming to avoid copying/close paraphrasing as the sentence looks similar to The Athletic.
- Citations comments:
- The Athletic needs an access-date.
- Typos in publication names: The New York Time, Los Angelas Daily News. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:43, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 Thank you for the very thorough review. I've updated the article to fix the issues you've raised, with a couple notes:
- - "For 2009, they were overall 5th not 6th". The tie-breakers were different in 09, I've added a better citation for overall standings which should clarify any ambiguities
- - For R3 vs R16, I refer to these rounds the way they're referred to in the source. Renaming R16 to R3 would be incorrect, as the R16 isn't always the third round (see 2013 where the fourth round is the round of 16).
- - For the 2005 continental competition, I switched this to a "DNQ". I've not found a source indicating that the team could've entered the tournament but chose not to. Brindille1 (talk) 04:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- The above points have been resolved apart from the following:
- In regards to Round 3, MLS page 179 only uses Round 3. Therefore, any usages of Round of 16 for the USOC need extra sources.
- 2012 attendance is linking to the wrong source. Should be this one.
- I just noticed that Soccerway doesn't verify that Ante Razov was the top overall goalscorer across all seasons with 31 goals. The link only provides details for the individual season.
- "announced a new expansion team that would play in Los Angeles, which would eventually become Los Angeles FC" - still needs reworking to pass WP:LIMITED.
- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 I've addressed these issues. For the Soccerway source, it contains a list of all league goals by player for each Chivas season- concluding the total number of goals falls under WP:CALC. Brindille1 (talk) 14:22, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 Reworded that sentence. Re: Razov's goals, good find. Soccerway seems to be wrong here. I've cited MLS's pages instead which (a) show he's the all-time leading scorer for the club and (b) show that he has 30 regular-season goals. Brindille1 (talk) 03:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Thank you for the fixes, especially with the rewording of that one sentence. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 04:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 Reworded that sentence. Re: Razov's goals, good find. Soccerway seems to be wrong here. I've cited MLS's pages instead which (a) show he's the all-time leading scorer for the club and (b) show that he has 30 regular-season goals. Brindille1 (talk) 03:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333 I've addressed these issues. For the Soccerway source, it contains a list of all league goals by player for each Chivas season- concluding the total number of goals falls under WP:CALC. Brindille1 (talk) 14:22, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- The above points have been resolved apart from the following:
Comments
[edit]- Tiny lead image could be made much larger. I suggest upright=1.4
- "from 2005 until folding after the 2014 season" => "from 2005 until it folded after the 2014 season"
- "which was a postseason tournament that culminates in the MLS Cup" => "a postseason tournament that culminates in the MLS Cup"
- "which is an annual international competition between league and cup champions in North America" => "an annual international competition between league and cup champions in North America"
- "The club's 2014 season set a record-low attendance for the league" => "The club's 2014 season set a record-low attendance level for the league"
- "It was named the Champions' Cup until 2008" - this needs a full stop.
- Looks a but odd to have Razov centred in the total row when all the other goalscorers are left-aligned
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude Thanks for the review. I've updated the article accordingly. Brindille1 (talk) 04:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Gonzo_fan2007
[edit]- USOC should use {{abbrlink}}.
- I have some concerns about the key:
- First off, "MLS", "CCL" and "SL" don't appear in the table at all. They should be removed from the key, as not relevant (specifically, instead of using the acronyms you spelt them out in the table).
- Consider using the horizontal key found in NFL seasons lists for position placing (e.g. List of Green Bay Packers seasons)
- In the key to cup record, most of those aren't found in the table (I know they could possibly be in the future), but why not just use {{abbr}} and {{abbrlink}} for all these? You already use these templates in the table for some abbreviations, why not these?
- All of these accomplish something super beneficial to the reader: they get rid of a bunch superfluous info that is (on my screen) almost the same length as the table (the key info the reader wants).
- You use {{sfnp}} but then have these citations grouped in the same section as other direct citations. Recommend splitting "References" into sub-sections. An example of this can be found at List of Green Bay Packers team records.
Brindille1, please ping me when you have responded. Nice work! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:08, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hm, looks like @Brindille1 last edited on July 30th. Hopefully they'll be back to address the feedback provided here soon. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:11, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hey, I plan on responding to feedback, but my laptop has died and I am waiting on my replacement which will arrive in a few days. Apologies for the delay. Brindille1 (talk) 02:50, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Gonzo fan2007, I've updated the list according to your feedback. The only item I did not address directly was the suggestion of the horizontal key. However, I reformatted the columns in the "Key" section, and I think this makes better use of the space. Thanks for the feedback and apologies for the delay in my response! Brindille1 (talk) 02:09, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support looks good to me! Nice work. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:29, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator: – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 17:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list, now that I've secured three Supports for my FLC of the Linda Lindas discography. Feel free to leave any comments if you don't think this is ready, but I believe it is. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) (ping me!) 17:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
NØ
[edit]- "The Linda Lindas have recorded 17 songs for album or EP releases, 7 songs as singles, and 5 songs outside albums, totaling 29 songs. Among the 29 songs, 7 of them are covers, and most were produced by Carlos de la Garza, the father of band members Lucia and Mila." - Exact counts like this require a secondary source; we're not allowed to just add a count from our in-wiki table since it could be incomplete. Either way, these numbers will keep on changing and would be a pain to maintain, so I suggest removing them.
- "The band started out as a cover band, playing music from multiple bands such as Le Tigre and the Go-Go's, whose "Tonite" they later covered." - I am a bit confused by the structure of the lead currently. The first paragraph seems to go into a summary of their overall career, and in the second paragraph it is back to describing how they started out?
- You should add some information about the musical genres and lyrical themes explored on the first album. Overall, the lead could deal with some restructuring.--NØ 12:04, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: what do you think now? I've restructured the lead and included info on genres and themes. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) (ping me!) 00:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Looks superb now. Kudos on the quick improvements!--NØ 02:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: what do you think now? I've restructured the lead and included info on genres and themes. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) (ping me!) 00:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Lead image could be made larger
- "started out as a cover band, playing music from multiple bands such as Le Tigre and the Go-Go's, whose "Tonite" they later covered" - this reads a bit weirdly - they started out as a band covering the likes of the Go-Gos, whom they covered later? Might be worth adding a little more context to their covering the Go-Gos "later"
- Also, the word "multiple" isn't needed
- "the Linda Lindas' namesake" - I would change this to something like "for which the band was named"
- "The album genre has been classified" => "The album's genre has been classified"
- ""Racist, Sexist Boy" has commonly been compared to riot grrrl sound" => ""Racist, Sexist Boy" has often been compared to the riot grrrl sound"
- "Their second album, No Obligation, is set to release in 2024" => "Their second album, No Obligation, is set to be released in 2024"
- Songwriter(s) column sorts on forename. It should sort on surname
- Song and album titles starting with "The" should sort based on the next word
- Some of the image captions need sources that the song in question is a cover of the band named
- "The Linda Lindas remixed "The News" by Paramore for a remix album entitled Re: This Is Why." - if they simply remixed the original song, this doesn't come under the usual definition of a song they "recorded" so I don't believe it belongs on this list -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Done; implemented all of your suggestions, thanks! Anything else? – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) (ping me!) 17:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Source review
[edit]I'll do a source review and add in any general comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:20, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
@The Sharpest Lives: comments below. Feel free to challenge. I reserve the right to spot something later! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Source review
- Notes b and c should have citations.
- The band's own Bandcamp site is cited few times, but only for straightforward facts, so that seems fine.
- I don't think that Film Music Reporter is suitable as a source - see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_387#Film_Music_Reporter_-_Reliability
- For consistency, Dork should be wikilinked to Dork (magazine)
- For consistency, Bigmouth should be wikilinked (redlink)
- For consistency, either remove the two ISSN's, or add ISSNs to other sources that have them.
- I think "Gabba Gabba!, Yo" and "Linda Lindas, The" should be re-ordered to their "natural" form, e.g. using the author rather than first/last parameters.
- Some of the sources, e.g. YouTube, Apple Music, aren't ideal, but they are OK for the info being supported here.
- Spot check on "most were produced by Carlos de la Garza, the father of band members Lucia and Mila." - no issues.
- Spot check on "In 2021, the band went viral with a performance of "Racist, Sexist Boy" and subsequently signed with the Los Angeles-based label Epitaph Records" - no issues
- Spot checks on "Growing Up is centered on themes of growing up, discovering oneself,[16] and anxieties that arise in adolescence" - no issues
- Spot check on "Their second album, No Obligation, is set to be released in 2024" - no issues
General comments
- Is there any info available about unreleased recordings? (Out-takes, etc.)
- " the Linda Lindas have appeared on cover, remix, and tribute albums, as well as soundtracks." - phrasing suggests to me there are multiple appearances on each type, which doesn't seem to be the case. (e.g. only one tribute album and one soundtrack)
- "Their second album, No Obligation, is set to be released in 2024. It spawned three singles:" doesn't quite seem right to me, given that the album is not scheduled ti be released until October. Maybe soemthing like "Three tracks that will be on the album have been released as singles" (but more smoothly written)?
- Feels like the heading for the main table should be something like "Songs released by the Linda Lindas" rather than "Name of song, songwriter(s), original release and year of release", but I might be wrong.
- Overall, great work!
- Nominator(s): NapHit (talk) 21:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
After some hard work on this list, I now believe it meets the criteria. This will form part of the Lists of UEFA club competition winning managers topic if it passes here and would be a long overdue addition. My current list has four supports, so I'm assuming it's ok to nominate this one now. Thanks in advance for the comments. NapHit (talk) 21:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Image caption: "Carlos Bianchi, pictured playing for Vélez Sarsfield won the competition a record three times." => "Carlos Bianchi, pictured playing for Vélez Sarsfield, won the competition a record three times."
- Link UEFA and CONMEBOL
- Link "played over two legs" to two-legged tie
- "renaming it Toyota Cup" - no reason for italics
- Link FIFA
- "Lula became the first manager to win successive titles leading Santos to victory in 1962 and 1963" => "Lula became the first manager to win successive titles, leading Santos to victory in 1962 and 1963"
- "Argentine managers have won the competition the most times" => "Argentine managers won the competition the most times"
- Footnote to explain why there is no winning manager recorded for two of the years should be a footnote, not mixed in with the references. Also don't use "wasn't" in the footnote, write it in full.
- Per MOS:BOLD, bold should not be used to highlight something. Use colour + symbol -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments, @ChrisTheDude:, I've addressed all the comments. Regarding the bold, I've looked at Bianchi's profile and he's not managed for 10 years. So safe to assume he's no longer active as a manager. NapHit (talk) 20:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Support from Gonzo_fan2007 (including source review)
[edit]- In the 1979 row, the managers should each have their own row so they can be properly sorted when using the table sort function.
- I removed the second manager as it seems he was the assistant to the other one, not co-manager. NapHit (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- In the managers with multiple titles table, recommend adding an emdash to the blank cells.
- Done NapHit (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- On the last two tables, I don't think you need to duplicate the section title and table title. You can use {{sronly}} to keep the descriptive titles for accessibility without showing them visually.
- I did this and then realised that it leaves the refs hanging above the table, so I've left it for now. NapHit (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- You can put it at the bottom of the table too. Take a look at Green Bay Packers draft picks (1970–present) for an example of this. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- I did this and then realised that it leaves the refs hanging above the table, so I've left it for now. NapHit (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think the abbreviated links in the Nationality and Country columns should use {{Abbrlink}}. Most people don't know country acronyms off the top of their heads.
- I've removed the abbreviations and used the full name. NapHit (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Source review: Passed
- In Ref 2, 5 and 6, why abbreviate "Rec. Sport. Soccer Statistics Foundation"?
- The full name is used not the abbreviation. NapHit (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- For Ref 1, I would recommend changing "bibliography" to a sub-heading of the "References" section and then add an additional subheading titled "Citations". An example of this is at Packers sweep.
- Done NapHit (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- All other references appear appropriate for the information being cited. All references are formatted appropriately.
- Spot checks on 10 refs did not bring up any issues.
- In Ref 2, 5 and 6, why abbreviate "Rec. Sport. Soccer Statistics Foundation"?
Please ping me when you have had a chance to respond. Thanks! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:05, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks of the comments @Gonzo fan2007:, I've addressed your comments and responded above to some. NapHit (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. I added one response above but it wouldn't prevent my support, so feel free to take it or leave it. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks of the comments @Gonzo fan2007:, I've addressed your comments and responded above to some. NapHit (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Broc (talk) 08:19, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
I recently created this list, with the aim to fulfill the featured list criteria from the start. I believe it does meet all of them, hence my nomination. Switzerland has been closely linked to the Nobel prize since the start, and a large number of laureates were Swiss. Broc (talk) 08:19, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment from nominator
[edit]I did significantly expand the last lead paragraph, which at the time of nomination only included Switzerland is among the countries with the highest number of Nobel laureates, both in total and per capita
. I wanted to add some context with explanations that have been published in Swiss media, as well as a remark on the general Nobel controversies (Western bias is a pretty obvious one). This should provide better context and more WP:NPOV, avoiding the mildly celebratory tone that country-based lists end up having. Broc (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Drive-by comments from Staraction
[edit]- Images need alt text.
- Use upright scaling instead of defining the size of an image. See WP:PIC#Thumbnail sizes.
- Note to future reviewers: have not looked into copyright status of images yet. Not a full image review.
- "The latest Swiss laureates are Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz, who received the Nobel for Physics in 2019." --> "The latest Swiss laureates are Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz, who received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2019."
Excited to see this list nominated! Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:22, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Staraction! I added alt text to all images and changed the sentence as you suggested.
Upright scaling can only be used with thumbnails, which might not be the best option in a table. What would you recommend?Broc (talk) 14:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)- Added upright scaling using "frameless" option. Broc (talk) 16:06, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting
|+ caption_text
as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}
instead. - Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding
!scope=col
to each header cell, e.g.! Year
becomes!scope=col | Year
. - Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row. In the case of this table, I think the primary column is the "Laureate" column which contains their name.
- Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:07, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Done thanks for the inputs, @MPGuy2824 Broc (talk) 14:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- MPGuy2824
- List of Indian Nobel laureates seems to be only other nation-based nobel laureates list. It has a section of nominees who didn't win the award. You could consider adding them here too.
- The last paragraph of the lead section is just a single sentence. See if you can merge it with one of the paragraphs above it.
- Run IABot on the list.
- The Telegraph reference is generating a CS1 error. Please fix.
- That's all that I got. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:09, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- @MPGuy2824 I adapted the lead section as suggested, ran IABot, and fixed the CS1 error.
- Regarding the list of nominees, I have a few concerns:
- A list of Swiss Nobel laureates certainly fulfills WP:NLIST, given the amount of sources publishing on the topic ([3][4][5][6] just to link a few). However, I could not find a published list of Swiss Nobel nominees.
- List of Indian Nobel laureates nicely distinguishes between Indian nationals at birth, individuals of Indian origin, people with acquired citizenship, but does so only for the list of laureates and not for the nominees. I am then left to wonder what the selection criterion for the nominees section was.
- The lack of a published list of Swiss Nobel nominees, combined with the relatively arbitrary definition of what "Swiss" means (in the case of laureates, "held Swiss citizenship at the time of the award" seems a commonly accepted criterion, but I do not know what would be a viable one for nominees), would make the creation of a list of nominees rather close to WP:OR, in my opinion.
- Broc (talk) 10:20, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- You can wikilink a few more terms/names like "Inter-Parliamentary Union", "Olympian Spring", "Fridtjof Nansen" and "Geneva Convention", but I'll support in advance of those changes. If interest and time permit, please comment at my FL nom. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:02, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Drive by comments
[edit]- Rationale for 'Nansen International Office for Refugees' is unreferenced. You could also add an emdash in the logo column of the same entry.
- Fixed, thanks Broc (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- For Jack Steinberger, it is mentioned that he acquired honorary Swiss citizenship in 2006. However, the source states that he acquired honorary citizenship of a German town in 2006. Could you please clarify this?
- My mistake, he acquired honorary citizenship in 2000 from Geneva, per source. Broc (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Question: Does the bestowal of honorary citizenship by a Swiss city or canton amount to acquisition of Swiss citizenship, like in the case of Max Theiler and Kofi Annan? If not, could they be put in the same category as Pauli? Nitro Absynthe (talk) 17:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is also a very valid question. The Swiss citizenship is given first by the city, then by the canton, and finally by the confederation. Per the Federal Act on Swiss Citizenship , "The granting of honorary citizenship to a foreign national by a canton or municipality without a federal naturalization permit does not have the same effect as naturalization." User:Nitro Absynthe should I rather split the table in two sections, one with the naturalized people (only Pauli) and one with the honorary citizens? Broc (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @Broc, the nominator, as these comments have gone unaddressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I missed the comment in my watchlist. I answered above. Broc (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @Broc, the nominator, as these comments have gone unaddressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is also a very valid question. The Swiss citizenship is given first by the city, then by the canton, and finally by the confederation. Per the Federal Act on Swiss Citizenship , "The granting of honorary citizenship to a foreign national by a canton or municipality without a federal naturalization permit does not have the same effect as naturalization." User:Nitro Absynthe should I rather split the table in two sections, one with the naturalized people (only Pauli) and one with the honorary citizens? Broc (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Broc, I feel like splitting would be better to avoid confusion. Also, there might be some discrepancy regarding Theiler's citizenship. According to this report by SERI (p. 16), Max Theiler is listed as a Swiss citizen. Maybe he could be placed in the naturalized citizen section with Pauli and Steinberger. Nitro Absynthe (talk) 09:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Nitro Absynthe uhm that's a tricky one. The Historical Dictionary of Switzerland mentions that Theiler was Swiss citizen by birth (place of origin: Hasle), which makes sense as his parents were Swiss. On the other hand, he certainly received a honorary citizenship, again from Hasle, in 1952, which would not make sense if he already was a citizen. However, according to the list you shared, he was Swiss when he received the prize. I think it might be best to add him in the main list with a footnote. Broc (talk) 12:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Broc, agreed. I think that's better. Nitro Absynthe (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Nitro Absynthe done, with footnotes on Theiler and Annan. Thanks a lot for raising these points, I think the list is better off now. Broc (talk) 07:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Broc, agreed. I think that's better. Nitro Absynthe (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Broc, I feel like splitting would be better to avoid confusion. Also, there might be some discrepancy regarding Theiler's citizenship. According to this report by SERI (p. 16), Max Theiler is listed as a Swiss citizen. Maybe he could be placed in the naturalized citizen section with Pauli and Steinberger. Nitro Absynthe (talk) 09:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
comment
[edit]- I think it's better to add Template:Nobel Prizes--金色黎明 (talk) 08:06, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Done. Broc (talk) 10:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- support--金色黎明 (talk) 01:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Done. Broc (talk) 10:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Source review
[edit]I see this as still awaiting a source review in the list, so will give it a shot.
- List entries: Main
Verifying these match Das sind alle Schweizer Nobelpreisträger with the exceptions of Pauli (exclusion explained in lede) and Hermann Staudinger (explained in footnote).
- Table row entries: References
I spot-checked a few and they all appear to be to the Nobel website, verifying the row data. Did not check every single one but I imagine this is the least controversial part of the article.
- List entries: Later citizenship
Pauli is fine per above. Steinberger, though... the source just says "ab 2000 von Genf" and his Wikipedia article doesn't say anything about him acquiring Swiss citizenship late in life. The NZZ.ch "Das sind alle Schweizer Nobelpreisträger" list above doesn't include him, and it was clearly created after 2000. Is there a source verifying this alleged Swiss citizenship more directly? For Koffi Annan, I'm of the opinion that honorary citizenship isn't enough to qualify for what this article is talking about. It's fine to discuss him in a footnote but I don't think this deserves a full table row, especially since the above NZZ.ch source also doesn't include him but does include other later-Swiss citizens like Pauli. Like, it would be weird to call Winston Churchill an American Nobel laureate because of his honorary American citizenship, right?
- Regarding Steinberger, this page from the Swiss Physical Society mentions
Seit 2000 Bürger von Genf
and the Swissinfo article mentionsEr wirkte ab 1968 am Kernforschungszentrum CERN in Genf und wurde im Jahr 2000 eingebürgert
. I would consider the Historical Dictionary of Switzerland to be a very reliable source, but I added the other two as well. Regarding Kofi Annan, I followed your suggestion and moved it to footnote [nb 3].Broc (talk) 11:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Verified now, thanks. (Also, for clarity, I wasn't questioning the reliability of the Historical Dictionary of Switzerland, but rather the question of whether it was even indicating Swiss citizenship at all, given that the mention was brief and oblique.)
- Regarding Steinberger, this page from the Swiss Physical Society mentions
- Additionally, four laureates acquired Swiss citizenship after the award:
Who's the fourth laureate? (Although it should be maybe two or three anyway per above if Annan is reduced to footnote status.)
- Fixed. Broc (talk) 11:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Ten organizations headquartered in Switzerland have received the Nobel Prize for Peace. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has been awarded twice, and the International Committee of the Red Cross three times. Four of these organizations were also founded in Switzerland, and they all have their headquarters in Geneva, a city hosting more than 40 international organizations and 750 non-governmental organizations.[7]
I can't find this in either https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/facts/nobel-prize-facts/ or the 2018 archived version. It all looks pretty non-controversial but perhaps needs a better source? Certainly should be easy to get a source on Geneva hosting a ton of UN & other global orgs.
- This was my mistake, I forgot to add the source I used. Fixed it now by adding a source from the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. Broc (talk) 11:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Geneva facts look good. However the main concern was the "ten organizations headquartered in Switzerland" bit, which is really the same question as sourcing the orgs list. See below for ideas on that.
- List entries: Organizations
While it's not the end of the world if we do a tad bit of synthesis here... is there a source that explicitly lists this out?
- I couldn't find a complete list, no. There is one at the bottom here [7] and here, but neither are comprehensive. I'm not sure how I could add these to the list, do you have a suggestion? Broc (talk) 12:10, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think this is where we write a fancy, long reference that explains where this is coming from when it's not from a source directly. You can include the other two links to prove that the topic of Swiss organizations winning Nobels isn't synthesis even if the lists aren't mirrored exactly. Something like:
- <ref>Ten organizations are based on the comprehensive list of Organization Winners at: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/nobel-prize-awarded-organizations/ (format this nicely as a cite). Non-comprehensive lists discussing the matter can be found at: (your two links here).</ref>
- Note that you can format long references drawing on multiple sources a little more nicely with Template:Multiref2 or Template:Unbulleted list citebundle if you'd like. Can be handy to ensure the citations for webpages are on new lines. Normally I'd stick the reference in the title of the table, but since you're using a style that doesn't have titles for tables, having it in the lede section on the "Ten Swiss organizations" line is fine too.
- I think this is where we write a fancy, long reference that explains where this is coming from when it's not from a source directly. You can include the other two links to prove that the topic of Swiss organizations winning Nobels isn't synthesis even if the lists aren't mirrored exactly. Something like:
- I couldn't find a complete list, no. There is one at the bottom here [7] and here, but neither are comprehensive. I'm not sure how I could add these to the list, do you have a suggestion? Broc (talk) 12:10, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Switzerland is among the countries with the highest number of Nobel laureates, both in total and per capita
The "per capita" article has been deleted, FWIW. (Swiss Info Source does check out, for all it's something of a statistical artifact.)
What do you mean, the article has been deleted? I can still access both articles used as references.Broc (talk) 11:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Several factors have been suggested as possible explanation, including large public funding for research,[10]
[8] and [9] verify the raw amount of funding (although it's not clear it's even "public" funding - GTranslate offers "The private sector not only finances 65 percent of research and development here" for one line), but don't seem to connect it to the Nobel Prize or awards in general at all. The real reference here is https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/nach-physik-auszeichnung-deshalb-bringt-die-schweiz-so-viele-nobelpreistraeger-hervor - I'd reformulate the SNF links to be "see alsos" in the reference primarily cited to the SRF article, and then reuse that reference for both large public funding for research and good universities.
- Fixed. Broc (talk) 12:10, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- The Nobel Prize has also been often recognized as being biased towards Western countries.[12][13][14]
Nitpick: None of the sources seem to use the word "Switzerland" or "Swiss" (don't have access to the full Telegraph article so can't be sure there). Obviously Switzerland is a Western country, but it could be argued that the relevance of this isn't fully established. Not demanding this be removed, just it'd be nice if there was a source connecting the dots more directly. (I do get the above comment that this is to avoid being overly celebratory / chest-puffy.)
- Unfortunately, I could not find such source. However, omitting such important aspect (a widely recognized bias of Nobel prizes in favor of Western countries) only because it does not specifically mention Switzerland would not be according to WP:NPOV and give a rather promotional tone to the article. I do believe the current statement gives a fuller picture. Broc (talk) 12:10, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- If you gave it a look, it's fine. I agree it's a positive addition to the article, just a nice-to-have rather than a requirement on tying this to Swiss laureates.
- Unfortunately, I could not find such source. However, omitting such important aspect (a widely recognized bias of Nobel prizes in favor of Western countries) only because it does not specifically mention Switzerland would not be according to WP:NPOV and give a rather promotional tone to the article. I do believe the current statement gives a fuller picture. Broc (talk) 12:10, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- According to Nobel laureate Werner Arber, the large number of awards to Swiss nationals is "likely a statistical anomaly".
True, and in the cited source, but the source ALSO includes Richard Ernst saying that it's not a coincidence and he's confident Switzerland will remain on top in the future. Both Arber and Ernst are Nobel laureates, but there's really little reason to think that either would be THAT much more informed about Nobel-politics than, say, a historian of science like Roland Müller mentioned in passing in the article. (Plenty of Nobel laureates out there with weird opinions on things, cough, cough, James Watson.) While keeping the snappy Arber quote is fine, do you have any other sources saying it's a statistical anomaly so it's not resting solely on him? (Or, alternatively, include the nationalist "it's because the Swiss are just so awesome!" by contrast first, since it's coming from an equivalently weighted source, even if we both think it's "wrong".)
- Fixed by adding statement from Ernst. Broc (talk) 12:10, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Other comments unrelated to sources:
- Peace and Economic Sciences[nb 1],[1]
Shouldn't the footnote go after the punctuation as well? Also, this is a case where the Oxford comma is mandatory IMO even in an article that doesn't use that style, because there's an earlier entry on the list titled "Physiology or Medicine". This makes it appear that "Peace and Economic Sciences" is possibly a Nobel category as well, so a comma to set apart each list entry is required IMO.
- Fixed. Broc (talk) 11:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Birth & Death dates in the list
This has nothing to do with the sources, but I will plant my flag to plead that birth & death dates don't matter in this context. I know a lot of lists do include this information, and it is indeed in the Nobel webpage blurbs, but it's irrelevant and those other lists shouldn't include it either. "Age at time of Nobel award" perhaps but otherwise it's not relevant to this list. Not a blocking comment, it's up to you, but I'd personally either omit entirely, or just have a single column with both birth & death dates, sortable by birth dates. (Nobody should want to sort by death dates anyway? What would that even mean?) Totally optional, just dropping off my two cents.
Nice work overall. SnowFire (talk) 21:08, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Noting that it's best to reply after a person's comment and to ping them @Broc, that way @SnowFire can voice their support or point out things that still need to be addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:49, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh I'm not done addressing all point yet, will do that as soon as I have a moment :) Broc (talk) 06:27, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- @SnowFire I think I addressed all points, see individual comments right below yours. Please let me know your thoughts.
- As for birth and death dates: I removed the option to sort by death date (not very meaningful indeed). Age at the time of award might also be a valuable addition as the age of the laureates is often a point of discussion regarding Nobel prizes. I might add that at a later point, but would not want to remove the information in the current table, as the format is the same the Nobel Prize website uses in its blurbs. Broc (talk) 12:44, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's fine, like I said I know that others opinions differs with mine on this, so I wanted to bring it up as a thought, but if you think it's relevant enough, go for it.
- Just crafting a fancy citation for the ten orgs issue remaining - think we're very close! (I'd be happy to give it a shot if you'd like too.) SnowFire (talk) 00:57, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- @SnowFire I added the reference as you suggested in [nb 4], updated the entry from the IPB and removed the ICBL (I had initially added the entry from the German Wikipedia list, but I can't find evidence they were based in Geneva at the time of the award). Double-checking the list was worth it. Broc (talk) 11:59, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Agree the new footnote should do nicely, and more closely drawing the line from the sources definitely helps. SnowFire (talk) 17:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- @SnowFire I added the reference as you suggested in [nb 4], updated the entry from the IPB and removed the ICBL (I had initially added the entry from the German Wikipedia list, but I can't find evidence they were based in Geneva at the time of the award). Double-checking the list was worth it. Broc (talk) 11:59, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Sources look good to me. SnowFire (talk) 17:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator(s): Aszx5000 (talk) 11:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
I am nominating this for featured list because this is a comprehensive list of equipment for the discipline of rock climbing. While individual elements of rock climbing equipment will change/evolve, the essence is quite stable. Rock climbing is now a new Olympic Sport, so I think this area will get even more attention in the future. I had proposed it as a GA but the recommendation was that the article was more of a list, which is correct, and that it would be a good suggestion as an FL per Talk:Rock-climbing equipment/GA1. thank you. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comments by RunningTiger123
This review will take me a little while – feel free to ping me if I go more than a few days without following up.
- Images need alt text
- Done.
- "And finally" → "Finally,"
- Done.
- The lead lists modern devices with the older devices they replaced – where is this information supported in the body? For instance, I see no mention of chockstones after the lead.
- Done., I have mentioned chockstones in the body, where they were replaced by nuts.
- Not technically wrong, but the list has a tendency to overuse parentheses; some of them can be reworked
- Example: Under Type of climbing, "and its X variant" doesn't need parentheses
- Done., hopefully that is better now.
- Another example: The second paragraph of Ropes (starting with "Some climbers will use...") has 4 sets of parentheses in one sentence. This ends up feeling really choppy.
- Done., and agree, hopefully better now.
- Per MOS:ACRO1STUSE, write out acronyms where they first appear: UIAA, CEN, OSHA, maybe CE marking?
- Done., CE marking is the actual name here.
- "in lieu CEN" → "in lieu of CEN"
- Done.
- "which are (circa 7–8 mm)" – misuse of parentheses
- Done.
- "(or 'tape')," – no comma needed
- Done.
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:50, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delighted that you are willing to help @RunningTiger123. This is (clearly) my first attempt at Featured article status. I have a few GAs under my belt and I think I am writing at a reasonable GA standard, but have little concept of FA stardard, but if you are up for it, I would love to learn and happy to spend time on this with you at whatever pace you prefer. thanks again :) Aszx5000 (talk) 13:02, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
More comments:
- "European European Committee for Standardization" – redundant
- Done.
- "e.g. the asymmetric/offset D-shape is the most common" – misuse of "e.g."
- Done.
- "e.g." means "for example" – if you substitute "for example" in place of "e.g." and it doesn't make sense, you're using the wrong phrase
- understand thanks,
- "(and materials used)" – no need for parentheses
- Done.
- "e.g. they require little in the way of gear-carrying loops" – another misuse of "e.g."
- Done.
- "e.g. to fit around heaving winter clothing" – same thing
- Done.
- Link Petzl and Wild Country at first occurrence (as well as any other companies)
- Done.
- First paragraph under Belay devices is unsourced
- Done.
- "e.g. a static rope that is hanging from a fixed anchor" – another "e.g."
- Done.
- "Petzel Traxion" – typo for Petzl
- Done.
- "Petzel Micro Traxion, and Camp Lift" – no comma needed, also same typo?
- Done.
- "SCLDs" – should be SLCDs? (occurs twice)
- Done.
- "like a Hex" – use lowercase for consistency
- Done.
- Don't hyphenate "bolt-hangers" for consistency
- Done.
- "stands one on aider" – I think this should be "stands on one aider"?
- Done.
- "Rock climbing hammers are mainly used..." – bullet point doesn't follow the same opening format as all of the others
- Done.
- A lot of bullet points under Miscellaneous equipment are unsourced
- Done., I also added one extra item, the Knee pad, which is a commonly used piece of equipment
- "is used by all rock climbers" – all is a strong word, so it either needs to be clearly sourced or removed
- Done., changed to "is very popular amongst rock climbers"
- Remove comma after parentheses for medical tape
- Done.
- Suggest archiving web sources (see WP:IABOT)
- checking this.
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:45, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- @RunningTiger123, thanks for those comments. I have made all of the changes but I am not sure I understand the last one re WP:IABOT? My understanding is that that bot runs automatically, or am I meant to run it? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- You can run IABot on demand here – it's not required but it can be nice to include. Also, I think you missed the "e.g. a static rope..." comment above, but I don't think it's worth waiting to support over that. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, have fixed the "static rope" now, and I will run the IAB. Thanks so much for your help and comments on this. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Just ran the IABot as well - wasn't aware of that. Thanks again. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:14, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- You can run IABot on demand here – it's not required but it can be nice to include. Also, I think you missed the "e.g. a static rope..." comment above, but I don't think it's worth waiting to support over that. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Gonzo_fan2007
[edit]- General
- Be conscientious of your use of "where", which is often not the best word for what you are trying to say.
- done, good point and have reduced the # of where's to 3
- I'm not sure of Wikipedia's policy on "e.g."... Ill try to see if I can find something.
- I found MOS:ABBR, and while there is no mention of "e.g." it does use the term a lot?
- You use a lot of parentheses; not necessarily bad but it is best to try to word sentences in such a way that this isn't needed as much.
- That is a fair point. I have taken out most cases where they are used outside of when it is an "(e.g. )" or "(also known as..)" situation.
- Lead
- Why is "rock-climbing" hyphenated in the title and the article? Rock climbing isn't.
- I am not sure about the grammar of whether combining the word "equipment" necessitates the hyphen. I have found books with/without the hyphen. I am happy to do either way but would need admin support to remove it as it was originally moved from the existing rock climbing equipment in 2011?
- When this FLC is done, it should be moved. I've never seen the hyphen before and don't see any grammatical necessity for it. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- I am not sure about the grammar of whether combining the word "equipment" necessitates the hyphen. I have found books with/without the hyphen. I am happy to do either way but would need admin support to remove it as it was originally moved from the existing rock climbing equipment in 2011?
- Can you link "climbing" as climbing in the first sentence?
- done
Bouldering needs the least equipment outside of shoes and chalk and optional crash pads.
replace the first "and" with a comma.
- done
Finally, aid climbing uses unique equipment (e.g. aiders).
- addto assist the climber in upward movement (e.g. aiders)
or something similar
- done, said ".. to give mechanical assistance to the climber in their upward movement (e.g. aiders)"
done manually, and with greater control (in all conditions) and less effort
delete the first "and"
- done
- Use and certification
Equipment is limited to climbing shoes and chalk (with chalk bag).
add "generally" before "limited" as neither shoes nor chalk are technically actually required to climb
- done
variant, adds a rope, harness, and belay device, but no general climbing protection outside of that which is used to create the anchor point at the top of the climb from which the top rope is hung (which is usually done with carabiners, slings, and/or cord)
run-on sentence. Recommend a full stop after "belay device"
- done
- Recommend replacing "in-situ" with on-site or linking in-situ
- done, replaced with on-site
- Why is "lead-climbing" hyphenated? Lead climbing isn't.
- done, should not be hyphenated
every pitch needs to be solo climbed (SLDs)
what is "SLDs" referencing here? SLDs is later defined in the article as "self-locking devices"
- done, expanded to self-locking device and added "using"
- At least link "Brexit" or explain. Like "After the United Kingdom left the European Union, it adopted the UKCA certification in place of the CEN.
- done, used your wording which is better
UKCA
needs to be defined
- done, linked to the UKCA marking article
- Ropes and slings
Some climbers will use a single full-thickness climbing rope of circa 9–11 mm
circa -> approximately. mm should be defined ({{Abbr}})
- done for both
both
shouldn't be italicized
- done
- "Circa" again, just use the more common "approximately"
- done it for the full article
Where two thinner ropes are used that are both clipped into each protection point (i.e. it is not to reduce rope drag, but instead to have a backup rope for long climbs), it is known as twin roping
add in the 7-8 mm thickness after "tinner rope", liketwo thinner ropes, typically 7-8 mm in thickness, are
. Also, it would sound better to just start withTwin roping is...
- done all suggestions
Climbers use webbing that has been sewn using a certified standard of reinforced stitching into various lengths of closed loops called "slings" (or "runners"), which can be used in a wide range of situations, including wrapping around sections of rock (e.g. for abseiling, or creating belay anchors, or as passive protection), or tied to other equipment—often via carabiners—to create a longer version of a quickdraw or even a makeshift lanyard.
long run-on sentence. Find somewhere to split into two.
- done.
- "Circa" again
- done, replaced for full article.
Cord loops (also known as "cordelettes") serve a wide variety of functions in rock climbing including creating friction prusik knots for ascending or gripping fixed climbing ropes, usually using thinner circa 5–6 mm cord, or for attaching to, and equalizing forces across, multiple fixed anchors points,[15] such as when setting up abseil or belay anchors on multi-pitch climbing routes, usually using thicker circa 7–8 mm cord.
long run-on sentence again. Split.
- done
- Rope devices
- You define "SLD" multiple times in the article. You also link the second use of the term. You should really link and define at the first instance. Maybe move the SLD section up above descenders?
- done, per above, I have now linked to it at its first mention in the "Type of climbing" sub-section. Given that, have not moved the SLD section above Descenders, and left in alphabetical order?
- Protection devices
- This section is the only one where you introduce the term with a full stop immediately after (e.g.
Hexes.
instead ofHexes are...
). Recommend changing to be consistent.
- done, have changed to be consistent with the rest of the article
Tricams are typically cheaper and lighter than SLCDs, and are less in use today.
and -> but and no comma needed
- done
- Similar to the previous section, you use SLCD before you define it. Maybe move "Active" before "Passive"
- done, swapped
is attached into which carabiners (and quickdraws) can be clipped.
no need for the parentheses.
- done
decade, but have a finite
, comma not need
- done
protection of choice, but are still
, comma not needed
- done
- Define or link "crag"
- done, linked to crag (climbing)
- Aid equipment
"aid" to the aid climber in ascending
, no need for the second "aid"
- done
which are a central part of the technique of aid climbing where they are normally used in pairs
some rewrite needed as it is confusing. Is it a central part of aid climbing only when used in pairs? "where" is probably not the right word either (when is more appropriate)
- done, split sentence and re-worded to ".. and are a central part of the technique of aid climbing. They are normally used in pairs .."
Like aiders, daisy chains are also a central part of aid climbing where they link the harness to the aider (see above);
not sure what you mean by "where they link the harness to the aider" nor do I understand what the "see above" is referencing.
- done, re-worded to "Like aiders, daisy chains are also a central part of aid climbing. They are used to attach the harness to the aider. Care has to be taken ...."
Copperheads are only used in aid climbing and their low strength means that they can only handle the "static bodyweight" of an ascending aid climber, and will likely fail where the climber makes a dynamic fall.
the first and should be a "but" and the comma before the second "and" isn't needed
- done
These are steel hooks of various shapes (e.g. bat hook, talon hook, grappling hook, etc.,) that are hung from cracks and flakes (e.g. the fifi hook and skyhook). Mostly used in aid climbing, but they have been used in extreme traditional climbing routes as a last resort (i.e.hook placements may not withstand a dynamic fall).
->Steel hooks of various shapes (e.g. bat hook, talon hook, grappling hook, etc.,) are hung from cracks and flakes (e.g. the fifi hook and skyhook). They are mostly used in aid climbing but have been used in extreme traditional climbing routes as a last resort (i.e. the hook placements may not withstand a dynamic fall).
Note that in my update, I fixed a missing space between "i.e." and "hook"
- done, and merged sentence with the heading of "Hooks", per earlier changes.
These are mainly used by aid climbers to hammer in various types of pitons while ascending routes; note that clean aid climbing does not allow the use of hammers as all clean aid equipment must only be inserted on a temporary basis.
->A type of hammer made insert various types of pitons whilee ascending routes; clean aid climbing does not allow the use of hammers because all clean aid equipment must only be inserted on a temporary basis.
- done
- Clothing equipment
- The anchor link to belay glasses doesn't work for me (i.e. it doesn't go to the specific term in that page)
- done, linked to the Belay glasses article
Belay gloves are used to protect the hands when doing lots of belaying (especially on big wall climbing routes), and their construction from leather or other hard-wearing materials, generally improves grip with the rope, which lessens the risk of a failure of the belay system.
I would recommend deleting ""when doing lots of belaying" as an obvious statement. Then add a full stop after the parenthetical.
- done
- vulcanization should be linked ("vulcanized")
- done
"edging", and softer
delete the comma
- done
particularly where the falling lead climber is flipped over.
where -> when
- done
- Misc equipment
- This is the only section without an intro sentence. Recommend adding one for consistency.
- done
, which could cause ankle or back injuries.
->leading to injury.
- done
that has been dangerously worn down
delete "dangerously" as editorializing
- done
Nut tools
should be singular or "are" should be used
- done, made singular
climbers even use toothbrushes to clean the smallest holds without damaging them
->toothbrushes may be used to clean the smallest holds without damaging them
- done
- Training equipment
A narrow flexible (e.g. it can be rolled up) all-metal, or PVC/webbing, ladder that
, too many consecutive adjectives. Reword to something likeA narrow and flexible ladder, typically capable of being rolled up, made from metal, PVC or webbing that
- done
that may be climbed up and down without the aid of the feet.
replace "may" with "is typically"
- done
the "hangboard" is focused on
change to "was developed to focus on"
- done, re-worded the two sentences to say "is related to the campus board and was developed to focus on building static arm and finger strength;"
- See also
- The Wikimedia commons box goes in the "External links" section per its documentation
- done
- Images
- All photos are appropriately licensed, captioned and have alt text. All do a good job of helping the article.
Nice work! Aszx5000 Please ping me when you are ready. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks @Gonzo fan2007 - only just back from my travels over the last few weeks but will get to work on the above shortly. Much appreciated! Aszx5000 (talk) 10:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Gonzo fan2007:. Thanks for all your great input and comments listed above, all of which I have now hopefully incorporated into the article. Aszx5000 (talk) 13:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support, really nice work on what is an atypical and challenging list Aszx5000. I made two small copyedits in the article, hope that they are ok with you. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Those changes are great and your support is very much appreciated! Aszx5000 (talk) 15:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support, really nice work on what is an atypical and challenging list Aszx5000. I made two small copyedits in the article, hope that they are ok with you. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Gonzo fan2007:. Thanks for all your great input and comments listed above, all of which I have now hopefully incorporated into the article. Aszx5000 (talk) 13:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Nominations for removal
[edit]- Notified: Ericleb01 Arsenikk, WikiProject Africa
I am nominating this for featured list removal because it has been tagged for update (for over a year), some descriptions are empty, some are straight up copied from the unesco website with no attribution, some images need alt text and is straight up missing some world heritage sites. 48JCL public (talk) 16:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'll remain neutral in the voting and get to work fixing/updating the article. Pliny the Elderberry (talk) 16:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Tagging Tone for awareness, as they've been working on World Heritage Sites lists for quite a while now. --PresN 20:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Remove. As mentioned, I've been working on those lists for a while and somehow the continent-wide lists are out of date and of bad style, compared to what the current FLs use. Also, due to its sheer size, the list is really difficult to maintain properly, as new sites get added every year, endangered list is getting updated occasionally etc. Having coordinates in the table is rather pointless since these sites are often not limited to a single location. Area is also not very informative, and sometimes even missing. Pictures are formatted randomly, sometimes centred, sometimes not. And technically, tentative sites should be mentioned, which probably more than doubles the list. I'd suggest trimming this list down to only a list of sites per country, without descriptions or images, and links to country articles. Speaking of, lists for Peru and Madagascar are not in a good shape and the list in danger is so-so (mostly excessive info in the table, as mentioned above), although better than this one. The three I mentioned are fixable, but this one probably requires too much work to be taken care during the FLRC process. --Tone 22:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hello! Do you have a model to recommend that I base edits to this list off of, formatting-wise? Pliny the Elderberry (talk) 16:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- There are several FLs on WHS. For example, List of World Heritage Sites in the United States. Have a look ;) Tone 19:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hello! Do you have a model to recommend that I base edits to this list off of, formatting-wise? Pliny the Elderberry (talk) 16:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Notified:
There are significant citation issues here, including one section that's been tagged for citations since 2018. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. The tagged "historical background" section wasn't in the original promoted FL. Nothing it says looks that controversial, but I think I'd be fine with expecting people to read the main Berlin Wall article first if they need background. I've chopped it down and added a basic ref (although not one that covers some of the minor details, but eh, it's probably in one of the longer works exclusively on the Berlin Wall). That said, as a procedural side note. Tastes differ and there will always be borderline tough calls... but... honestly this seems more like an article than a list anyway? Page size reports ~5,700 prose words ignoring the list itself, which is pretty significant and probably longer than the "main" list. This seems more like an article with an attached list than a list with some prose explanation, so possible it should be demoted on those grounds and moved to Deaths at the Berlin Wall or the like. SnowFire (talk) 10:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Remove seeing no other edits. Not convinced the prose / referencing of the larger article is up to FA snuff. Also, the URLs have moved to the memorial website (e.g. https://www.stiftung-berliner-mauer.de/de/gedenkstaette-berliner-mauer/historischer-ort/bernauer-strasse ), so it'd be cool if rather than relying on Wayback copies, they were updated, but more of a nice-to-have. (Also, some parts of the table are questionable IMO... why is the person's birthdate & age relevant? But I'm a "less is more" type.) SnowFire (talk) 03:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thebiguglyalien, did you notify the relevant editors and WikiProjects? If so, please add that to the nomination. If not, please do so. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Notified: WP Cricket, WP IPL, Vensatry & Sahara4u (both involved in FL promotion comments), Razr Nation (promoted this to FL in 2013). Note, the nominator of this to FL is indef blocked, so not notified them.
I am nominating this for featured list removal because it fails many of the Wikipedia:Featured list criteria, particularly criteria 1, 2 and 3. The lead text has not been significantly updated since it became a FL in 2013, apart from the addition of mostly unsourced text that also includes random stats and trivia. In addition, the lead and table list captains by titles won, but the main stats source [10] does not have the titles mentioned. In the table, apart from the titles being unsourced, the use of unexplained blue background text, I presume to list current IPL captains as of 2024, violates MOS:COLOUR as it is the sole way of identifying these. It is also not needed, but if colour is kept, it needs to be added to the key section and also use a symbol as per the MOS. Sourcing of this article is also pretty weak in general, since most of the lead text is sourced just to the database stats table. All in all, nowhere near the current FL criteria. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support for removal. I noticed that most of the information is unsourced and needed to be updated with reliable and independent sources. If It get improved in due date than at that time, I will change my comment. Best Regards! Fade258 (talk) 13:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)