Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/July 2011

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 21:16, 31 July 2011 [1].

---

1952 Winter Olympics medal table

Nominator(s): Strange Passerby (talk • cont) and H1nkles 03:33, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Original contributor: Andrwsc informed.

Another FLC from me, this time with H1nkles and an Olympic medal table list rather than a medal winners list. I think this meets the FL criteria; including 3b, as despite having only 13 entries, the main article is already very comprehensive and an FA and the prose here would probably be rather out of place to squeeze in there. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 03:33, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Parutakupiu (talk) 19:55, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

;Comments: In the first instance of "National Olympic Committees" you provide its abbreviation, but then you never use "NOC" again in the rest of the page ("nation" is used instead). If you don't intend to use NOC again, you don't need to give the abbreviation, but if I were you I would change all the "nation" instances for "NOC" which is more correct, in my point of view. "There were 10 nations that won more than one medal." → "Ten NOCs won more than one medal." Fixed, I left one instance where I felt "nations" worked better than NOC. "After a 16-year ban from Olympic competition..." Sixteen? You mean since 1936? But there were no Games until 1948, so one cannot consider it a ban during that period. From what I know, Germany's ban began with the 1948 Olympics, the first after the Second World War. Try to clarify this. Good point, changed "ban" to "hiatus" "They won gold medals in both and two- and four-man bobsleigh events." Oops good catch "These medals would mark the first Olympic medals for the Netherlands." → "These medals were the first-ever Dutch medals at the Winter Olympics." Fixed figure-skater → figure skater; Fixed "... men's free skate program."; Fixed "They did this by dominating dominated the cross-country events..."; Fixed That ref #2 anchor just below the medal table looks a bit lost there. Can't you find a better place? Moved to the end of the introductory paragraph. Not sure of a better place for it but I agree, where it was wasn't good. 1950-1990 → 1950–1990 (en-dash not hyphen); That's a direct quote off the Olympic website; i.e. the IOC uses "1950-1990" with a hyphen. I'm inclined to not use an endash here as such, but would welcome other opinions. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 17:09, 10 July 2011 (UTC) Fine with me. Parutakupiu (talk) 19:50, 10 July 2011 (UTC) Could you move ref #21 and #22 anchors to the end of the sentence? Ref anchors that source non-contentious material are better placed at the end of a sentence as per WP:INCITE; Fixed Specify that ref #5 is a Word document file; Fixed but please check and see if it fits what you're talking about. I noticed that you have two refs that come books (available online). Since you only use each of those sources one time in the Notes section, you could provide the full source info in this section, instead of the References section. Usually, that's only helpful if you have many refs from different pages of a book and you don't want to give the entire source info every time you use it. Fixed Any reason for the link to the "Historical Dictionary of the Modern Olympic Movement" lead to a section on the 1956 Winter Olympics? Good catch, I don't know how that happened. I fixed it. — Parutakupiu (talk) 16:26, 10 July 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the review, I hope I've addressed all the concerns listed above. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 16:22, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Parutakupiu (talk) 19:55, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments "30 National Olympic Committees (NOCs) participated in ... Of the 30 participating NOCs," repetitive and dull. Fixed "one medal, and athletes from eight of these won" unclear about "these" - reiterate NOC here. Fixed "There were 10 NOCs that won more..." -> "Ten NOCs won more..." Fixed "did not disappoint their fans " not encyclopedic. Removed statement US or Brit Eng? You have "meters" and "digitised" which are incompatible. Fixed, I couldn't find "digitised" until I looked in the refs good catch. Suggest linking "nordic combined" in the Highlights section. Linked "alpine skiing. She placed second" -> "skiing, placing second..." I have a tendency to break up sentences, which is a bad habit, thanks for catching that one. "eight out of a possible 12" 12->twelve here. Fixed Can we clarify that "hockey" is actually "ice hockey" for international readers? The hockey has been iced "Soviet team began to compete" do you mean that they actually entered the competition or that they became competitive? Not 100% clear for me. I changed to the Soviet team entered the competition, which is to say that they had not previously competed. I hope that is more clear. If not I can change again. "1950-1990" en-dash. This was also brought up above by Parutakupiu. "1950-1990" is a direct quote from the IOC database, which is why I'd prefer not to change it to an endash, but if the consensus is that it should be changed, that's fine. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 02:26, 18 July 2011 (UTC) For the record, Dabomb87 changed it to an endash using a script earlier, which I missed. I'm fine with leaving it as an endash, since it's already been changed. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 02:29, 18 July 2011 (UTC) en-dash in ref 15 too. Fixed The Rambling Man (talk) 18:53, 17 July 2011 (UTC) I made the fixes you suggested. Thanks for taking the time to go through it. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 15:04, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments – Highlights: "when she won three medals in alpine skiing, placed second in the downhill and third in the slalom and giant slalom." "placed" → "placing"? Seems to work better that way after the comma. Fixed "These medals were the first-ever Dutch medals at the Winter Olympics." Remove first "medals" as a redundancy (two in the same sentence, both serving as the subject). Fixed Comma after Jeannette Altwegg? Fixed In reference 18, Sports Reference is missing an s after the first name. Minor, but worth taking care of. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:25, 21 July 2011 (UTC) Wow good catch and fixed. I addressed all the concerns above and thank you for reviewing the list! H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 15:15, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support Had one small niggle, but it was easier to just fix it as I read. Courcelles 07:01, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to all of you for lending your support and expertise. H1nkles (talk) _{citius altius fortius} 15:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 21:16, 31 July 2011 [2].

---

1908 Summer Olympics medal table

Nominator(s): Miyagawa (talk) 12:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that it is now inline with the existing Olympic medal table FLs (i.e. 1896 Summer Olympics medal table and 1976 Summer Olympics medal table). I've done some touchups back and January and some more recently, although most of the referencing was completed over a year ago (but fortunately archived).

While I believe it is inline with existing FL medal tables, it has been a couple of years since the most recent one was promoted, and so I'm more than happy to make changes. Miyagawa (talk) 12:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

And after saying that, I notice the Paraolympic nomination three nominations below! :) Miyagawa (talk) 21:28, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:55, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments Would expect dates to be in British format, although as an international event, I'm torn. I wondered about this myself, and decided in the end to stick to international so as to match the other medal lists. Lead image doesn't need a full stop, and for medals do we talk about obverse rather than reverse like we do for coins? Fixed. "and an increase from two medals" from 2 to 146, certainly does qualify as an increase. Just reads a little strangely to me. change the and to a semicolon, which I think improves it a little. "occured" is missing an r. And I'm not keen on "dominance occurring" either. Changed this to "Success occurred for the British team..." as on second read through it wasn't very npov. Sorry, I don't like that much either, it's a little too passive. The British team were successful... they made it happen, it didn't just occur, you know what I'm trying (badly) to say? The Rambling Man (talk) 09:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC) No problem, I've switched it to "Particular success was achieved by the British team..." Miyagawa (talk) 20:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC) "men's 400 meters" -> metres. Fixed. Actually, if you're sticking with international English, I guess this should be reverted back to meters. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC) Switched back. :) Miyagawa (talk) 20:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC) Bronze col doesn't sort properly. Nor does rank. Inserted sort templates for those two, so it should all work fine now. Refs 2 and 5 need an en-dash. Fixed. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC) Thanks for your comments! Miyagawa (talk) 09:23, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:04, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments – "The host nation, United Kingdom, dominated the medal table". Should "the" be put before the country name, like in the third paragraph? Corrected as per suggestion. "they only did not win the middleweight silver medal." This is the only part of the whole text I'd consider a touch wordy. How about "they won all but the middleweight silver medal."? Thanks, every time I'd looked at the sentence I wasn't happy with it but couldn't think of a better way to say it. Have changed it to your suggested prose. Medal table: "This information is provided by the IOC however the IOC does not recognize or endorses any ranking system." Three points here, two for the list in question and one for me. First, there should be some form of punctuation before "however"; I'm partial to the semi-colon here, but a comma would also work. Second, "endorses" should be singular. Third, does the IOC's (lack of) endorsement go for all the tables or just this one? This is different from the other Olympic medal table FLs I can recall, including one I worked on. Fixed as suggested. Regarding the lack of endorsement, it's something that is listed on the archived olympic site here. But I wouldn't go as far as listing it on other articles unless the IOC state specifically somewhere that they don't recognize the table as a ranking system. The links to the IOC's website are all dead. Would switching the deadurl=no parameter to yes get the WebCite links to be the main ones in those citations, so I'm not clicking on a dead link when I hit the first avaliable link to check a fact? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:36, 26 June 2011 (UTC) Fixed that too. Thanks for your comments. Miyagawa (talk) 14:39, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:04, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support: Satisfy all the criteria, great work. — Bill william compton^Talk 03:56, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Oppose. Sorry to take a dump in the punch bowl, but I have now read both the List and Article versions of the 1908 Olys. Both are short. I think much better to combine the two and make the best "larticle" you can, not worrying about classification. Then run it through whatever process makes sense. Probably here (they are more liberal and will put up with a lot of prose in their list, as opposed to fancy shmancy article people and the converse). Other than that, it looked clean. Much prettier than the Campaigns of Suleiman. I guess a little thing, but "front and back" or "obverse and reverse", no? I really think you should combine the list and article. Found myself wanting more prose in this thing. And heck, how much list is really here? A medal table? I think Sandy would take that fine at the bottom of an article (we have aerospace articles with tables that dense at the the end.) but here is fine too. But I think the artifical split is a waste when we have a short article and...a table. Sorry...totally heart love of the topic. not love of star-collecting though.TCO (reviews needed) 06:24, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

• Comment Perhaps you're missing one thing that "Wikipedia is not a paper", so IMO separate medal table is not a "waste" of anything, specially not of space. — Bill william compton^Talk 06:45, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

It's not an issue of server space but of different pages or same pages. The advantage of same page is compare and contrast and ease of navigation. Advantage of separate pages has to do with topics that have grown over long or are very different. However in this case we have two articles (the nominal list and nominal article) that are both very short and very similar. I honestly think the reader is better served by combination. HAve the best table in the article and the best prose in the list. And that means combine. And if it gets unGodly long, split. But you are not there, yet!TCO (reviews needed) 06:56, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

The problem isn't that there isn't enough room to place every medal table on every main Olympic article. The issue arises when you realise that you have 1908 Summer Olympics, 1908 Summer Olympics medal table, Bids for the 1908 Summer Olympics, List of 1908 Summer Olympics medal winners and then all the little nations at the 1908 Olympics articles. For every single Olympics there are a set of these and its become standard practice to split them all up in this way. Miyagawa (talk) 17:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Have to say that I disagree with the opposition in this instance. It's not like the main article has three lines of text and then the top-10 table. To me this is a valid split from the main article. It would be questionable if this was a 10- or 11-item list, but 19 is just enough that I don't think this is a 3b violation. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:06, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

My comment was not meant to be procedural. Just looking at the the articles, the article article and the list article, there is a big overlap of content and both are "short". I honestly think that from a reader standpoint (nothing to do with "rules") that benefit is made from merging. The 1908 Olys are a mystery to the modern reader. More than a century ago. Splitting what little content we have...is not helping.TCO (reviews needed) 19:11, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support Meets FL standards, good work. Should not be merged into the main article, the main article should be made to grow. Courcelles 19:06, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support per above supporters, and the fact I haven't seen any issues with the list itself. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 18:08, 31 July 2011 [3].

---

List of stutterers

Nominator(s): PumpkinSky talk 22:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets or is close to FL status. I asked Dabomb87 to preview it and fixed concerns (see his talk page). He's already run his script. This is my first FLC so please keep that in mind. I assure you I'll work through all concerns as best I can. reviewed List of municipalities in the San Francisco Bay Area. PumpkinSky talk 22:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• Looks good after skimming through. To ensure the list meet WP:BLP, quality sources should be used, most are good but some are questionable, like Elvis Info Net, BookRags, etc.—Chris!_c/t 00:45, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Replaced both of those with the same article in Huffington Post by an medical doctor. Are there other refs I need to replace? PumpkinSky talk 01:29, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Support—Chris!_c/t 02:38, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from KV5

Comments from KV5 Remove period/full stop from lead image caption; it's not a complete sentence. (done) "Stuttering, (alalia syllabaris)," - remove first comma (done) "stuttering is unknown, both genetics" - comma should be a semicolon (done) "essentially no 'cure'" - is "cure" quoted from somewhere? If not, remove the quotes. (done) "Examples of people who were stutterers include:" - too wordy, consider Some stutterers include and remove the colon (done) The dynamic list template should either be a hatnote or above the first table (hat preferred). (done) Only one paragraph in the lead is not long enough. More coverage should be given to the contents of the list. (done) Lifetimes with dashes should not be open-ended. It should either be 1982–present or born 1982. (done) Years requiring "BC" should have a non-breaking space between the year and BC; ranges which cross between BC and AD need to have both notations. (this breaks the DTS template Dabomb told me I had to use to get BC dates to sort correctly, I think it's more important and better to not break the template) Tables do not meet WP:ACCESS requirements (rowheaders and such); see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (accessibility)/Data tables tutorial for further information and directions. (done as best I understand it) Copyedit all of the tables carefully; I see a few mistakes like "King George" instead of King George VI, "Muhammed Ali" instead of Muhammad Ali, and "fashion dessigner" instead of fashion designer. (done) "American banker." - remove full stop/period (Vernon Hill's row) (done) Hope these comments help. — KV5 • Talk • 02:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the input. I've marked the ones I did. Others will be done later today. I don't know what a hatnote is so I moved the dynamic list thing. What exactly do you mean by contents of the list to be in the lead? PumpkinSky talk 10:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC) By a hatnote, I mean that the note would be the first thing in the list, above the lead and lead image, but where it is now is fine. As to the contents of the list, basically what would be helpful to the list's lead would be expanding and providing some further sourced information on some of the more famous stutterers, like the ones you've listed. They should be in their own paragraph (a featured list should ideally have 3 or more lead paragraphs). For example, you can talk about Demosthenes' pebble therapy; another suggestion would be to address King George VI's stutter, and you could even reference that a movie was made about it (all with references, of course). — KV5 • Talk • 11:17, 20 July 2011 (UTC) Worked all. Pls review again. PumpkinSky talk 23:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC) Really good job on the lead. I think it's much more explanatory now. (tks) Open-ended dates still exist. (done) Tables still need row headers; directions are in the tutorial above. (sorry but I simply don't see what's wrong, can you fix one so I can see) "American diver." - remove period/full stop (done) Check your formatting on dates: an example would be "10BC–54AD" - this should be 10 BC – 54 AD (again, that breaks the dts template Dabomb87 says I have to use to get BC dates to sort properly, maybe he and you can sort it out, because I don't know how to please two both of you on this) "19??–present" - I don't think this is appropriate, but I don't really have a suggestion for something better. (agreed, leave as is) "Greek Orator" - orator is not a title; no caps (done) More explanation would be better in captions than just simple names. (done) Hope this helps. — KV5 • Talk • 00:40, 21 July 2011 (UTC) Redux two. PumpkinSky talk 01:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC) I have fixed the "Others" table (dates and headers) as an example for you. — KV5 • Talk • 01:34, 21 July 2011 (UTC) Many thanks for the date and header fix! I'll need til tomorrow sometime to do the others. PumpkinSky talk 01:48, 21 July 2011 (UTC) Ready for redux three! PumpkinSky talk 22:13, 21 July 2011 (UTC) "384 BC – 54 AD" - I doubt Claudius lived 400 years. Other than that, all is well. — KV5 • Talk • 23:54, 21 July 2011 (UTC) Fixed. PumpkinSky talk 00:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Much improved. This list has my support for promotion. — KV5 • Talk • 00:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Comment I think it is a very nice article, and I am this close to pledging my support, but I have a little question: Is there any reason that the last sentence of the lead ("Many people had...") doesn't have a citation after it? Bobnorwal (talk) 18:25, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I almost put a ref there but didn't because several of the people listed outgrew stuttering. But since you brought it up, I've added one, unused in the list before, from the National Institutes of Health, certainly a reliable source. It actually says MOST children outgrow it, vice many, but I've okay with saying many. If you want to change to most, that's fine. PumpkinSky talk 23:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Looks good to me! Support Bobnorwal (talk) 00:13, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments – "to the point where an untrained ear can not identify a problem". Should "can not" be one word? Cole Sprouse: "American actor, twin of Dylan Sprouse, became the richest teenage twins in the world". He was only part of the twins this describes, so an adjustment is needed. In the Athletes table, Tiger Woods is listed before Bill Walton. This goes against the alphabetical order used everywhere else. Winston Churchill: The note has either one parentheses too few or one too many. Carly Simon: "recipient of ... Grammy Hall of Fame" isn't proper grammatically, I don't think. Try separating it from the other awards in this sentence. Arthur Blank: Spell out NFL in his note. References 25, 35, and 62 have parts of their titles in all capital letters, which they shouldn't be. Reference 22 is missing a publisher (appears to be the Huffington Post). Publisher of reference 25 (Entertainment Weekly) should be italicized since it's a printed magazine. Publisher of reference 33 shouldn't be Chron; this is the Houston Chronicle, a newspaper. Italicize this one too. It's now given as Houton Chronicle, meaning there's a typo. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC) Publisher of reference 34 should just be ESPN, not ESPN Sports. Should be a space in GolfDigest in ref 37. The name of the magazine is Golf Digest. If PEDA in ref 47 is an abbreviation for something, it should be spelled out. What makes http://houbi.com/belpop/groups/arno.htm (ref 51) a reliable source? As a BLP in a sensitive list, it's particularly important that all of the sources are OK in reliability terms. I see Time and TIME as publishers. Make them consistent throughout; I would de-cap the latter one (ref 62) myself. Also, for the information of the other directors, I spot-checked sources for some of the entries since this is such a potentially problematic list if done wrong. Everything I looked at checked out. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC) Fixed all except for the Churchill one because I don't see what you're talking about. Can you elaborate? PEDA seems to stand for nothing and be a take off on "teaching" as in pedagogue. Houbi.com is a Belgian Rock Music archive site. If this nor another ref is suitable I'll just move it to the talk page list and note it needs a better ref. PumpkinSky talk 01:22, 28 July 2011 (UTC) The Churchill note has parentheses like this: (1940–1945, (1951–1955). I'm thinking that the one before 1951 should go. As for Houbi, I don't think it's the best site to be using for an FL. If an alternate can't be found, moving it onto the talk page is probably the best solution. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC) So fixed. As for the rock star, I'm sure he was a stutterer but I see your point, so I moved him to the talk page. PumpkinSky talk 21:39, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 18:08, 31 July 2011 [4].

---

List of Front Mission media

Nominator(s): PresN 18:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi all, it's back to video game lists for me! Back in December LegaiaRules whipped up this list, and in March I restructured it after List of Final Fantasy video games, an FL I wrote. I didn't get a response from Legaia when I asked him if he wanted to nominate it a few months ago, so now that I'm done with the Hugo lists here it is! This list encompasses everything made relating to the Front Mission video game series, which is much more popular in Japan than in English-speaking countries. Have at it! --PresN 18:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from J Milburn (talk)

Generally looking very nice. A few thoughts- "List of Front Mission media" should be "List of Front Mission media". I forget how that is done; have a root on Template:Italic title This should be done with {{DISPLAYTITLE}}. Regards.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫Share–a–Power[citation needed] 20:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC) Thanks; forgot about that,a s most video game articles set it through the infobox. --PresN 20:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC) "genres besides tactical role-playing into genres" Repetition Fixed. --PresN 20:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC) Can I ask why you have italicised the names of the mechas? Ooh, tricky. The (fictional) convention depends on whether you treat them like ships (italics) or tanks (none); looks like the Gundam pages don't italicize so I'll go with that. Fixed. --PresN 20:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC) "The line produced seven action figures, with re-releases of these figures sporting new paint schemes. Toy distributor Palisades released these figures overseas within days of the North American release of Front Mission 3 in 2000." Ref? Turns out that for some reason, finding an RS on a small toy line released a decade ago by a bankrupt company is... nearly impossible. I got one that says that Palisades released them here; anything more needs non-notable hobby websites. --PresN 20:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC) I haven't looked at the sources, but the content seems good. J Milburn (talk) 17:59, 6 July 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the review! --PresN 20:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC) Just a couple of quick questions on source reliability- Siliconera? What makes that reliable? Ugh, can't find the rationale I wrote down somewhere, so swapped it for an IGN ref. --PresN 02:20, 9 July 2011 (UTC) There's still one reference to it, sorry. J Milburn (talk) 10:35, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Replaced. --PresN 17:24, 9 July 2011 (UTC) "Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of Japan"? Dropped as unnecessary and ref'd to the book itself. --PresN 02:20, 9 July 2011 (UTC) HaksanPublishing? The publishing company for the Korean versions of the novels. --PresN 02:20, 9 July 2011 (UTC) I don't understand footnote 43 ("Front Mission Dog Life & Dog Style 06 (프론트 미션 도그..6권". HaksanPublishing.) Fixed; the "l" was missing from "url=" Hobby Link Japan? Japanese retailer/wholesaler that sells action figures, models, and books in Japan and North America. It's a commercial source, used to verify that the product ever existed/who made it and when. --PresN 02:20, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Mora? Japanese online music retailer a la iTunes; I think it's superfluous to the iTunes ref so removed. --PresN 02:20, 9 July 2011 (UTC) If these are definitely reliable, I'd be happy to offer my support. (I'll note that some people may get annoyed at commercial sources, like iTunes, being used, but I do not consider it a problem at all.) J Milburn (talk) 23:05, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Support, I feel that this article is ready for FL status. J Milburn (talk) 19:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — Legolas (talk2me) 05:18, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

;Comments from Legolas2186 That group has produced --> Better would be to substitute the name G-Craft Done. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) besides tactical role-playing ---> a comma after playing Done. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) The main unique selling point ---> The unique selling point Done. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Those black borders really turns me away in reading the article further. Can you please replace them? The dense grey works fine. I have no idea how to change {{Video game titles}} and {{Video game titles/item}} to use gray instead of black. If you know I'm up for it. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Check the WP:OVERLINK of the reference publishers. Given that you can get to any reference without first going through the others I think all publishers should be linked rather than making the reader hunt for the first use, the same way we do for sortable tables. I've done this for 15 FLs so far. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Same for the labels in the Music albums section. Done. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) No images? At least an image of the toy released would be good. That would still be non-free. J Milburn (talk) 10:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC) There are no free-use images that I can find, and they would be decorative and thus ineligible for fair-use. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Sorry, I should have been more explanatory. I meant sometimes these game related media have conventions, where they hold their seminars etc and display their media. The image of them in a seminar or press report would pass free media, that klind of image if you find, you can add. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:12, 10 July 2011 (UTC) What is Hobby Link Japan? See above. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) En-dash in reference titles. Done. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Front Mission 4 - Elsa en-dash Done. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Front Mission Dog Life & Dog Style, en-dash in between the volume nos and Japan. Done. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) As I pondered more over the tables, I think they really can be arranged better, The simple table approach, with rowspan="4 should do that. I will think about it later. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC) Sure, if you can find a better way, but again, this is the same format used in another FL, List of Final Fantasy video games. --PresN 02:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Note: I've fixed my archiving script to work with Firefox 5, so all of the urls are now archived. --PresN 04:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Support. On second thought, after PresN pointed out the table format used in other similar articles, I think consistency is more important for me, and I'm happy to accept the tables as it is. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:12, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 13:00, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments Can't you link "first game of the series"? Done. --PresN 19:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC) "The unique selling point of Front Mission is its storytelling approach. " really? not unique any more, surely? Perhaps initially... Done. --PresN 19:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC) Was Front Mission released in North America at all (apart from on DS in 2007)? Nope, this series is pretty obscure. --PresN 19:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC) Replace spaced hyphens with spaced en-dashes (e.g. "Volume 1 - July 9, 1994" should be "Volume 1 – July 9, 1994") - this includes text, game titles and references. Argh, thought I got all those. --PresN 19:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC) Not sure you need all those ISBN numbers in the table when you repeat them all in the references. If you do keep them, format the ISBNs the same. Dropped. --PresN 19:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC) "April 25, 2007 – Manga[30]" vs "September 8, 2010[32] – Manga" - check consistent ref placement. Fixed. --PresN 19:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC) Can you explain what the last two external links are? Dropped, looks like they were a Japanese fan site and the translation project LegaiaRules is in. --PresN 19:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments –

• Other media: In the tables, why aren't the games italicized? Everywhere else I look, they are.

• Done. --PresN 01:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

• Toys: Remove hyphen from "highly-realistic"?

• Done. --PresN 01:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

• Books: After "and a reference book titled Front Mission World Historica: Report of Conflicts 1970-2121" is a period, followed by a parenthetical ISBN number and a cite. I'm thinking the period should be moved to in between the parenthetical bit and the cite (this is how such a situation is usually handled). Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:38, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

• Pulled the ISBNs like I did in the table in response to TRM above. --PresN 01:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support; good work, I don't know what else to say. I liked the idea way back when of creating a Final Fantasy game list separate from the main "media" list, and it was a good list to take inspiration from. Tezero (talk) 04:29, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 18:08, 31 July 2011 [5].

---

List of buildings by Charles Holden

Nominator(s): DavidCane (talk) 22:46, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

This list is a companion to the featured article on British architect Charles Holden and presents a comprehensive list of all of the buildings built to his designs (many of which are listed buildings) as well as the cemeteries and memorials he designed for the Imperial War Graves Commission following the First World War. The layout of the page has been influenced by Grade I listed buildings in North Somerset, although I have not included grid references for the buildings as some of the buildings are private homes and others are not precisely known. DavidCane (talk) 22:46, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments:

Resolved comments from bamse (talk) 10:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

*Is this list complete? It is. The Eithan Karol biography contains a list of all of his buildings.--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Does it also include all unbuilt buildings/projects? bamse (talk) 10:58, 1 June 2011 (UTC) The unbuilt projects are also complete. The list includes all of those for which he had a commission, but which were subsequently cancelled. There were a number of unsuccessful competition designs which are not included here (some are mentioned in the main article), but, for an architect working in the public sector, Holden seems to have been unusually lucky in that almost all of his projects reached completion. The most significant one that was not completed as originally conceived was the large scale plan for the University of London.--DavidCane (talk) 13:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC) "Many of his buildings have been protected by being listed." and "Many of his buildings have been granted listed building status..." seems doubled. Removed duplication.--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) I am not sure how familiar readers are with the meaning of "being listed". I think this should be explained shortly in the lead. I have added a note and the listed building article is wikilinked in the test.--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) I realized that the listed building article was wikilinked. I just don't like to read another article in order to make sense of a sentence. The present note ("protection...") is good and gives an idea of what the listed status means. If possible, maybe you could mention "Special Architectural or Historic Interest" somehow in this or in an additional sentence. bamse (talk) 09:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Done.--DavidCane (talk) 13:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC) References should be added to the lead. Done. --DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Holden's competition-winning Tudor Revival design for Bristol Central Library was described by as "one of the great masterpieces of the early Modern Movement" By whom? Missing name added.--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) "Grade I/II/II*" should be defined somewhere or their meaning wikilinked (if possible). Note 1 covers this briefly and the listed building article in detail.--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Empty table cells should be filled with {{center|—}} Done for listed column.--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Why not in the "Note" columns? bamse (talk) 11:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC) I feel that this is unnecessary. Where a column in the list might be expected by a reader to have content for every cell, it may be appropriate to include the dash when the cell is unused; however, where the column is unlikely to have content in every cell (such as the notes column), the inclusion of a dash seems inappropriate.--DavidCane (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC) Have to think about it. I thought that it was an MOS requirement, but can't find it, so possibly it is just a tradition. bamse (talk) 10:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC) I checked as well and couldn't find anything. There are plenty of FLs which have empty cells, e.g. List of awards and nominations received by The Simpsons, Load Records discography or List of numbered roads in Kawartha Lakes.--DavidCane (talk) 11:55, 4 June 2011 (UTC) OK. Sorry for insisting on it. bamse (talk) 13:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC) The "Buildings" section should get an intro in the same way as those of "Cemeteries" and "Memorials". Done.--DavidCane (talk) 23:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC) What does "...influenced by European architecture." mean? Is Holden's architecture not considered to be European? bamse (talk) 10:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC) Clarified as "continental European".--DavidCane (talk) 11:55, 4 June 2011 (UTC) Not sure how relevant the numbers of casualties/missing in this context are. It gives an idea of the range of sizes of the cemeteries that Holden worked on.--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Why is there no "Year" column for the last two tables. Other than the odd year, the available data for the cemeteries does not provide dates for their completion. The memorials were constructed at the same time as the cemeteries they are in, but it is not exactly certain when they were built either (just circa 1928).--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Both are memorials to the missing from New Zealand. reads a bit strange. Possibly the New Zealand Expeditionary Force should be mentioned and wikilinked here. OK. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC) bamse (talk) 22:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Guerst->Geurst in ref 62? bamse (talk) 22:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Done. --DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

• It would be nice to have some more "Notes" (ideally for all projects if possible), but if there is nothing interesting to write that's fine as well.
  • For some of the buildings on the list (the cottages and houses) there is no more information available than their location and completion date.--DavidCane (talk) 00:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
    • OK. How about the others (non-cottages, non-houses)? bamse (talk) 11:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
      • Most of the important ones are described in the main Charles Holden article or in their own articles, so I think duplicating the information here is unnecessary.--DavidCane (talk) 23:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
        • I think, if there is something particular about the building (special style, etc.) it would be still interesting to have it replicated here. Especially for the listed buildings, a short note on what makes them special would be good. bamse (talk) 10:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
          • I have added a few more to cover the particularly interesting or noteworthy.--DavidCane (talk) 22:50, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
            • Better/more interesting. Leaving it out of "resolved comments" in case another editor/reviewer wants to add more. bamse (talk) 10:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
• I am a bit confused, the article name says "List of buildings...", but then there are three tables of which only the first is called "Buildings". Possibly the article name should be changed.
  • It could be renamed "List of buildings, cemeteries and memorials by Charles Holden" if you think it necessary.--DavidCane (talk) 23:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
    • Or something like List of works/projects (not sure about the correct jargon) by Charles Holden. bamse (talk) 10:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
      • "Works" would probably be best
        • Fine with me. bamse (talk) 13:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
          • To avoid confusing the bots, I'll do the move once the candidacy is complete.--DavidCane (talk) 22:50, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
            • Alternatively you could ask an administrator to do the move. Either way is fine with me. I leave this comment out of "resolved comments" not to forget about it. bamse (talk) 10:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Tending towards support, but I'll have another look at it in a couple of days. One immediate suggestion would be to move all images of buildings into the "Buildings" section and to have a generic image for the lead such as an image of Charles Holden or a map of building locations or an image of a typical stylistic element. bamse (talk) 10:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Had another look...and only one minor complaint.

• Why does ref 138 spell out the CWGC and the other references use the abbreviation "CWGC"? Also wikilink "CWGC" in note 4 and define the abbreviation in text somewhere like this: "Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC)". bamse (talk) 17:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Done. Thanks.--DavidCane (talk) 21:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks. bamse (talk) 08:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Support (under the condition that the list's title is changed to "List of works..." or something similar after promotion). bamse (talk) 08:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:38, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments – "during the 1902s and 1930s." Have a feeling the first number should be 1900s instead. Should be 1920s.--DavidCane (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC) The three hyphens in the Location and Year Completed column for Buildings should be dashes of some type. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC) Year completed still has hyphens (I count eight now). Giants2008 (27 and counting) 18:16, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Forgot those when I did the search replace. All now done.--DavidCane (talk) 21:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Also, the second word of the Year Completed heading should be decapitalized since it's not a proper noun. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC) British Medical Association: Typo in "The were defaced...". Done.--DavidCane (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC) Cemeteries: Should "the" be added to "69 cemeteries for the dead of First World War..."? There's a "the" before First World War in the next section, and I think the flow is better that way. It should. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC) Photo caption in Cemeteries: "The Reginald Blomfield designed Cross of Sacrifice is a features of all IWGC cemeteries." "features" → "feature". Copy edit remnant. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC) Memorials: Remove spaces before cites in this table. Did it for the cemeteries, but forgot those. Now done.--DavidCane (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC) All the references from numbers 9 to 59 need to have publishers listed outside the references themselves. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC) Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:33, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments Opening sentence is quite a mouthful.. any chance of a useful split in there? I've revised the wording.--DavidCane (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC) "in the period from 1920 to 1928" don't think you need "in the period". Done.--DavidCane (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC) "became Adams' partner" I guess it's worth ensuring people know you mean business partner here. Made a change.--DavidCane (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC) St Omer is a disambiguation link. Thought I had done that one once before. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Street numbers should sort numerically in the Building column. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Folkstone->Folkestone. Slaps forward. I live in Kent. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Berkhampstead->Berkhamsted. Slaps forward again. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC) 1198->1,198 etc in that table. Done.--DavidCane (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Is that Naves link the one you really want? Fixed.--DavidCane (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:32, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support The Rambling Man (talk) 16:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks.--DavidCane (talk) 21:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support I found no concerns besides what was already addressed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 15:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 17:56, 26 July 2011 [6].

---

List of Giro d'Italia general classification winners

Nominator(s): NapHit (talk) 20:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because now that the Grand Tour general classification winners list has been promoted I can re-nominate this list, sorry for listing it before when I had another list I was unaware of that rule. Anyway, the list has dealt with the problem from the previous nom, which was of verifiability of teams, which is now rectified. Cheers NapHit (talk) 20:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support At the previous nomination, I was the only opposer, and my reason was that there was no source for the team information. Since then, this source has been added; as all my other points were already solved in the previous nomination, I now fully support this list. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 20:50, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
• Comment Support – Reviewed this the first time and my comments were taken care of there; the only things I want to point out are that "french" should be capitalized for the reference 8 language indication, and the hyphen in reference 19 should be an en dash. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 03:11, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments Giants, they've both been dealt with. NapHit (talk) 10:24, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 19:09, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments "speed of 38.937 kilometres per hour" do we really need that level of accuracy? I'll take the 7 off as in most bike races they use the first two digits after the decimal, so that should be enough. NapHit (talk) 19:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC) Probably worth linking lire as some of our non-European readers may not understand what that is at all. "Bartali's superiority was diminished " not keen on this phrase at all. Shouldn't "20 year old" be hyphenated? I think the "not contested" should sort as the minimum of each column, not the maximum. Not sure "Not contested" should sort by N in the rider name column. Is bikeraceinfo.com a reliable source? the editors of the site have had numerous books published about cycling, which uses the data from their site, therefore I think this deems the site reliable. NapHit (talk) 19:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC) What makes [7] a reliable source? Not sure so I've removed the links and replaced them with sources that are reliable. NapHit (talk) 19:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC) For future situations: memoire-du-cyclisme can be considered a reliable source. It is backed by an organisation, the members are not anonymous, the content is not user-generated (except the forums), there is contact information, and the information is regarded highly accurate in the cycling community. You don't need to change it back, because the new source is also reliable. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 22:47, 18 July 2011 (UTC) 13-digit ISBNs are preferable if available (according to Amazon, both those with 10-digit ISBNs have 13-digit ones too...) The Rambling Man (talk) 12:54, 16 July 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the review TRM, I've dealt with all your concerns. NapHit (talk) 19:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support The Rambling Man (talk) 19:09, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 17:56, 26 July 2011 [8].

---

List of Atlanta Braves team records

Nominator(s): Albacore (talk) 23:48, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Next article in the List of... team records articles. Albacore (talk) 23:48, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — Legolas (talk2me) 13:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

;Comments from Legolas2186 The wins and losses are the same nos? No, wins are 9,945, losing 9,954; approximately .500 Hank Aaron's picture would serve better in the led. Replaced Where and how the table keys are being used except for the last one? Can you please explain? Yes, the asterisk is used in the Individual single-season records for triples. The others are abbreviations used throughout the article. The column "Braves career" contains date ranges only which needs to be crippled per MOS:DATERANGE. For eg: dates within same century should be 1954–74, instead of 1954–1974. Per what, specifically, in the MOS? A link would be helpful; MOS:DATERANGE is nonexistent. Baseball-refernce.com, MLB.com are all online sources and they shouldn't appear italicized in the reference. Please correct all of them. Per what, specifically, in the MOS? Also, is there really no other third party sources reporting these statistics other than these two primary websites? Any news sources etc? Did you try to look for them? Added a third party source for the batting average MLB record. These are some comments I could find. Spotchecks not done. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:38, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Support the promotion now. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 13:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments – "This list documents the superlative records and accomplishments of team members during their tenures as Atlanta Braves in Major League Baseball's National League East." The team wasn't always in Atlanta, and wasn't always in a division. A more accurate ending would be "of team members during their tenures as Braves in MLB." (use the abbreviation if it's already been provided) Reworded Can we get rid of "the" before MLB in this sentence? No one calls it "the MLB" like they do for the other major U.S. sports leagues; they just say MLB. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:06, 16 July 2011 (UTC) Removed "the" Albacore (talk) 22:46, 16 July 2011 (UTC) Surprised that Hank Aaron's home run leadership isn't mentioned, since that is the (former) record he is most remembered for. You could say the same for RBI. Added home run leadership. Albacore (talk) 13:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC) Don't need two batting average links in the lead. Fixed "while John Clarkson is tied with himself...". Confusing at first glance. I'm wondering whether some more explanation would be worthwhile. Reworded Vic Willis photo caption: "batsman" should be "batsmen". Fixed Check the player sorting for single-game pitching records. Barrett is sorting after Smoltz, which is incorrect for sorting by last name. For me it sorts like it's supposed to. I agree with Giants, it sorts incorrectly. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:57, 13 July 2011 (UTC) Now it sorts in the order of Barrett, Smoltz, Niekro. Not sure if it was that way before or if I misread it the first time. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:06, 16 July 2011 (UTC) Now fixed, Smoltz was sorting as "Johnson". Albacore (talk) 22:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC) Also check to see if the photo captions require periods at the end. Fixed, see below Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 12:27, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Comments "in a single season two times in his MLB" twice? Willis caption needs a period. Nichols caption - should have a period and (pictured) could be in italics. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC) Changed, added, and fixed. Albacore (talk) 00:36, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support no more issues for me. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 20:10, 24 July 2011 [9].

---

List of accolades received by 127 Hours

Nominator(s): Crystal Clear x3 14:06, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets the criteria. Crystal Clear x3 14:06, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫Share–a–Power[citation needed] 12:18, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

*Comments link "Utah" in lead? done dmy dates or mdy dates? I see you are using 99% the former. done could make the "Date of ceremony" bigger, so that the dates will fit in one line. done ref 32: avoid allcaps titles done ref 4: Mike Bruno fixed ref 26: Eric Ditzian fixed ref 13: Robert Wilonsky? And BTW, how reliable is this blog? I've always been under the impression that it was a RS, but I've left a question over at the FLC talkpage. I've fixed the author ref 35: Kilday-- fixed ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫Share–a–Power[citation needed] 18:20, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 13:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments Infobox (a) image caption needs a full stop (b) Awards & Nominations -> Accolades (or Awards & nominations) done "feature limited United States and United Kingdom releases " why not just "limited releases in the United States and United Kingdom" and then have a less confusing link (i.e. you can link "limited release" rather than pipe link "limited"... done Not terribly keen on the thicker lines between award types but just personal preference. I usually just keep them in every awards list since awhile back (I think at my Precious FLC) someone said to add them so it would be easier to read Do you need all those super-categories since 127 hours has its own category? done (removed bio films and films made by danny boyle as the page already has a template) Crystal Clear x3 22:48, 7 July 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

• Table needs row and col scope for accessibility.

huh?

I take it you mean "Could you explain that please?" - see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (accessibility)/Data tables tutorial. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:34, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I think I've corrected it now Crystal Clear x3 23:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

No, you need "scope="col"" for column headers, and "scope="row"" for row headers. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I honestly have no idea as to how to do that. Could you please show me an example? =/Crystal Clear x3 14:48, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

That's why I linked the data table tutorial. Look at this for how I added "col scopes" and the first "row scope" in the table. It's for screen readers. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support... And do note that, yes, I did copyedit this article at the end of June. Bobnorwal (talk) 17:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 16:25, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments – "It amounted 35.8 million at the box office". Amounted? Is that what they normally say? I thought it would have been something else. Changed to "grossed" The photo caption has a stray apostrophe at the end that needs removal. done Remove all caps from title of reference 6 ("AWARDS"). done In reference 17, the newspaper Evening Standard should be italicized. done What makes Alternative Film Guide (refs 38 and 39) a reliable source? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC) I've seen it used in plenty of other FLs but I've left a question on the FL talk page just in case I'm wrong about it being an RS Crystal Clear x3 03:28, 13 July 2011 (UTC) After talking to User:Dabomb87 I think it's safe to say it's an RS. Crystal Clear x3 03:15, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Ruby2010 comment! 20:02, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Ruby2010 MTV Movie Award -> MTV Movie Awards done Is there no URL for ref 24? There was, but then it became a deadlink =/. So I decided to make it like a tree link. Ref 36's publisher should be the International Press Academy, not Satellite Awards done I notice you have a lot of secondary sources (rather than primary, like the awards' direct website). Could you try and convert the citations to the award show's direct websites (instead of sites like Awards Daily)? Primary is always better A problem there is that quite a few of the award ceremonies cited in the list are pretty low-key and do not even have official websites, or posts about the nominations/wins get updated/removed soon (such as the Saturn Awards). Like for example, the Las Vegas Society and St Louis awards's websites only lists its winners [10] [11], which would be fine if 127 Hours had won all of its nominations. However, for something like the London Critics Circle I could source it through their official site, but with The Utah one, I used indieWIRE instead. K. I know it's difficult to find obscure award sources, but just wanted to be sure you had tried all their websites first Ruby2010 comment! 14:38, 20 July 2011 (UTC) Independent Spirit Awards has one win (typo in infobox) done Again with infobox, Santa Barbara International Film Festival gave one nomination, not five done Again with infobox, St. Louis Gateway Film Critics Association is repeated twice Really? I only counted it once..... Look again: Santa Barbara International Film Festival 1 1 St. Louis Gateway Film Critics Association 1 5 Satellite Awards 0 9 Screen Actors Guild 0 1 Southeastern Film Critics Association 1 2 St. Louis Gateway Film Critics Association 1 5 Toronto Film Critics Association By bad, corrected Again with infobox, Utah Film Critics Association gave two noms, not three done Crystal Clear x3 06:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC) Again with the infobox, I count 24 wins and 136 noms (you should recount to be sure) Ruby2010 comment! 14:38, 20 July 2011 (UTC) -Ruby2010 comment! 03:14, 20 July 2011 (UTC) done Crystal Clear x3 19:44, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Support Overall a nice list. Ruby2010 comment! 20:02, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Support – A very good list. Novice7 (talk) 13:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 20:10, 24 July 2011 [12].

---

List of accolades received by The Young Victoria

Nominator(s): Ruby2010 comment! 04:31, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it to be completed and of sufficient FL quality. The lead summarizes the actual list while also adding new, relevant information (i.e. how many Oscars costume designer Sandy Powell now has etc). For the list, I strove to double cite everything with a primary and secondary source (with a few exceptions due to not being able to find suitable references). I modeled the article after other FLs based on film accolades, such as here and here. Please note that this is my first FL. Thanks to everyone for looking it over! Ruby2010 comment! 04:31, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — Legolas (talk2me) 06:10, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

;Comments from Legolas2186 Break the first sentence after Fellowes. Start the new sentence from Blun and join it with the third one with Martin Scorsese Done Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) Toronto,[7] Sudbury, Ontario,[8] Chicago,[9] Hamptons, New York,[10] Vermont,[11] San Francisco,[12] Denver,[13] and San Joaquin, California.[12] --> Please kill them. Done (see ref 7) Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) Emily Blunt --> Blunt, in the second para Done Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) the ceremony saw film costume designer --> The word costume designer implies indirectly anyone related to film/theatre medium. So no need to include the word film. Done Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) each their second BAFTAs, --> remove "each" Done Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) on a list of the --> replace "a" with "their". The list was compiled by their journalists. Done Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) Who's the person accompanying Blunt in the infobox image? He's not mentioned in the caption I see. Would it be possible to crop him out of the image, and keep only Blunt? I'll work on finding a better image or cropping this one. Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) Found a cropped version. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 23:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC) Infobox, total nominations is 23 I see. Yep you're right. Done Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) First appearance of The Young Victoria in the Recipients column should be wiki-linked. Done Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) En-dash in ref. 9. Actually check the en-dash in reference titles of all the references. Done Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) Remove capitalization in reference titles. Before I begin this sort of big endeavor, just want to verify the only word you want capitalized is the first word (or film titles etc). I was just going by what the articles themselves capitalized otherwise. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Er I misinterpreted what you meant. There were a few refs with all caps titles that are now fixed. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 23:40, 4 July 2011 (UTC) Ref 28, BBC News should not be italicized. Done Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) American Society of Cinematographers, not listed in table. The Young Victoria unfortunately failed to receive a nomination there (unless there's something else I missed). Ruby2010 comment! 23:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC) ASC award is listed in the infobox as with 1 nomination. There in lies the discrepancy of 23/24 noms. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:10, 5 July 2011 (UTC) Fixed (removed award). Good catch! Ruby2010 comment! 15:31, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Overall, a nice list. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:12, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for looking it over! :) Ruby2010 comment! 23:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Support the promotion of the list now

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments Infobox: (1) caption needs a full stop, (2) Awards & Nominations -> Accolades (or, worst case Awards & nominations). Perhaps one sentence about what the film is about? " After the Academy Awards ..." think I prefer "Following the ..." "The Sydney Morning Herald included The Young Victoria on their list of the .." on "its" list. "giving it the top " top repeated here, perhaps "highest" the second time? About half of the award titles in the table redirect, is there a good reason for that? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC) All now fixed (chose "accolades", added full stop, fixed all redirects etc). Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 21:47, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support no problems. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — Crystal Clear x3 23:37, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

;Comments from Crystal Clear x3 Comments: a few minor suggestions: "The film starred Emily Blunt, Rupert Friend, Miranda Richardson, Mark Strong, Jim Broadbent, Harriet Walter, Paul Bettany, and Thomas Kretschmann, while Martin Scorsese, Graham King, and Sarah, Duchess of York served as its producers.[1]" I think that this sentence should be spilt. (ex . Martin Scorsese, Graham King, and Sarah, Duchess of York also served as its producers.") Fixed Ruby2010 comment! 16:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC) There are quite a few instances of using "the film" or "it/its" in the first paragraph. I think it would be better to refer to it by name more often (A GK Films production, The Young Victoria was; The Young Victoria's theatrical release occurred) Fixed Ruby2010 comment! 16:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Since the first paragraph also begins with The Young Victoria, you might wanna start the second different (for example: Vallée's movie has garnered) Fixed Ruby2010 comment! 16:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC) There seems to be some overlink in the refs. (Variety in ref 4 and 7; Digital Spy in ref 32; MTV in 35; The Guardian in 18 and 20 and The Times in ref 15) Not quite sure what you mean here. For consistency's sake, all the works/publishers for the refs are wikilinked (common practice in most articles). Unless you mean something else? Per Wikipedia:OVERLINK, a work/publisher should only be linked once. (for example, if you cite People/Time Inc for ref 10 and then use EW/Time Inc for ref 52, the latter TI should not be linked) Ah, I see. Done. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 23:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Ruby2010 comment! 16:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Box Office Mojo and IMDb Inc should be linked in ref 12 Just to be sure, you want me to add IMDb as a publisher? B/c generally I either add publishers to all the refs, or none of them (i.e. the New York Times would have The New York Times Company etc). Ruby2010 comment! 16:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC) If you only cite works then adding B.O.M. is fine. Crystal Clear x3 22:12, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Wikilinked Box Office Mojo. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 23:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Crystal Clear x3 21:36, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Suport good work on the list! Crystal Clear x3 23:37, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 14:39, 21 July 2011 [13].

---

1974 Asian Games medal table

Nominator(s): — Bill william compton^Talk 16:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

In my view this article satisfies all the criteria of FL, and I'll do my best in addressing all the concerns and queries. — Bill william compton^Talk 16:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — Legolas (talk2me) 16:52, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

;Comments by Legolas2186 September 1, 1974 --> comma after 1974  Done in an any country of Middle East. --> in any Middle East country.  Done At the Games, 3,010 athletes --> Doesnot look nice, try "A total of 3,010 athletes... don't forget to use non-breaking spaces.  Done Join the last two sentences of the first para.  Done In the medal table, do we need the country name abbreviations? They are not indicating anything elsewhere in the article. These abbreviations are template generated, so I can't remove them; and perhaps you might have neglected first para of "Medal table" section— "If nations are still tied, equal ranking is given; they are listed alphabetically by IOC country code, and these abbreviations are IOC country codes. In references, accessdate should be May 1 instead of May 01.  Done Online sources like Olympic council and Pakistan Sports Board etc should not be italicized.  Done Not sure how much those redlinks have a chance of getting an article created sooner than later. Seeing that this is a 1974 awards table, I would recommend removing them. Don't worry, I'll make articles for them. Haha, would love to see you create wonderful articles on them. :) — Legolas (talk2me) 14:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC) These are some of the issues I found in a glance. — Legolas (talk2me) 07:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I think this qualifies as a FL now, I support this. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 14:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure whether articles would be "wonderful" or not, but I'll try to keep them in decent shape (demo), and would you please strike out your comments now. One more thing, I know this is not a right place for this, but I'm a big fan of your work, as I'm also an admirer (or, devotee would be better to say) of Madge and Gaga. Keep it up - your amazing work. — Bill william compton^Talk 16:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh god, *blushing* didn't know I had admirers. Well, I have supported this list, no need to strike out eh? :) — Legolas ^(talk2me) 16:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

It's perfect. — Bill william compton^Talk 17:22, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments – Three "the"s needed in first sentence of second paragraph; one at the start and one before Asian Games Federation's and People's Republic of China.  Done "finished at the second spot in a medal table". "a" → "the". Do the same with the last sentence of the lead.  Done In the Hasegawa caption, add more "the"s before "gold medal" and "men's doubles event". Also, commas would be helpful before and after "paired with Mitsuru Kohno".  Done Changes in medal standings: It's never said what substance the two weightlifters tested positive for.  Done I really don't know about the specific chemical, but it was stimulant, so add it there. Two more "the"s needed before "heavyweight category" at various times in this section, and one before "middle heavyweight category".  Done I'm not sure what "due to marginal overweight" means. Is this meant to be "due to being marginally overweight"?  Done "Two gold of Masashi" → "The two golds of Masashi"?  Done Remove comma before Pourdejam's name.  Done In reference 3, the link to The Journal goes to a Connecticut paper, not one from Switzerland. Also, the publisher link goes to an English paper. The link is at Record-Journal.  Done Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:26, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 11:59, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments Last sentence of the first para of the lead is a little odd because the two clauses really aren't related at all, so the semi-colon seems a little, well, odd to me. But Legolas asked me to make them one. Well, it's fine, but they're not linked together so it'd be better if they weren't linked at all. Think about expanding them both a bit and then having them as standalone sentences. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC)  Done You abbreviate NOC but never use it.  Removed "play with Israel in tennis" I would suggest "face" rather than "play with".  Done "Pakistan and Singapore improved their position in the general medal table compared to the 1970 Asian Games" and none of the others did? Just trying to clarify why this is so particularly relevant. It's relevant because they were the only two nations beside Iran (which I've explained in later sentence) that improved their rankings. Not clear that Iran (who you mention two sentences later) was one of only three ranking positions to have improved. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC) In simple sentence yes, there were only three nations (Iran, Pakistan and Singapore) which improved their rankings in the medal table as compare to the last Games (Israel and Japan retained their position, means no change). Okay. Can you say that easily and elegantly? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:53, 4 July 2011 (UTC)  Removed I've removed the whole sentence. It's better without any comparison. "South Korea devolved to fourth position with 16 gold and 57 overall medals, South Korea ranked second"... perhaps "ranking" instead of "South Korea ranked..."  Done "second in the medal table of the last Asian Games" confusing, perhaps "previous" rather than "last".  Done "or the banned substance " what's "the" banned substance? Explained above to Giants. Not really, it's actually just "a banned substance". Unless you can tell me what "the" substance actually was. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC)  Replaced Oh, mon erreur. The Record-Journal is actually just "Record-Journal". I'll change, but please first check here, isn't it "The Record-Journal". Sure, I'm going with our own article. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC) Do you want me to remove "the"? No major trauma. It's a redirect, that's all. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:53, 4 July 2011 (UTC) Okay. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support The Rambling Man (talk) 10:59, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 14:39, 21 July 2011 [14].

---

List of Tennessee Volunteers head football coaches

Nominator(s): Patriarca12 (talk) 16:48, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets the FL criteria as I modeled it after a similar list on the same topic (List of Alabama Crimson Tide head football coaches). Any comments are greatly appreciated to perfect this. Thanks for the consideration! Patriarca12 (talk) 16:48, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — Legolas (talk2me) 05:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

;Comments by Legolas2186 Why are Division I and Football Bowl Subdivision separately linked to the same article? Good call. Removed one of the links. coach in compiling a record of twelve --> coach while compiling a record of twelve Fixed in seasons coached and games won --> in total number of seasons coached and games won. Fixed Is it necessary to bold the names in the table? We know that the list pertains to the coaches. You can probably included "plainrowheaders" in the table declaration and scope="row" in the rows Done Dates within the same century should be crippled. For eg: 1902–1903 --> 1902–03. I do not necessarily have an issue with changing this. However, many of the other college football coaches lists include the full, not abbreviated years. If we do decide to change it here, I would like some sort of consensus for how the others should be formatted for consistency purposes. That seems reasonable. In the key box it says "elected" for the Hall of Fame. Inducted is always a better word. Done The Football Guide book, does it have any isbn, issn etc? This is the annual media guide published and distributed by the UT athletic department. I cannot find an isbn or the like for it though. Anything else? Like volume, issue date etc? — Legolas (talk2me) 05:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC) Added the Eds per the guide. REf 5, online source should not be italicized like 2010 NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision Records. Not quite sure how to format this. I thought it was correct in that it is an on-line version of the official record book, not just an on-line PDF. If that is the case, make 2010 NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision Records as the main title of the url, not the pdf one because that's misleading. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC) Ahh. I think I have this straightened out now. Alt needs to be a little more explanatory I feel. More detail added Expand on the imagery present behind him. Its just not a field, you can clearly see the photographers too with their camera. Done. Do you need to have two separate level headers for General and Specific headers? They are practically one-inch apart. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC) Reformatted. These are some issues I saw. Overall great work. — Legolas (talk2me) 09:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the comments! I will address them early next week when I get home from vacation. Patriarca12 (talk) 03:07, 30 June 2011 (UTC) Thanks again for the comments. Hopefully I have them addressed, but please feel free to let me know if something else needs to be fixed. Patriarca12 (talk) 21:54, 13 July 2011 (UTC) If I may step in on the next-to-last comment up there, I believe reference 5 may be part of a larger book. Italicizing the book title is correct if that's the case. Not sure what to do about the current title, though. Maybe just give the book title? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC) Glad you noted. I think it should any one of them. Either choose the pdf link, or choose the book with proper citation. — Legolas (talk2me) 15:37, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Support – I'm fine with this one. Nice work Patriarca. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:33, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:03, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments – Scraping the bottom of the barrel to find anything to add to the above comments... In the last sentence of the lead, I would remove the comma after Dickey's name. This is the only place in the lead where a serial comma is used in a list-like sentence; the change would make this consistent with the rest of the lead. Punctuation before a ref would be nice, but is no deal-breaker. Fixed Key: Second word of National Championships should be decapitalized as a non-proper noun. The lead doesn't capitalize it. Fixed Note 4: Put an en dash in "win-loss percentage", just like if an actual figure was given. Fixed Minor, but the state in the general reference from the school ("TN") should be spelled out. Fixed In reference 5, unless "The" is listed before National Collegiate Athletic Association as the publisher of the reference, remove it. Also, I don't think the abbreviations are needed here and in ref 15, since there are no other cites to items from those publishers. Fixed Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:03, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NThomas (talk) 04:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments - In addition to the concerns above: Johnny Majors last season was in 1992, when the SEC debuted divisions. Major's field for division championships should have "0" instead of the em dash. Done Commas are needed between separate tenures Done Coaches prior to 1916 should have em dashes for post-season stats, as the first bowl game, the Rose Bowl, wasn't played "openly" until then. Done Derek Dooley's term should read "2010–present" not simply 2010. Done Coaches that "shared" tenure over the same season should have a footnote similar to FA List of Colorado Buffaloes head football coaches Footnotes added The SIAA did not award conference championships. From 1896–1920, coaches were not able to compete for a conference title so em dashes are need till then. Done The Southern Conference does not recognize conference champions until 1933. Again, coaches during up to 1933 were not able to compete for a conference title so em dashes are needed during that time. Done Unlike modern athletic conferences, the SIAA did not feature a separate conference schedule. The SIAA was more or less held a similar role to the present day NCAA regulating competition. Win, loss, tie, and percentage records need em dashes during SIAA seasons. I do understand this concern. However, UT does make note of their SIAA victories in their media guide as conference victories. Since it is listed in their official sources, I feel they should be included in this article. Ultimately, I will agree to any sort of consensus on the issue though. I was looking at the "All-Time Coaching Records" on page 162 of the media guide you listed as a general reference. Where did you find conference records for SIAA and Southern Conference games? NThomas (talk) 04:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC) Don't really know what I was thinking here. Guess I still had the LSU list I recently created still in mind which does list SIAA records in their media guide. For this I went through the individual season records in the guide from 1899–1922 in calculating SIAA records. If this is not appropriate for FL status, I do not have an issue with removing the information. Patriarca12 (talk) 10:43, 7 July 2011 (UTC) I have no problem with it. Just curious where you got it. Sorry for the late reply. NThomas (talk) 03:44, 16 July 2011 (UTC) Keep up the good work! NThomas (talk) 06:37, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support As far as I can tell, this meets all FL criteria. NThomas (talk) 03:44, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

All comments have now been addressed. Please feel free to post any more or ask for clarity for any others you may have. Again, thank you all for taking the time to look at this. It is appreciated! Patriarca12 (talk) 19:07, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments "since it began play" I do find this a touch colloquial. Presumably the first head coach was around before they began play, i.e. to coach them for their first game. Perhaps "since its formation"? Updated Note 2 says SEC East, this isn't noted elsewhere... Changed note to reflect East Division as indicated in the leade. General ref has the Football Guide in italics, the references has the title in non-italics. Italicized The Rambling Man (talk) 18:21, 6 July 2011 (UTC) Comments addressed. Thanks for taking the time to look at this! Patriarca12 (talk) 21:36, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Support – Comments from KV5

• So in perusing the list, I note that there is no head coach in 1943? Why is this? Certainly this gap is worth noting in the lead?

I made a mention of this in a note at the top of the Term column. I think this does suffice, but am agreeable to adding it to the leade if others agree to placing it there rather than a note.

• "James DePree has the lowest winning percentage of those who have coached more than one game, with .306." - does it have to be clarified? All coaches have led the team for more than one game.

Good call, removed.

• "Of the 22 different head coaches"

Removed

I re-formatted the dates in the article out of ISO format, so that's probably it for me! — KV5 • Talk • 23:41, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with some of the formatting and commenting on this. It is appreciated! Patriarca12 (talk) 21:54, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support The Rambling Man (talk) 11:01, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

• Comment Have KV5 and Legolas been asked to revisit? Dabomb87 (talk) 19:41, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm fine. — KV5 • Talk • 00:57, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 14:39, 21 July 2011 [15].

---

Latin Grammy Award for Song of the Year

Nominator(s): Jaespinoza (talk) 01:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it is fully referenced, has an expanded lead section and the table was worked in order to be clear and complete. I will keep an eye on the suggestions of the editors to take this list to full potential. Thank you very much. Jaespinoza (talk) 01:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments Look at making the table more accessible with row and col scopes included (see this tutorial). I read the tutorial, but I was wondering if you have an example of another table that I can see?. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC) In the infobox, awarded for just says "excellence in songwriting", but presumably it Latin music songwriting specifically? fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC) Cafe Tacuba seems to be Cafe Tacvba. fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC) " The exception being in 2000 and 2009,..." -> "The exceptions to this were in 2000 and 2009...." fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC) "No Hay Nadie Como Tu" diacritic missing from the u of Tu (since you have them elsewhere, be consistent). fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC) 2009 is linked twice in the lead, don't overlink. fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC) Sanz caption needs a full stop. fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC) Guerra caption also. fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC) 2004 - Cafe is missing its diacritic, and see above note about Tacvba. fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 23:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments –

• "The exceptions to this were in 2009, when 'Corazon Espinado' by Santana featuring Mana and 'No Hay Nadie Como Tu' by Calle 13 featuring Cafe Tacvba, respectively, receiving the award without a nomination for Song of the Year." "receiving" → "received".

Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 16:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

• "Jorge Luis Piloto and Jorge Villamizar are the only lyricists to be nominated twice at the same year". "at" → "in".

Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 16:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

• In the photo captions, remove commas after Juan Luis Guerra and Luis Fonsi. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 16:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Jaespinoza (talk) 16:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support no issues for me. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:46, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support: I support the promotion of this list assuming other reviewers' concerns are also addressed. My preference would be for the Songwriter(s) column to NOT be sortable, but it doesn't bother me enough to not support this list's promotion. Well done! --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:32, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 21:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments "The Latin Grammy Award for Song of the Year is an honor presented annually at the Latin Grammy Awards, a ceremony that recognizes excellence and creates a wider awareness of cultural diversity and contributions of Latin recording artists in the United States and internationally." -> "The Latin Grammy Award for Song of the Year is an honor presented annually at the Latin Grammy Awards, a ceremony that recognizes excellence, creates a wider awareness of cultural diversity and contributions of Latin recording artists in the United States and internationally." -- too many "ands" Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 21:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC) "Nine of the eleven awarded songs also earned the Latin Grammy for Record of the Year, which unlike this category, is given to songs that were released on a promotional level, and the prize is given to the performer, producer and audio engineer." -- would be better if it was said as "have also earned" just so that it flows Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 21:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC) "Jorge Luis Piloto and Jorge Villamizar are the only lyricists to be nominated twice in the same year, Piloto in 2009 for songs performed by Andrés Cepeda and Luis Enrique, while Villamizar wrote songs for the band Bacilos. " -- a colon would serve better after "in the same year" versus a comma Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 21:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC) I second that the songwriters shouldn't be sortable.--Truco 503 14:44, 11 July 2011 (UTC) Fixed. Jaespinoza (talk) 21:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support -- all issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL.--Truco ⁵⁰³ 14:41, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 14:39, 21 July 2011 [16].

---

List of songs in Rock Band 3

Nominator(s): –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:35, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... erm... I think it meets the criteria. :) It has a well-defined scope (the songs on the Rock Band 3 disc), good prose (in my opinion), a lead which explains what the list is, and it looks nice. I recently added in the images which are next to the list as a way of making the article look more appealing than just a list... although the images are just of the artist, and not necessarily related to thee in-game song beyond that. If people in the discussion feel that they should be removed, I don't really mind. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:35, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I think we need to borrow from the RB3 reception to talk about the critical response to the setlist, since that can be discussed in depth. Also, it may be worthwhile in talking about the DLC that HMX has considered Rock Band (and RB3 itself) to be a game platform that they can support indefinitely with songs, and while they are't pushing an RB4 out this year. --MASEM (t) 22:31, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Adding reception would make sense, sure. I'll try and add something later today or tomorrow. The way that HMX considers the series to be a "platform" seems like it belongs more in the Rock Band 3 and Rock Band (series) articles to me, though. I wanted to make the DLC section in this article focus specifically on what can be used in RB3 and what RB3-specific DLC is like, rather than discussing DLC for the platform as a whole, since that is (or should be) discussed in the series article and Complete list of downloadable songs for the Rock Band series. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 12:18, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I've added in a short section for reception. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 13:19, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments – Announcements: "The full setlist list was formally announced on August 25th on the Rock Band website." Don't think you need to put "list" if "setlist" is right behind it. Also, the th should be removed from 25th. In the Queen photo caption, get rid of the contraction (isn't). Downloadable songs: "Downloadable songs since the game's release includes, when appropriate...". "includes" → "include"? Is it Pro Guitar or Pro guitar? I see the former in the table notes and the latter in the downloadable songs section. The archived link for reference 22 isn't showing up. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 16:30, 6 June 2011 (UTC) done. Looks like the archive error was a copy-and-paste mistake. Anyways, I'm using "Pro Guitar" now because that seems to be how Harmonix capitalizes it at this page of their website. If that goes against the MOS or anything, I'd be happy to change it back. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 17:15, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

The formatting of the Track_listing section should be fixed. The long vertical list of images doesn't make sense in context and ruins layout. Maybe a gallery would be better? Diego Moya (talk) 14:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the input! I think as a gallery it wouldn't look very good; how nice it looks probably depends on monitor size. As I said above, I'd be happy to remove them... do you think that that is the best course of action? I can't think of a better place to put them, and they're really just decoration with some "fun facts" in the captions so removing them doesn't really detract from the article. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 15:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm against deleting content for no good reason. No, it just needs to be put in a different format. The problem is that at standard resolution (I'm at 1024x768), at anything other than with a maximized window they don't align with the table so they look like a "long right-aligned list of photos with whitespace on the left". Maybe they could be scattered around the article so they aren't together, or their text could be extracted and the images placed in a gallery. Something that don't force HTML text reflow to mess up with the list structure. Diego Moya (talk) 18:01, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Ooh... that is problematic on 1024x768 displays (my monitor is much wider than that, so the end of the images actually lines up perfectly with the end of the table). I'll look into it. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, in order for the table to look good on both 1024x768 and *whatever-my-15.6-inch-display-is*, all but like one or two images need to be removed. The remaining images, then, seem kind of out of place. I'd happily put them in a gallery, but I don't think a gallery here would pass WP:IG. I've removed the images for now (and since the captions are really kind of trivia-ish, the info isn't really needed in the article). I'd just added them before the FLC so the article looked nicer, but they do really make it look ugly on some displays. If you have any ideas as to how they, or the information in the captions, can be kept, I'd be happy to add it. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:14, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

That same guideline suggests moving them to commons, and there's a template to link to them.i wouldn't like the pictures lost because of my feedback.Diego Moya (talk) 23:40, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Most of the pictures are on Commons, but not in a single category. I mean, what would it be? "Pictures of artists featured in the Rock Band series"? It seems kind of arbitrary. They aren't screenshots or anything, and IIRC most of them are already in the article about the pictured artist. Begins to regret having put them in in the first place. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 12:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Yea, from past discussions, we don't classify songs as being part of Rock Band or GH through categories, it would make no sense for the artists (or even photos of articles) to be categorized in the same manner. --MASEM (t) 13:23, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

• Question from nominator: Would it make sense to add in the "band difficulty" for each song? It could be a useful sort, I just don't know whether or not it would be encyclopedic enough. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 22:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
  • From experience, as soon as you try to add this in, readers will want to see all the ratings. Since these are all available via the RB website, we don't need to include them. Unlike other music games where there is tiering based on difficulty, it doesn't really happen in RB, so I don't think you'd want to include them. --MASEM (t) 13:23, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
    • Ah, gotcha. That makes sense, thanks! (And what is up with the tiering not being based on difficulty? There are songs which are devil-tiered for the full band when none of the individual songs are devil tiered!) –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 13:26, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:33, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments Up to seven players but only five instruments mentioned? Can you do multiple vocals or something? I guess so, considering the table says up to 3 vocal parts, worth expanding on this in the lead. done –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:15, 13 June 2011 (UTC) " the full Rock Band library consisting of over 2,000 songs by the time the game was released." is that referenced anywhere? Yes; it is referenced in List of songs in Rock Band 3#Downloadable songs (reference 16 at this time). –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:15, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Any reason why Amy Whinehouse sorts by A and not W (which you'd normally expect for solo artists performing under their "own" name)? That's how it sorts in-game (only "The" and "A" at the beginning of a name change the in-game sort order, to my knowledge, and those are accounted for in the table). I can change it because it isn't that big a deal, but I feel that reflecting the game's sort order would be worthwhile. The same goes for David Bowie, James Brown, John Lennon, etc. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:15, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Du Hast -> Du hast. Listed in the game as "Du Hast". Maybe the game is incorrect, but listing it as "Du hast" here would be misrepresenting the name of the song in-game, which is what this list should reflect. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:15, 13 June 2011 (UTC) In the table, worth explaining what "Year" means. Added as a footnote; seemed like the most appropriate place for such a note. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:27, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Is Genre in the table something that's defined by Rock Band or something you decided upon yourself? As listed in game and on rockband.com . –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:24, 13 June 2011 (UTC) What does "Family Friendly" mean and why is Friendly capitalised? I've removed the column. It was added by User:Wiki helper guy a little while ago (presumably to be consistent with Complete list of downloadable songs for the Rock Band series) and I filled in the fields. Thinking about it more though, I don't really see much point in keeping it; on the DLC list, it can be used to see what songs are compatible with Lego Rock Band, but that can't be saids for RB3 songs. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:24, 13 June 2011 (UTC) "More than 2000 potential" 2,000 and do you really mean "potential"? I think you mean something like "a library of over 2,000 songs was available..." done –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:15, 13 June 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:19, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

• Conditional support that the nominator corrects the italicization of the online and printed sources in the references. I found some of the website names as italicized, which should not be, and vice-versa. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 16:10, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review! I think I've fixed the issue you mentioned; let me know if I missed any. I really don't know why {{cite web}} italicizes the "work" by default, since it it almost always going to be a website. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 16:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• "The Power of Love" does not sort properly.
• I will support besides that.--Truco ⁵⁰³ 14:54, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Good catch, thanks. Fixed with this edit. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 15:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Support -- meets WP:WIAFL.--Truco ⁵⁰³ 14:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments: Here are the issues that stood out to me.

• The sentence in the lead about the number of players and the types of peripherals seem awkward to me. Not sure, but I think too much info is in there for the sentence to flow smoothly. Maybe break it up?
• "Pro" keeps popping up, but no description of it is made on the page. Some basic description should be made for the layman, otherwise the content about it makes little sense.

I also made a few tweaks to trivial things I noticed. Other than that, the list is in good shape. I'll check back in later. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:53, 18 July 2011 (UTC))

• Thanks for the review! I think I fixed those couple issues in this edit. –Drilnoth (T/C) 15:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Support: My concerns have been addressed and the list looks to meet the FL criteria. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:22, 18 July 2011 (UTC))

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 12:33, 16 July 2011 [17].

---

List of TNA World Heavyweight Champions

Nominator(s): --WillC 13:40, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... I nominated this once before but it didn't gain enough support to pass. Copyedited it real quick and decided to renominate it.--WillC 13:40, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comments - Not a lot in the way of issues but a few inconsistencies I think should be cleared up, for example how Slam Sports is stylized. "Afterwards, TNA ceased to recognize Angle's first title reign nor the vacancy for unknown reasons." I would think this statement needs some sort of source. Afro (Talk) 17:55, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
• Agree with Afkatk, this needs a source. And if this reign isn't recognized by TNA, than why does it have a number. If you see for example the title history of the WWE Championship, then this reigns don't have numbers in the first column. Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 23:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Well the problem with List of WWE Champions was it was passed four years ago and goes by the in universe history rather than the factual history, which means it violates In-U. The reason the reign has a number is it can factually be proven it occurred and was recognized. It use to have a source to TNA's official history, but they remove the history to the title all the time. As such I cann't show they don't recognize it on their site anymore, or any other reign at that.--WillC 00:45, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
    • Also fixed the slam problem afro.--WillC 10:37, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

• I would suggest hiding the information or removing it until a source can be found. Afro (Talk) 16:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

• Might as well. Everything else is sourced and the article is factual. Only problem I've not been able to solved. Removed.--WillC 00:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support - I'll support the promotion, like I said before there's no real issues with the list. Afro (Talk) 16:02, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 15:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 12:26, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments "...were set to host their annual Sacrifice pay-per-view (PPV) event, in which the NWA World Heavyweight Championship was set .." set overdose. Fixed--WillC 16:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC) "The ownership of the championship was decided" do you need "ownership of the" here? Yeah somewhat, because of the special finish. Everyone was claiming ownership of the title.--WillC 16:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC) "it is won via a scripted" new para so reiterate here what "it" is. Fixed.--WillC 16:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC) "reigns that occurred on Impact!, usually aired on tape delay " grammar fail on this sentence, perhaps "Impact! are usually aired..." Fixed--WillC 16:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC) "with 4." -> four. "at 1 day" -> one. " 15 reigns shared among 8 wrestlers, with 2 vacancies" -> fifteen, eight, two. Well numbers below 10 are supposed to be written out rather than spelled. And according to the MoS I believe there should be a consistency in writing styles.--WillC 16:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC) Ah, but numbers you can spell with a single word are okay too... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 7 July 2011 (UTC) So really what is the point? Either way works.--WillC 16:38, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Two of the numbers are below ten so it would look and read better (prose-wise) if you made all three numbers textual. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC) Ehhh screw it, done.--WillC 11:23, 16 July 2011 (UTC) Col heading "Wrestlers" -> "Wrestler". Fixed--WillC 16:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC) If you wikt link "vacated", why isn't "vacancy" linked anywhere in the notes? I see no point in the wikt link myself. Linked the rest.--WillC 16:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC) Check ref titles - use en-dash not spaced hyphens (e.g. ref 35). Fixed--WillC 16:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Support Nice read and I can't see any outstanding issues. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:34, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments Support – Overall this looks quite clean. Just a couple minor things I spotted toward the end...

• Footnote A: "wrestlers with the same number mean that they are tied for that certain rank." Can't put a finger on it, but something is bugging me about this. Removing "mean that they" leaves "wrestlers with the same number are tied for that certain rank." To me that sounds better.
• The titles of references 8 (twice), 36, and 37 have hyphens that should be en dashes. This is admittedly very picky, but I've seen others mention this from time to time in various FLCs, including this one. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:25, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Done both--WillC 04:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 00:07, 15 July 2011 [18].

---

List of Victoria Cross recipients (G–M)

Nominator(s): Woody (talk) 17:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Quick on the heels of the recently promoted A–F list, this is the second of the three alphabetical lists. The errors pointed out in the A-F list have been fixed here as well and I think it meets the FL criteria. Thanks for your time, Woody (talk) 17:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Comment

• When I sort the table by "Date of action", Frederick Miller doesn't sort in the right place; it sorts between James McKechnie's 20 September 1854 and Thomas Grady's 18 October 1854. Albacore (talk) 16:25, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

• That was a typo on my part, fixed now. Thanks, Woody (talk) 21:36, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:24, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments quick ones No images of the recipients? Don't mix date formats in the references. "a single action was 7" - > seven. Why doesn't Temp. Corporal sort the same as Corporal? Same with Lieutenant. In fact, perhaps you could explain the sorting of the Rank column to me? Refs - sometimes you have pp.x and sometimes pp. x (i.e. there's a space sometimes, others not). The Rambling Man (talk) 19:48, 4 July 2011 (UTC) The VC lists don't have images for two main reasons, 1) there aren't that many images of the recipients available, 2) they would make the table far too large to be navigable. Fixed the date and 7/seven. With regards to the refs it is the {{LondonGazette}} template that puts the spaces in. Personally I prefer no spaces but if you think it needs to be consistent I can add spaces to the non-template refs? The sorting is fairly simple in its logic, it sorts by rank (using the Nato codes ie. OF-1 etc) and then seniority. (ie inter-service seniority so Navy, Army then RAF) So, take the corporals as an example, all of the corporal ranks are together and sorted alphabetically, Naik and Lance Daffadar are the Indian ranks for corporal which is why they appear between Corporal and Temp. Corporal. I could perhaps do some sorting trickery to make all of the Temps./Acting/Substantives sort together if you think it appropriate? The Lieutenants is a slightly separate issue in that there are Naval Lieutenants and Army Lieutenants with different ranks so they sort differently. Woody (talk) 11:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC) Perhaps (and this is just personal opinion, of course) you could add a note explaining the sort order? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:11, 7 July 2011 (UTC) We have "The rank column lists the rank of the recipient at the time of the action and it sorts by rank and seniority of service and not alphabetically." Do you reckon I should expand on what rank and seniority of service mean. I wrote as someone with military knowledge and looking at it that sentence now, it probably does need some explanation. Woody (talk) 19:19, 7 July 2011 (UTC) I think a shade more explanation wouldn't go amiss. The fact you had to refer me to Nato codes means that to a general reader, it could be difficult to grasp. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2011 (UTC) How does this sound: "The rank column sorts by the rank of the recipient at the time of the action. This column sorts by the comparative rank of the recipient within the British Armed Forces command structure. Within the British Armed Forces the Navy is the Senior Service, followed by the Army and then the RAF." Woody (talk) 19:43, 7 July 2011 (UTC) That sounds perfectly splendid. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:52, 7 July 2011 (UTC) Jolly good, now added. Ta, Woody (talk) 20:19, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support job done for me, nice. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:24, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support No issues with dabs or links! I beleive the footnotes should all end on a full stop. MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:53, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
• Comment – Only recommendation I have is to spell out RAF in the new pre-table note. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:52, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

• Done thanks. Woody (talk) 09:08, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

• Comment Support I agree with your use of Indian mutiny as it was called at the time, but some now consider it POV and as it redirects to Indian Rebellion of 1857 how about changing it to Indian rebellion with a redirect. Jim Sweeney (talk) 15:23, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

• I'm not quite understanding what you are asking? What do you want the reader facing text to be? I think the text should remain as is (Indian Mutiny) as that is what the sources used call it and that is what the British Armed Forces refer to it as. The specific list List of Indian Mutiny Victoria Cross recipients is at that title for precisely the same reasoning. Woody (talk) 17:17, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

No I am happy with Indian Mutiny just a comment that some now consider it POV, but as the sources call it that change to support. Jim Sweeney (talk) 17:26, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 00:07, 15 July 2011 [19].

---

Grammy Award for Best Traditional R&B Vocal Performance

Nominator(s): Crystal Clear x3 07:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets the criteria. Crystal Clear x3 07:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comments: Use the sortname template for the Performing artist column and the sort template for the Work column (see Grammy Award for Best Female Rock Vocal Performance for example). The former will sort artists by last name and the latter will eliminate sorting based on punctuation. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Done (comment by Crystal Clear)
    • Thanks. Will try to take another look at the list when I return (will be away from computer for several days). --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:04, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
      • Support: I went ahead and added sort commands, made the Nationality column consistent with other Grammy-related FLs, and made minor capitalization/MoS changes. Crystal or reviewers, feel free to discuss if you disagree. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:42, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments –

• "Up until 2003, albums were only nominated." Would make much more sense if "only" was moved to before "albums". It almost sounds now like they could only be nominated and not win. Surely not the intention.

Done

• Aretha Franklin photo caption: "She first won the award in 2004 for 'Wonderful' and a second at the 2006 ceremony for 'A House Is Not a Home'." Missing a word like "won" before "a second".

Fixed

• In reference 15, if Jack Klunder is the author of the article cited, then that information should be formatted like the authors in other refs (3, 13, and 14 are good examples). Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Jack is not the author of the article. He is the publisher of the Los Angeles Daily News. Crystal Clear x3 02:50, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — Legolas (talk2me) 06:07, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

;Comments from Legolas2186 Now, only singles or tracks are. --> This looks so odd with "are" as the only verb. I've reworded the sentence/sentences to: "Up until 2003, only albums were nominated, now just singles or tracks are" Correct redirects of the Grammy ceremonies in the pictures. Done Beyonce is always credited as Beyonce Knowles, except for album and single covers. So correct it + the sorting too. Done Emdash in reference 14. Done The New York Times being a self-publishing company does not need publisher. Done Do you need the overlinking on United States? Its practically world's most common name. Fixed The sorting for the Work column is taking into consideration the quotes too for the songs. It should sort without them. — Legolas (talk2me) 16:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC) I have no idea about sorting things. Could you better explain what to do or show an example with and without the italics and quotation marks ? Even I'm not good at the sorting thing. Just suggested this as it looked odd. Can you find someone who knows about this better? — Legolas (talk2me) 06:07, 5 July 2011 (UTC) Fixed up the sort issues using {{sort}}. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:18, 5 July 2011 (UTC) Now The New York Times appears unitalicized. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC) Done Crystal Clear x3 11:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Support the article as a FL now. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:27, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 14:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments Would like to think there's a better way of using two tiny sentences like this: "Up until 2003, only albums were nominated. Now, only singles or tracks are. " merge and improve. I've reworded it to: "Up until 2003, only albums were nominated, now just singles or tracks are. " Neville Brothers is The Neville Brothers. Done 6 dab links - Anthony Hamilton (thrice), Three Wishes, Fantasia, Quinn. Fixed Earth, Wind and Fire -> Earth, Wind & Fire. Done Ref 8 could use first and last parameters to be used for the author name. Same with Ref 15. They're not the authors, they are the publishers Refs 14 and 15 need en-dashes. Done Crystal Clear x3 20:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:59, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

• Comment is there a source for the changes of name of this award.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:50, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

From what I'm aware of, there is not an RS covering the award's title changes. However, as you can see by each year's references, the title has changed. On a side note, I am not aware of there needing to be sourcing for that in the lead. I've seen plenty of Grammy FLCs the same as this pass without anyone raising that question.... Crystal Clear x3 13:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Support then -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

• Note: Updated scope commands. Also, this page may need to be moved to the award's new title soon... --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:45, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Support by Ruhrfisch - as requested, I have read the article and feel it meets the FL criteria. I have a few quibbles, which do not detract from my support, but do need to be addressed. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:38, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

• It is not clear to me what this sentence is talking about - this award or the Grammys in general (assume it is this award) Up until 2003, only albums were nominated, now just singles or tracks are.

done

• In conjunction with the previous comment, I think I would put the start date of this award in the first paragraph of the lead. So perhaps the sentence in the previous point could be something like The award was first given in 1999; until 2003, only albums were nominated, now just singles or tracks are.

done

• The first sentence of the second paragraph would then have to be changed, perhaps to something like "It is different from the Grammy Award for Best Female R&B Vocal Performance and Grammy Award for Best Male R&B Vocal Performance, which were both awarded from 1969 to 2011. Not sure if the combination of these awards should be mentioned here or not - probably not.

done

• I assume the General reference probably covers the various names of this award mentioned in the lead.

Actually, that aspect is covered in the ceremony year sources

Nice job, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:38, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your support and comments! Crystal Clear x3 23:23, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

You are very welcome - Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 16:13, 13 July 2011 [20].

---

1972 Summer Paralympics medal table

Nominator(s): Basement12 (T.C) 11:57, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

The article is based on similar Olympic and Paralympic articles that already have FL status, particularly 1968 Summer Paralympics medal table and the comments at that FLC review. - Basement12 (T.C) 11:57, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments Is there a translation for what DVS means (i.e. the German which when abbreviated becomes DVS)? "This medal table ranks ..." as the last sentence in the opening para, this seems out of place, perhaps move this into the second para. *"were awarded in 187 " the article appears to be written in predominantly BritEng, and I would therefore expect the word "medals" after "awarded" here. Um, I don't think 575 athletes won medals, so "575 were awarded medals" would be wrong. Presumably, number of medals awarded across the 187 events was 575. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 08:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC) That's not what I meant either, but who knows what I meant. Struck. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:26, 19 June 2011 (UTC) Typo in ref 2 - internationl. I think this is a better ref for the javelin throw, and it should be 18.50 m, not just 18.5. Sorting by total, Austria seems out of spec. Ref 5 has page number missing (it's p. 1) The Rambling Man (talk) 16:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC) Done. I've removed the DVS abbrevoation all together. The German Paralympic association is the DBS so potentially DVS is a typo for this by the IPC but I can't find confirmation either way - Basement12 (T.C) 11:43, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comment – Only suggestion I have is that the abbreviation for National Paralympic Committee could be taken advantage of in the Medal table text, by making the relevant bit "is an entity represented by an NPC." As long as you already have the abbreviation, why not use it? Don't have any other complaints. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Good catch, abbreviated to NPC - Basement12 (T.C) 22:46, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support - Can't see any outstanding issues. Miyagawa (talk) 11:43, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Support I looked it over carefully and, despite my best efforts, can find nothing wrong with it. :) Bobnorwal (talk) 19:33, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

• Comments Everything is great, just answer these two:
• "Some athletics and swimming events did not award silver or bronze medals", can you specifically mention those events. This whole article is about the medal table, so any discrepancy in the medal categories should be answered.

That would be beyond the scope of this list -as you say this article is about the medal table, listing every event in which only one or two medals were awarded is no more relevant here than listing every event where a gold medal was won. If it were only one or two events (as at modern day Games where 3 medals are almost always awarded) then it could be done like this but at the early Paralympics events with only one or two entrants were very common - Basement12 (T.C) 18:41, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

• "also known as the XXI World Games for the Paralysed", then what was the official name of the Games.

As far as I can tell it was known as both the Paralympic Games and International Stoke Mandeville Games (aka World Games for the Paralysed). The Games took place every year serving jointly as the Paralympics every 4 years (see the list at IWAS World Games) - Basement12 (T.C) 18:41, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

— Bill william compton^Talk 04:13, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Satisfy all the criteria, great job as always! — Bill william compton^Talk 00:13, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 16:13, 13 July 2011 [21].

---

List of National Treasures of Japan (writings: Chinese books)

Nominator(s): bamse (talk) 15:28, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

This is a list of manuscripts of old Chinese books that have been designated as National Treasures of Japan. Three types of manuscripts are included: those created in China, those copied in Japan and some of the oldest printed editions from the Song Dynasty. The list has been modelled on other featured National Treasure lists. bamse (talk) 15:28, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support: Well-detailed, quality page, which from what I can see satisfactorily meets the criteria for a Featured List. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 04:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:15, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments – Add "the" before "7th century Tang Dynasty"? "or are Chinese printed edition." "edition" → "editions"? Usage: Add "by" to "sortable pressing the arrows symbols"? Chinese manuscripts: Excess word in "One of the most most well-known missions...". Don't need a second Tang Dynasty link here. "Twenty Chinese books National Treasures...". "books" → "book"? There's something similar in the next section. Wang Bo collection vol 29, 30: Comma needed after "one verse from the biography section". "Elegant Orchid" isn't sorting in the intended order, perhaps because of the quotation mark. Japanese manuscripts: Period missing after "At first the curriculum consisted mainly of Confucian Classics and Chinese history". "consisted of Chinese works and scholarly collections were dominated by Chinese secular works." Add "that" or "which" before "were dominated". This would change meaning. In this sentence "collection" has the meaning of "library", so "scholarly collections" is a subset of all libraries. Would it be clearer if split in two sentences: In the Heian period, the majority of works held in libraries (both those produced in China and those copied in Japan) consisted of Chinese works. Scholarly collections were dominated by Chinese secular works. or if "collections"->"libraries"? Kanen: Is "the Three Kingdoms of Japan and (symbol) China" missing anything, or is this correct? Removed the "symbol". Nothing was missing. In this table: the books by Oe no lekuni don't seem to be sorting properly by author (diacritics will cause this). Song printed editions: Remove comma after "when a large number of dharani known as Hyakumanto Darani". No need for a second Chinese Classics link in this section. The third table has some odd sorting in the format column. May need a sort template for the numbers. The format columns are not meant to sort by numbers (which would be less useful, because, say how do you compare three scrolls with two books, etc). As explained in the Usage section the format columns sort by the type of manuscript: "books/scrolls/other". As for the third table, all entries are of the same ("book") type, so sorting is not really useful here. If you wish, I can make that column unsortable in the third table. bamse (talk) 19:59, 17 June 2011 (UTC) Note 2 is missing a period at the end. Notes 6 and 7 could use some "a"s in "designated as National Treasure". Note 12: Add apostrophe at end of "monks"? References 20, 25, and 59 could use PDF designations, like ref 3 has. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 14:56, 17 June 2011 (UTC) Thanks a lot for your thorough feedback. I addressed almost all of your comments following your suggestions and replied to those that I did not address (i.e. to two comments) above. bamse (talk) 19:59, 17 June 2011 (UTC) One more from taking a look at the changes: in note 2, the order of "blank" and "two" should probably be switched. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:15, 19 June 2011 (UTC) Done. bamse (talk) 22:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comment This is an exemplary list and really commendable work. Main qualms are about the bibliography formatting. There are ghost ref tags, inconsistency in inclusion of publisher location, and some wikilinking errors for the {{harvnb}} template. Could you brush through the references once more please? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look at it. What do you mean by "ghost ref tags"? bamse (talk) 10:48, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Removed one </ref>. Is that what you meant by "ghost ref tags"? bamse (talk) 10:50, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Done as far as I can see. Removed one excessive "</ref>", removed location of publisher from one bibliography and all the {{harvnb}} links should work now. Please let me know if something else needs to be fixed. bamse (talk) 11:26, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes its done as I can see, however another query. Some of the books have just the year of the publication while some have exact dates. As far as I can see for them, Google books did not list any date when they were written. Can you please correct them? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I used this tool for creating the bibliography. Honestly I don't know where it takes the month/day information from, so I asked the creator of the tool (who has not been active on wikipedia since May 7, 2011). Since year information is sufficient and since the tool sometimes created wrong dates (day=32), I got rid of the months/days. bamse (talk) 12:42, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support: Excellent page. Wish more lists were this thorough and organized. One suggestion: get rid of red-links in the references section. I'd suggest getting rid of the red-links in the list itself, but I suppose there's a good chance someone will eventually write articles on those places, most of which I believe, are temples. Primary editor is to be commended for compiling this list of written works. Boneyard90 (talk) 08:01, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks. As for the red links, these are temples and museums which house or own National Treasures and as such are relevant and will get their wikipedia article eventually. I am planning to create articles for all shrines/temples/museums that have National Treasures of Japan. In fact, I recently wrote Omura Shrine and Anraku-ji (Ueda). It'll take some time before all of them have a wikipedia article though. In order not having to put back wikilinks later, I'd prefer to leave the red-links in there unless that's an issue for FLC. bamse (talk) 08:39, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

In this narrow issue, I have to disagree with Boneyard90. I would have thought that Wikipedia:Red link suggests a kind of fuzzy logic? In each instance, Bamse is likely able to explain and defend the red link as a positive element in the current state of this article. For example, in the Japanese manuscripts section, the red link for Daigaku-ryō caught my attention. This was an article I intended to create some time ago -- in fact, I thought I did create this article at the same time I developed Yushima Seidō; but I was distracted. The red link served as a reminder and I immediately set about creating a stub ... which is a good example of what a red link is supposed to do. --Tenmei (talk) 13:14, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support In terms made specific at Wikipedia:Featured list criteria, the first impression of this list article is that the structure and style of the table are congruent with other other featured National Treasure lists. We have already seen how minor problems of format accessibility or ease of use have been worked out in the other National Treasure articles which Bamse has developed.

I wonder if one or two sentences might be added to the last paragraph of the introduction of this article (and its corollaries)?

1. The comprehensiveness of the current list is explained clearly, but I wonder if some kind of caveat like {{dynamic list}} would be perceived as timely? as an invitation? as a distraction? Some variation on these words is worth considering: "This is an incomplete list, which may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness. You can help by expanding it with reliably sourced entries."
2. I also wonder if the overview of this subject would be enhanced by a sentence which explained that the official listings do evolve as part of an on-going process? Compare National Treasures of Japan#Designation procedure. In other words, the Agency for Cultural Affairs is likely to designate one or more additions to this list in 2012 or at some other time in the future. Compare National Research Institute for Cultural Properties.
3. I wonder if a "See also" section should mention Independent Administrative Institution National Museum, Tokyo Research Institute for Cultural Properties, Nara Research Institute for Cultural Properties, etc.?

These suggestions present issues of judgment and focus. --Tenmei (talk) 12:17, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions and support. As for {{dynamic list}}, my understanding is that this template is for lists that are inherently incomplete (List of female tennis players,...) and whose inclusion criterion often is the existence of a wikipedia article. This list however is complete and in fact is not changing on short timescales. In the 21st century, between one and five National Treasures were designated each year. There are 13 Lists of National Treasures of Japan, so any of these lists is updated on average only about once in 4 years due to new designations. I added a see also section per your suggestion (didn't know we had an article on "Independent Administrative Institution National Museum" and in fact had never heard of this title before). As for your second suggestion, it is kind of implied by the language and tense used in the intro: "...have been designated...", "...items are selected...". Do you think that a more direct statement is necessary? bamse (talk) 12:53, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

No changes are necessary. These suggestions only demonstrate engagement with an open-ended question -- musing, speculation, wondering about what might be marginally better? Your good judgment is unquestioned.

As you know, the last sentence of National Treasures of Japan#Designation procedure is: "In the 21st century, between one and five properties were designated every year.-- 国指定文化財 データベース, Database of National Cultural Properties.

Is it likely (or possible) that a reader might profit from reading a variant of this sentence at the end of the last paragraph of the introduction? It's just a question? "No" is a reasonable and acceptable answer. --Tenmei (talk) 15:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

In my opinion, it would be good to have a sentence like that referring to "writings: Chinese books" only (i.e. to the items in this list). However, due to the small number of Chinese books NT (56 versus more than 1000 NT as a whole), I feel that we can't have a meaningful statement like this because of a lack of statistic samples. (Does this make sense?) bamse (talk) 15:13, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Let's agree that this is a trivial issue; and yes, I defer to your good judgment. In the future -- perhaps in 2012, we may revisit this if you or I stumble across an on-point citation in a credible source? --Tenmei (talk) 16:46, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Agreed! bamse (talk) 20:55, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 16:13, 13 July 2011 [22].

---

List of Croatian submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film

Nominator(s): GregorB and Timbouctou (talk) 01:18, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets the FL criteria and closely resembles similar FL articles such as List of German submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film and List of German submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film. The article was originally created in March 2008 and has been worked on recently by User:GregorB and myself. All comments are welcome. Timbouctou (talk) 01:18, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

• Comments by Kebeta:
  • IMO, the lead could be a bit longer.
  • The last sentence of second paragraph, and the last paragraph of the lead should be cited.
  • There are no dab links, but one ext links don't work - see The Motion Picture Credits Database. I propose that you just delete this one.
  • You will need to have a proper "alt text" for the image of Vinko Brešan.
  • Overall, nice work by you two guys. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 22:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Here is a couple of quick responses:

• I feel that the lead is about right - will consider this one, though.
• Good point about the citations. Will be provided.
• MP Database Credits URL fixed.
• Not sure about the alt text - is this actually a requirement? The other corresponding FL-class lists do not have it.

Thanks for the input... GregorB (talk) 22:23, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Update:

• Reference added to the second paragraph.
• Alt text for the image provided.

Reference for the third paragraph is pending. GregorB (talk) 09:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The offending claim has been removed, and the content of the last two paragraphs has been rearranged somewhat. Citation-wise, the intro should be fine now. GregorB (talk) 11:47, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Everything looks fine now in the article, except here it doesn't - it shows one dead link, although it's not 'dead'? --Kebeta (talk) 19:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Well the link is not actually dead but I removed it as the database is not really relevant to this particular list (the database has almost no information about past foreign language film nominees). Timbouctou (talk) 21:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support: all my concerns have been dealt with.--Kebeta (talk) 21:54, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments –

• In the third paragraph of the lead, there are two instances of faulty hyphen usage (not "Croatian-based"; the ones after that). To fix them, you can make them either a spaced en dash (smaller dash) or an unspaced em dash (bigger dash). Depends on your own preferences.
• In the original title column, Cudnovate zgode Segrta Hlapica doesn't seem to be sorting in the proper order, unless it's meant to be sorted by the word that starts with z. The diacritics at the start of the title may be responsible for that. May need a sort template of some sort to correct it if necessary. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for comments. Both issues fixed. I replaced hyphens with spaced en dash and I used template:hs to fix sorting order in the original title column. I also fixed entries for "A Wonderful Night in Split" and "The Blacks" in the English title column so that the sorting ignores articles "a" and "the" at the beginning of titles. Timbouctou (talk) 01:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments "It was not created until ... Award, was created for non-English speaking films" - "created" in quick repetition. Is it Marshall or Marshal? Our own article redirects Marshall back to Marshal... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:30, 13 June 2011 (UTC) "Introduced" is now used to avoid repetition. "Marshal" is correct per multiple sources, including film.hr, The Guardian and IMDb. Fixed accordingly. GregorB (talk) 16:47, 13 June 2011 (UTC) In fact, the question was not which title was correct, but which title was used in the nomination. Per oscars.org source (now provided), it was Marshall, so I've changed it back, now with a piped link to the film article. GregorB (talk) 17:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Yeah, it seems to be a question of British vs. American spelling. The film was screened internationally as "Marshal" but the Academy referred to it as "Marshall". Gregor's solution works best IMO. Timbouctou (talk) 03:38, 14 June 2011 (UTC) I agree that the verifiable spelling (i.e. that used by the nomination) should be used here. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:18, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Comment on the name of the organization that selects these films. It looks, from what's on the talk page, as if a Wikipedian translated the name of this organization themselves. And then the initials obviously don't match. I assume they represent the name in the original -- but then there's no mention of what that is... Honestly, I don't know the style guidelines on this, but I'd like to see it resolved before I can pledge my support. Bobnorwal (talk) 02:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

The organisation's full native name is Hrvatsko društvo filmskih djelatnika or HDFD for short, which literally translates as Croatian Association of Film Workers. Since an official translation of their name does not seem to exist there are several variants used in English, and Film Artists' Association of Croatia seems to be the most common [23], [24], [25]. I've added the full native name to explain where HDFD comes from. Timbouctou (talk) 02:59, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Support, then... good job, all in all! Bobnorwal (talk) 03:18, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Comment overall, the article appears well written, comprehensive but not overwhelming, containing a properly weighted lead. In those terms the first three FL criteria are in my opinion met. I would prefer to see the last sentence of the second paragraph cited - the references are already there in the table, but still... Otherwise the nomination seems fine to me.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Hm, I'm not sure about that. The last sentence of the second paragraph would require eight references which would make it look like an overkill. Besides, the lede is just a summary of the body per WP:LEAD and shouldn't require referencing if what it states is supported by sources in the body. Timbouctou (talk) 13:35, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree, WP:LEADCITE does provide for omission of citations in the lead on "case by case basis" if there is such a consensus. I personally don't think this to be a contentious issue really. Should a handy source amalgamating the information become available I suggest using it in this place, just to dot all the i's and cross all the t's.

Support, as I see no other issue left to address at this point. Good job.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Cheetah (talk)

Comments Since achieving independence from Yugoslavia, Croatia has submitted 19 films... - This sentence should have an end date, something like "as of 2011, Croatia has submitted 19 films since independence..." Fixed. It's as of 2010, the 2011 submission is yet to be determined. Timbouctou (talk) 05:52, 12 July 2011 (UTC) In the references, frst citation is for submissions and the second one is for nominations, is this a correct guess on my part? There should be such note that states it clearly. Yes you are correct. I've added a note and it should be fixed now. Timbouctou (talk) 05:52, 12 July 2011 (UTC) Current reference for Countess Dora's submission leads me to the home page of the official website of croatia-film where I don't see anything that shows that film was submitted. A note in the reference should be added to navigate the reader to the right page. Um, I'm not sure what to put in the note. It is a partially translated flash site talking about the Croatia Film production company. Assuming you clicked the English-language main page, you should go to Production→Awards and Recognitions and then in the window that opens scroll down to the year 1993 and "KONTESA DORA" where it says Hrvatski predstavnik za Oscara (Eng: Croatian submission for the Oscar award). I don't know why that bit is not translated. Timbouctou (talk) 05:45, 12 July 2011 (UTC) The simplest way would be to change the title of the link to "Croatia Film - Production - Awards and Recognitions". That would help the readers to go straight to production.--Cheetah (talk) 06:30, 12 July 2011 (UTC) Done. Timbouctou (talk) 06:36, 12 July 2011 (UTC) --Cheetah (talk) 03:57, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support--Cheetah (talk) 04:51, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:01, 8 July 2011 [26].

---

Philadelphia Phillies all-time roster (L)

Nominator(s): — KV5 • Talk • 13:24, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Current open nomination has three supports and no open comments. As always, concerns to be expediently addressed. We're past the halfway point (this is list 10 of 18 in the series). — KV5 • Talk • 13:24, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments - thought I'd take this opportunity to learn a bit about how to read baseball stats!

• How can I discover that "Lush also made more than 30% of his career appearances with Philadelphia as a first baseman," from ref 22 please? It's not a challenge to your statement, more assistance to a non-expert (me) on how to find that out from the ref.
• Lajoie has 1896 to 1900, isn't that five seasons? His caption says four seasons.

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Ironic that the answer to question 1 is math, while the problem with question 2 is that I can't do it.

I've fixed LaJoie. As to Lush, it's a simple math problem, just requiring some addition and then division, as well as knowing where to look. On Lush's page at Baseball-Reference, there is a table entitled "Standard Fielding", which lists games played by position in each season. From 1904 through the midpoint of 1907 (all the portions labeled PHI for Philadelphia), Lush played in 64 games at first base (62 in 1904 and 2 in 1906), 54 games at pitcher (7 in '04, 2 in '05, 37 in '06, and 8 in '07), and the rest in the outfield.

The games at each outfield position are designated in the second "G" column of that table (to the right) as, for example, "0-6-16", meaning 0 games in left field (the leftmost number), 6 in center field, and 16 in right field. In sum, Lush played 51 games in right field and 11 games in center field for the Phillies. 64 1B, 54 P, 51 RF, and 11 CF equals 180 total games; 64/180 = 35.5%, and 54/180 = 30%. As per the footnote, "players are listed at a position if they appeared in 30% of their games or more during their Phillies career", so even though Lush played almost as many games in right field as he did at pitcher, he didn't break the bright-line criterion (there are very few players who break the line at three positions), and his contributions on the pitcher's mound were arguably greater due to the no-hitter he threw.

If I've jargoned you out, let me know. — KV5 • Talk • 01:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

No, that's fine, it's clearly not straight-forward for us non-experts! Support. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Didn't spot any issues with this list. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support. My only nitpick would be that Lopata's image doesn't synch width-wise with the others. Not sure if that's cause for removal. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:19, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:01, 8 July 2011 [27].

---

List of France national football team captains

Nominator(s): JS^{Rant Away} 03:24, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets the required featured list criteria and is important to its subject giving the importance of several of the players on the list. JS^{Rant Away} 03:24, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments quick ones... Don't think you need the cap note at all, the title (including "captains") is clear and unambiguous. Perhaps include the articles you link to as See also links if necessary. Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) Don't like "This list of..." to start with, we stopped doing that a year or so ago. Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) "captained France national football team to victory a" in English we'd say "captained the French national football team to victory" Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 2 dab links - mediator, Pierre Bernard. Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) " only 104 have served as captain of the national team." ditch "only". 1 in 8 isn't "only"-worth, and this is really POV. Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) You link the first football to Football (soccer) then have a direct link to association football. Don't overlink, and be consistent. Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) Merge first two sentences of the History section. Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 1904... went on .. in 1895.. back in time? Oops. Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) "The team's next captain after Canelle was Pierre Allemane. Allemane had previously captained the..." -> "The team's next captain was Pierre Allemane who had..." Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) Explain FIFA before you abbreviate it. Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) "in a major international competition " what is a "major international competition"? It is listed as a reference right next to the statement and explained there. — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) "alternated between the duo of Zinedine Zidane and Patrick Vieira" no need for "the duo of" Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) On my screen, Henry's picture is forcing the references to be squashed up on the left hand side. Consider using {{clear}} if you want to keep the image. Done — JSRant Away 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

• I would reduce the mildly dubious section on a captain's duties here, and increase that which is relevant to France.
  • Will take care of this when I got more time. — JS^{Rant Away} 23:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
    • I removed the section. Doesn't that make the lead a little short though for a FLC? . — JS^{Rant Away} 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
      • Well yes, it does seem short now, at just one paragraph. You could use another para which summarises the history section, e.g. identify first, most recent, most capped, most successful, least successful captains in the lead too. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:21, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
        • Took care of a couple of those mention. Most recent is a tough one because, as of right now, there is no permanent captain. It is currently being rotated at the moment. — JS^{Rant Away} 23:02, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments – History: "The first player to captain France in a major international competition while playing under FIFA was Andre Francois. Francois...". Try not to have the names repeat like this in the sentence transition. Done. — JSRant Away 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC) Same goes for "One of the first permanent captains of the national team was Jean Ducret. Ducret...". This could probably be made into a single sentence without much trouble. Done. — JSRant Away 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC) Don't need to link World War II twice in the span of two sentences. It may not even require a link at all, since it's such a well-known subject; how helpful is the link? Done. — JSRant Away 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC) "the captaincy regularly alternated between Zinedine Zidane and Patrick Vieira. Vieira...". This is like the first two comments from me. Switching Zidane and Vieira around in the first sentence seems like the easiest possible fix. Done. — JSRant Away 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC) I don't understand "injuries propelled his stint as captain". Propelled in this context would mean something different than what I think the intention is (that the injuries prevented him from serving as captain at that event). Was "curtailed" or similar what you meant? Done. — JSRant Away 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC) "was the national team's all-time leading goalscorer Thierry Henry. Henry...". Another one of these repetitions. Might as well get it along with the others. Done. — JSRant Away 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC) List of Captains: We already know from the title of the page that this is a list. Does it really need to be repeated here? I feel this would be better served as Captains, which is a bit simpler. In references 7, 9, 21, 25, 27, 30, 34, and 41 should all have the publishers italicized, as they're all printed publications. Done. — JSRant Away 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC) What makes History in an Hour (reference 22) a reliable source? It appears to be a blog. Found a more reputable source. — JSRant Away 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC) What makes The Soccer Room (reference 36) reliable? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC) Removed source. — JSRant Away 21:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC) One more from reference 35, which I missed the first time around: the contraction "haven't" should be removed in favor of "have not". Actually, I think this and reference 36 would be more accurately listed as notes, to distinguish them from the citations. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC) Done. — JSRant Away 22:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:03, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Support no immediate issues for me. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:35, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Support. After a read today and a read yesterday, I don't see any issues. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:40, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 19:21, 7 July 2011 [28].

---

List of awards and nominations received by Madonna

Nominator(s): — Legolas ^(talk2me) 16:28, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because this is a complete list of the awards and nominations received by American recording artist Madonna, till date. It has been carefully structured alphabetically according to the awards and contains details about what she won, when etc. Hence with the consensus of my fellow reviewers, I would like to see the list promoted to a featured lists status. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 16:28, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• RIAA in ref 1 should be linked

Done.

• "Flash" in ref 16 should not be capitalized

Done.

• Who's the publisher for ref 41

Added.

• Same for refs 109-114

Added, except for El Pais, because it is a self-publishing company like The New York Times, The Washington Post etc.

• "Till date, Madonna has won" -> To date, Madonna has won

Done.

• Unlink AllBusiness.com in ref 91 as its already linked in ref 73

Done.

• Same for TEC Awards in ref 120

Done.

All in, it's an impeccable list! Crystal Clear x3 10:25, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your helpful comments, I have addressed them. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 13:38, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Support Crystal Clear x3 21:11, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• Madonna a pop icon for pushing the boundaries of lyrical content in popular music and imagery in her music videos which became a fixture on MTV. < I would say Madonna became a pop icon
  • Oh god, that was embarassing.
• The Billboard Music Video Awards is sponsored by Billboard magazine to honor artists and their music video < music videos
  • Done,
• The MVPA Awards is held annually by Music Video Production Association to honor the best music videos in a variety of genre, style, and production a <shouldn't genre, style and production all be plural?
  • Well at the end of the line I'm including categories so in that sense I did not include the plural of genre or style. Am I missing something?
    • I see now it does make sense, just the way I read it at first made me think that something was wrong--Blackjacks101 (talk) 20:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
• achievements in Mexican record industry < the Mexican record industry

That's all I currently see now. Great Work!--Blackjacks101 (talk) 16:40, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I did my best. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 16:48, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Support I think this article is FL ready! Great Work. And thanks for clarifying--Blackjacks101 (talk) 20:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support Can't see any remaining issues, and I think it's now suitable for FL. Nice work. Miyagawa (talk) 12:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:33, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Oppose for now – Very surprised to find myself here because I had high expectations for this list. It's as comprehensive as any list I've seen, and the referencing is of good quality. However, there are too many prose glitches at this time for me to be comfortable seeing a promotion here. "which achieved her global recognition." I'm not sure about this; how about "gave her global recognition."? Very minor point, but in the lead photo caption, the "a" before MTV Video Music Award should be replaced with "an" (the one before the Grammy is fine as is). "The Billboard Music Awards is sponsored by Billboard magazine...". "is" → "are"? Check the others awards too, because many of them appear to need similar edits. Elle Style Awards: Should "the" be added before Style Icon Award in the prose? Golden Apple Awards: Definitely add "the" before Sour Apple Award in the prose. Golden Globe Awards: Remove "for" from "Madonna has been nominated for six times". Japan Gold Disc Awards: "including five times Artist of the Year award". → "including the Artist of the Year award five times"? MTV Awards: "Madonna has been honored for Artist of the Millennium in 2000." "for" → "as"? MVPA Awards: Add "the" again, this time before Music Video Production Association. NRJ Music Awards: Missing "was" in "Since the show created in 2000". Pollstar Concert Industry Awards: Another "the" needed before "concert industry". Also remove "for" before "thirteen times". Porin Awards: Should "The Polin is Croatian music award" be "The Polin Award is a Croatian music award"? Also, add another "the" right before the group names. Recording Industry Association of America: "for selling more albums than any other female artist in rock category during the century." Add "the" before "rock category". Rockbjornen: "one of the largest newspaper in Nordic countries." Make "newspaper" plural. The Sun Bizarre Readers Awards: "The Sun Bizarre Readers Awards is a polling awards...". Lot of singular/plural confusion here. How about "The Sun Bizarre Readers Awards are polling awards..."? TRL Awards: Add "a" before Lifetime Achievement Award in text? VH1 Do Something! Awards: Remove apostrophe and s from VH1 in the first sentence. VH1 Fashion Awards: Do the same here, and add one more "the" before "most fashionable". Remove all caps from reference 4. I'm certainly willing to re-evaluate things once these are looked at, and this is a list that will probably deserve a star when that happens. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:57, 1 July 2011 (UTC) Thank you, a big thank you for the detailed review that you gave. I really wanted something like that. I have gone ahead and made all the corrections, as well as taking care to see that any other prose glitches are also eliminated—to the best of my abilities. Please take a look Giants. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:36, 1 July 2011 (UTC) One more, which I just noticed while checking everything I capped: TEC Awards doesn't seem to be in the proper alphabetical order. For some reasons it's in the awards starting with S, in the body and infobox listing. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:33, 1 July 2011 (UTC) Good catch, I found another one NRJ Music Awards, re-arranged both of them. — Legolas (talk2me) 18:15, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Support — Looks good. Jimknut (talk) 14:41, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 19:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments Where is entrepreneur referenced? Ok, a general comment, things like her date of birth, place of birth etc isn't referenced in the lead. I guess this is because you think it's fine because it's referenced in the main article. I'm not sure that's okay if this is supposed to be a standalone list. For instance "which gave her global recognition" is not referenced here. "Golden Globe Award for Best Actress in a Musical or Comedy" why only the first half linked? "one of her most critically acclaimed release," -> "releases" and prove it. "the second top-selling female artist in the United States" ever? "To date, Madonna ..." probably best to put a "As of July 2011" or similar here. "American Moviegoers' Awards" with or without apostrophe?:C " Madonna has won Best Actress award for her role in Evita (1996).[4]" no need (imo) for "has". "for favorite shows, performers and moments " is this a quote? it sounds very chintzy. Can you reference it directly please. "was the official industry award ceremony in Greece," for what? Referenced? ASCAP - a general repetition of "annual" since you've said that in the higher level section. "Year-End Charts. " are they capitalised for a good reason? What's a Boxscore? "Best International Female in 2001 and International Female Solo Artist in 2005.[17]" table says 2006. No need to abbreviate ZPAV as you never use it subsequently. "are presented annually since 1941" -> "have been presented..." "usually in recognition not of performance but of behavior" needs a reword and a citation. "Madonna has won the Sour Apple Award " remove has. HFPA - see ZPAV note above. Hungarian awards, same album nominated twice in consecutive years? BASCA - see ZPAV above. "are a major music award" who said "major"? And I guess it should be "a music award ceremony held.." "The Juno Awards is a major music ceremony.." again, major? etc. LVFCS - see ZPAV. "to give recognition to Asian and international icons in achievement, cinema, fashion, humanitarian, and music" (a) must be a quote ("icons" is not encyclopedic) and (b) "icons in ... humanitarian..."? Not grammatically correct. " to celebrate both local and international acts" again, must be a quote from the award people. ref needed. "Nominated artist and work" should that be "Nominated artist or work"? Not sure EMA is ever used as an abbreviation. " to celebrate the top music videos of the year." quote again. "It was first held at the end of the summer of 1984, and originally as an alternative to the Grammy Award in the video category." is this cited? "to honour " sudden switch of ENGVAR. "Madonna was awarded by the magazine as the Artist of the Decade in 1989" -> "Madonna was given the Artist of the Decade award by the magazine in 1989" "to acknowledge the efforts and creativity of musicians in the online world, and the creativity of music industry designers and programmers" sounds like a direct quote, so cite. " is an awards show recognizing the people and the work of popular culture" ditto. Revisit all those "major" award moments here. "for outstanding achievements in the Mexican recording industry" another quote. Museum doesn't need to be linked. "one of the largest newspapers in Nordic countries" cite. "annual program to honor technically innovative products as well as companies and individuals who have excelled in sound for television, film, recordings and concerts" quote so cite. "honor every year athletes, music artists and actors that have portrayed a social issue during the past year" ditto, plus weak grammar. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:21, 6 July 2011 (UTC) Thank you for the comments RM, I have addressed each and every one of them. The MTV Asia Awards have been removed since it was sourced to Madonna's brother Christopher Ciccone's book, which I presumed will be COI as per RS. Nominations and Wins have been updated accordingly. As for the description of the awards, some of them were sourced by the winner/nomination pages at the end of the description, I have made them in-line. For the rest, new sources have been added. As for the grammar issues, I have done to the best of my abilities, wherever you find discrepancy, I'm open to any suggestion that you have. For the lead description of Madonna's bio, I have added some sources, while removing the bit about entrepreneur as that would open another can of worms. Its not exactly related to the award page also since she never received any award for it, and to bring it in context would have been difficult, hence removed. — Legolas (talk2me) 07:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 18:42, 4 July 2011 [29].

---

List of colonial governors of Massachusetts

Nominator(s): Magic♪piano 23:45, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I've been working on this one for a while, and think it is ready for feature list consideration. Massachusetts has a somewhat tangled early colonial history into which this list opens a window. Thanks in advance for your time and feedback. Magic♪piano 23:45, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:29, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments I know it's obvious to you, but perhaps a clarification that this is the United States we're talking about in the opening paragraph wouldn't go amiss to non-expert readers. Fixed Magic♪piano 01:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Not keen on the See also note in the lead image caption, that's what See also sections are for. Removed Magic♪piano 01:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC) "first permanent settlement... second major settlement" - is that to say the second wasn't permanent then? Correct. The second settlement was Wessagusset, which failed. Magic♪piano 01:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Merchant Adventurers appears to be a disambiguation link. Fixed Magic♪piano 01:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC) "settlers to engage in profit-making activities in the colony.[2] The settlers had intended to settle near" suffering from "settle" overdose I'm afraid. Reworded Magic♪piano 01:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC) "more than thirty terms" - did I miss the bit where you told me how long a term was? Yes, in the first sentence of the paragraph. Magic♪piano 01:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC) I'm not entirely sure what MOS says about year ranges, but if it's the same century, I've always tended to just include the last two digits, so 1622–23 instead of 1622–1623. WP:MOS says "A closing CE–AD year is normally written with two digits (1881–86) unless it is in a different century from that of the opening year (1881–1986)." WP:YEAR is silent on the matter. WP:MILMOS#DATERANGE (not that this bit of MOS applies here, but one I've used a fair amount) allows either method. Aren't WP guidelines wonderful? I've change it to two digit years where appropriate. Magic♪piano 01:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Dominion in the lists is shown in italics, but in the prose without, seems inconsistent to me. Fixed Magic♪piano 01:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Refs 21, 38, 48 need spaces after the comma. Fixed Magic♪piano 01:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 15:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments – "the newly-formed Commonwealth of Massachusetts elected John Hancock as its first governor." The hyphen after -ly should only be there if it's in a compounding part of a sentence. It's borderline as to whether that's the case here. Popham County: "and was replaced by Ralegh Gilbert. Gilbert...". It would be better without the repetition in the sentence transition. Governor-General of New England: Hyphen in "recently-failed" is one that I'm pretty sure should be removed. Massachusetts Bay Colony: William Phips doesn't need a link here since he was already linked in an earlier section. Dominion of New England: Charles II was linked in the last section, and also doesn't need a second link later. Province of Massachusetts Bay: I see another Phips link and a "newly-formed" that matches the one in the lead. At the bottom of the table, the page range needs an en dash. Last note: "This is de facto end of Oliver's tenure". The previous note has "the" after "This is", and I think that is needed here as well. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:45, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Thanks for your feedback. I've left "newly-formed" as is (I'm the wrong person to know the ins and outs of hyphen placement), but have addressed the others. Magic♪piano 19:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from WFC

*Comment I'm preoccupied today, but of all the current nominations that I haven't looked at, this is one that I'm particularly keen to review. If I forget to return in the coming days, and this is in danger of being archived for lack of reviews, please could one of the directors ping me? —WFC— 12:53, 16 June 2011 (UTC) Comments from WFC The list is excellent, and most of the nit-picking has already been covered. Just a few loose ends to clear up before I support. Richard Greene's article states that he died in October 1622, but this list says November 1622. The former might be wrong, but if it's correct, I assume that he didn't remain as governor for the extra month? There may be one or two other situations like this, I didn't check everyone to see if they had died. On that note, it's possibly worth denoting where someone died in office, for instance with a †. This would have the added advantage of helping a reader more easily understand why there is sometimes a more detailed date within the same table, such as the May 1657 entry in the Plymouth table. For notes 57 and 58, de facto and de jure tenures appear to be different. Assuming this to be the case, would it be possible to give the latter as part of the notes for completeness? —WFC— 15:51, 26 June 2011 (UTC) Thanks for your review! A few comments in response: Greene's date of death is actually uncertain. Bradford's record, on which the Greene article relies, implies it occurred in September or October 1622. I have adjusted that date in this article to reflect the uncertainty. Sanders is described as Greene's replacement, but no precise date of assumption is given. I've added indications when various officeholders died in office or left without immediate replacement, and added more detailed dates to the Plymouth table. As far as the de jure ends of the royal governance are concerned, I've not seen any source indicating when the Gage and Oliver commissions were formally terminated. (This information might exist, but it's probably buried in the colonial office records. Gage's biographer John Alden, for example, does not report when his commission ended, only noting that he continued to technically hold the office at least into 1776.) Magic♪piano 13:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Strong support an excellently constructed list that I implore others to review. I also think that this would be a great candidate at Today's featured list submissions once it passes; it deserves main page exposure, and I've yet to see another one like this. —WFC— 14:25, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support - excellent work -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:54, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support, read through and found no issues. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 18:16, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:39, 1 July 2011 [30].

---

1998 Asian Games medal table

Nominator(s): — Bill william compton^Talk 15:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

The list contains sufficient entries, completely sourced, good accompanying prose, images, etc. In nutshell meets all of the FL criteria. I'll try my best to answer each query rises during the course of nomination, thanks. — Bill william compton^Talk 15:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments from —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 20:55, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

• Citations in the second paragraph in the medal table section should be positioned correctly, after a punctuation mark and leaving a space between it and the following text.

Done

• "Sepaktakraw" should be two words "sepak takraw".

Done

• In principle, support. Just a quick question: Is it standard to call the periodic Games with "this" rather than "these", as in the 3rd sentence? I understand it's one event, but it still sounds grammatically odd. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 09:58, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I guess there is no standard. Some use "these", while at many places "this" is also in use. Even on Wikipedia there is no fixed convention, I guess I'll have to discuss it with my project members (WikiProject Olympics), for now I've made it neutral with "This edition of the Games".

Resolved earlier comments from Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

*Oppose for now. I disagree that there is "good accompanying prose", at least right now. Some comments: Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Is the first note really necessary? It's irrelevant to the medal table. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Removed "competing in 376 events in 36 sports and 44 disciplines" — "in 376 events in 36 sports" or "in 376 events in 44 disciplines", but there's no need to mention both, imo. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done "This Games remarked as the debut of three new sport events—squash, rugby union and cue sports—in the list of Asian Games sports, squash was included after the seven years of lobbying by Asian Squash Federation." Grammar. Semicolon before "squash was included", perhaps. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done "Athletes from 33 countries won at least one medal, leaving eight countries without a medal, and 23 of them won at least one gold medal." This sentence reads weird. You've taken "athletes from countries" and "countries" and put them in the same sentence, and to compound that use "of them" later in the same line. Of what? Athletes? Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done Change to NOCs "South Korean athletes claimed 164 medals in total, including 65 golds and earned second spot in medal table." Grammar - remove the comma or add a second one after the gold medal clause. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done "Host nation Thailand improved its medal table rank three folds as compare to last Asian Games held in Hiroshima, where it finished at the twelfth spot." It's "threefold", not "three folds"; I'm also not convinced you can use threefold on position. Threefold means "three times". Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done "two bronze medals were awarded per event in ten sports: (...) sanshou event of wushu" An event is not a sport. Use "wushu (sanshou event only)", perhaps. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done "Additionally in swimming, there was a three-way tie in men's 100 m freestyle event, thus three bronze medals were awarded; also a tie for second position in women's 100 m freestyle event meant that no bronze was awarded." Grammar: "also" is unnecessary here. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done "In wushu, a tie for silver medal position in men's changquan discipline of taolu event" What? An event is categorised under a discipline, which is categorised under a sport. How can an event have different medal disciplines? Clarify. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done "also a three-way ties in the men's nanquan discipline of the same event, meant that three bronze medals were awarded." Again, extraneous "also"; "three-way ties" is grammatically incorrect; remove the needless comma after "event". Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done "In gymnastics events many shared medals were awarded; a tie for third place in—horizontal bar, pommel horse, rings, women's vault and women's floor exercise—meant that two bronzes were awarded for each event and no silver was awarded in pommel horse." Emdash is used incorrectly here. There is no need for it. Rephrase entire sentence. Also explain how a tie for third place led to no silver being awarded in the pommel horse event. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done "A four-way tie for second position in parallel bar meant that no bronze medal was awarded." Use "In the parallel bars event", or "on the parallel bars", but not "in parallel bar". Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done The "Changes in medal standings" section needs a total rewrite, I cannot understand a single sentence of it. Likewise rewrite the accompanying note, which is also hard to understand. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) I've tried to make some changes, please take a look. Grammar in image captions: there are a lot of needless commas. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:52, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Done

Resolved further comments from Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 12:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC) (resolved 01:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC))

Still needs some language cleanup and copyediting, imo. Still numerous grammar issues and sentence structure problems. For the most part the minor issues have been settled but I'd like to see the article read more like readable English before supporting. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 12:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC) I'll let you know the status after the copy editing of the article, thanks for your comments. — Bill william comptonTalk 13:19, 6 June 2011 (UTC) Now the article has been gone through copy editing, would you please reconsider your opinion? — Bill william comptonTalk 22:07, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Nitpicking here, but "33 NOCs won at least one medal (23 won at least one gold medal); eight did not win any medals." – don't start a sentence with a number. I would also rephrase "forcing the country to share last place in the medal table with four other nations." to something like "placing the country joint-last in the medal table". Also, the single note left in the article remains pretty poorly written and hard to understand. Once these three points are fixed, I'll support. Also note that I can't speak for WP:ACCESS but that distribution map might or might not have some issues. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 01:53, 12 June 2011 (UTC) Changed the whole line to "Athletes from 33 NOCs won at least one medal, and athletes from 23 of these NOCs secured at least one gold; athletes from eight NOCs did not win any medals", rephrased the line as you suggested and tried to rewrite the note (if still seems skimpy, then please change it as you think would be appropriate). WP:Access or more precisely WP:Color shouldn't be a problem as color is not the only method used to show the medalists, accessible symbol like * (gold medalist), † (silver medalist), ^ (bronze medalist) and # (no medal) are also used there. I'm really happy that you are helping in the improvement of this article and if still you need something there, then please mention. — Bill william comptonTalk 05:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC) "Athletes" is repeated a bit too often in that sentence now. I'd prefer "carried out" over "executed" for the note. I'm not convinced the "for instance" bit is really necessary. Other than that, looks fine. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC) I also felt the redundancy of "athletes" there, but I didn't have any other way to implement your recommendation together with retaining the information, now I've replaced "athletes" at one place with "contingents". Replaced the "executed" with "carried out", and removed "for instance". I actually meant the entire bit after "for instance". Why single out only Nepal and not Syria as well? But then listing both would make the note quite long and unwieldy. IMO the bit stating Nepal's medal won is not needed. Once this is done, I'm ready to support. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 08:46, 19 June 2011 (UTC)  Done

• Support, while noting that I am a member of a WikiProject this article falls under. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 01:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
• Comment Support – Only thing I see is that a few improvements could be made to the note, as was said earlier. First, add "the" before Olympic Council of Asia. Second, should "were" be before "never promoted in the medal table"? Third, I don't understand what "Nepal ranked with its only silver medal" means. That could use a re-write. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Made some changes.

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments Avoid superscripts, e.g. 13th -> 13th per MOS. Done Lead image can be bigger and usually is, I think MOS says up to 300px, but possibly up to 500px, I can't recall. Done Both the images are lead images, so increased their size up to 250px. "This medal table ranks the participating NOCs by the number of gold medals won by their athletes.[4]" seems a bit odd in the lead. Especially when the table is sortable. Perhaps remove this from the lead and add it above the table and include "initially". Or perhaps just delete this line altogether.  Removed Bhupati ->Bhupathi. Done "100 m freestyle" etc, just check if we should put a space (and if so, it should be a non-breaking one) between 100 and m usually. Thanks. According to WP:UNIT space is needed and hard space is already there. "only non-Chinese player to win a gold medal in table tennis (men's singles)." this needs a reference. Done Red circle may be difficult to perceive for some colour blind readers, can you check the accessibility of this on the map please? Done ‡ (double dagger) is also added there. Ref 2 - June 03 -> June 3. Done The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support - I've taken the liberty of making a few minor changes to the dates in the references, otherwise all good. Afro (Talk) 22:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:39, 1 July 2011 [31].

---

List of number-one EPs (UK)

Nominator(s): Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:20, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Vinyl EPs are dead, but they had a life in the 1960s and even their own chart. Hopefully it is up to standard and maybe even slightly interesting. I realise I've been away, but assuming I haven't missed the introduction of any new "scope" or "alt text" type standards, I believe it is up to scratch. As always all reviews are greatly appreciated. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:20, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Comment - no images..........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I didn't add one because any actual EP or cover would be non-free and I don't think justified under WP:NFCC#8. As for artist images, all images of The Shadows are truly pathetic. Ditto for The Beach Boys (their article used copyrighted ones + a rubbish older one meeting Regan). I don't really want to use the Beatles image because it seems to be in the lead of many of my FLs and that's a bit boring. I've put in an image of someone who never got a UK number-one outside the EP chart, is that okay? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:42, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Good call :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:09, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments –

• Don't need to link The Beatles or Shadows twice in the lead.
• "and a silver disc of recordings selling over 250,000 units." I feel "of" would be better as "to", like you have for gold discs, or perhaps "for" if you want something different. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:35, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Done them. Thanks for catching those. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• "Mirror had stopped compiling their own and had begun publishing Record Retailer's charts in March 1962" - does this mean Record Mirror published their own, different, EP charts at some point? If so, what makes the ones shown here "official" and the RM ones not so.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Nope just an unclear statement. It was referring to the fact that RM used to publish singles & albums charts, then stopped them and began publishing RR's. I've made this explicit now. Hopefully it's okay. Good catch though, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support - all looks good as far as I can see....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:11, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments - welcome back by the way...! Caption: 8->eight. You directly cite the "died out" quote but not the "third vinyl format" quote. Any reason? Singles is overlinked in the lead. Should you also link format the first time rather than the second? Link NME in the lead. Would it have been called New Musical Express in 1952? I thought "disc" was the US spelling of disk? Spelling of disc shows this is quite confusing. Although the use in computing—disc is used for optical media (CDs etc.) and disk is used for magnetic media (hard disk etc.).[32]—may suggest that the magnetic gramophone records would be "k" I have strong evidence to the contrary: Cliff's EP is called Cliff's Silver Discs, Continuum (UK origin) use "disc" in the Credo hosted reference cited, publications such as Record Mirror[33] and NME[34] used "disc" in their publications. Although I haven't managed to find an online Record Retailer scan but am fairly confident it would use the same spelling as other British periodicals at the time. Also, in this artile the usage of "disc" always refers to the music certifications introduced by Disc. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 21:24, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Any reason why Magical Mystery Tour isn't in italics if it's an EP in this context? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC) Done all but one, and I'm pretty sure my response to that point is adequate. Done deal dude. Your response is "adequate"...! Good to have you back. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:26, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support The Rambling Man (talk) 16:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support No major issues, but perhaps the dab is unneeded, as no other country has had a EP chart? Suggest move to List of number-one EPs. Also the link of Highlights from South Pacific to South Pacific (film)#Song list is a bit confusing, as there is no mention of Highlights from South Pacific. Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:01, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure about that. There might not be a well publicised EP chart outside the UK but just a quick google search turned up this Billboard article from October 1957 mentions a Billboard weekly listing of the top 10 selling EPs and refers to it as "the new EP chart". Just because a Wikipedia article doesn't exist doesn't mean it didn't happen. There weren't any lists documenting the UKs most followed charts in the 60s until I made them. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and despite my seeming rant above I do appreciate your comments and support. I'll get onto the South Pacific thing some time soon. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:39, 1 July 2011 [35].

---

Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album

Nominator(s): Another Believer _(Talk) 21:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets criteria and closely resembles other Grammy lists with FL status. I specifically request feedback regarding the necessity of the Nationality column for this particular list. The category honors Native American music--it appears to be the case that award-winning performing artists are American, though I could not find enough information about all of them to identify which Native American tribes they belong to, if any. It would certainly be possible for non-Native American artists to release a Native American music album and win, but given the award category has retired with all Native American recipients, is the column necessary? I would just state in the lead that all performing artists were American, but I cannot find a source making this claim. In my opinion, a Producer(s) column would be more appropriate than the Nationality column given the number of award-winning compilation albums in which producer(s) received an award. Thoughts? Thanks, as always, to reviewers for your assistance. Another Believer _(Talk) 21:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• Good point regarding nationality. I'm in no way an expert but would be mildly surprised if Native Americans consider their nationality to be "United States". Losing the column would look odd compared to the other Grammy lists though... I'm happy to switch it for Producers.

Noted. Waiting for other comments/feedback... --Another Believer _(Talk) 01:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Doing... --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

*"the award was first presented to" perhaps reassert Grammy here because we've talked about other ceremonies in the meantime.. Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 01:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC) "artists have criticized the award category" now the cat is defunct, should this be "artists criticized the award category"? Or something similar? Done. Changed tense, therefore also changed "take" to "took". --Another Believer (Talk) 01:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC) "he award is presented to " was presented? Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 01:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 16:35, 21 May 2011 (UTC) Thanks so much! Will address Nationality column once I receive additional feedback. --Another Believer (Talk) 01:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments – I think that for this particular list, replacing the Nationality column with a producer column makes sense. Not all lists in a series have to have the exact same format if circumstances dictate the use of an alternative method. Agreed. Will make change based on 3-0 consensus. Doing... --Another Believer (Talk) 17:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC) Done. Grammy sit lists Tom Wasinger and Thomas A. Wasinger--should the table display the same as the Grammy site or should each entry appear as the latter for consistency? --Another Believer (Talk) 18:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC) "The name of the award has remained unchanged since 2001." That could use an update, since it obviously isn't going to be changed now. Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 17:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC) "The award has been presented to artists or groups originating from the United States each year to date". Not sure if you were planning to drop this due to the verifiability issue you mentioned, but if it's kept this also should be updated in the "was" form. Removed sentence. --Another Believer (Talk) 17:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC) Note III: "An award was presented to Jim Wilson as the producers of the album." The word "producers" should be singular, without the s at the end. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:30, 25 May 2011 (UTC) Done. This note will be removed once the Producer(s) column is added. --Another Believer (Talk) 17:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC) One more I just noticed: the all caps in the title of reference 12 should be removed. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC) Done. Thank you for your feedback. --Another Believer (Talk) 17:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC) To answer the one question up there, I would make Wasinger's name the same throughout, assuming this is in fact the same person for all three relevant awards. The readers might otherwise think they are two different people. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC) Perhaps "Thomas Wasinger" would be best for Tom Wasinger vs. Thomas A. Wasinger? --Another Believer (Talk) 15:39, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Sounds reasonable. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 03:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comment: Ref #8 is a deadlink. Fix that and I'll support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support amazing like usual.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫_{Share–a–Power}^{[citation needed]} 19:56, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support - can't see any issues -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:39, 1 July 2011 [36].

---

List of Grand Tour general classification winners

Nominator(s): NapHit (talk) 00:30, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe the list meets the criteria and will form part of a featured topic on Grand Tour winners of which this is the parent list. Thanks in advance for your comments NapHit (talk) 00:30, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:15, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments "are the three most prestigious" suggest you find some references to back your opinion up here! "They are the only stage race permitted " races? "career are; Jacques Anquetil," not sure you need the semi-colon at all. "Contador is the youngest to win all the Grand Tours, and he completed the feat in 14 months which is the shortest amount of time that anyone has won the Grand Tours in" yuck, "Contador is the youngest, at xxx years, and quickest to win every Tour, completing the feat in 14 months." (you fill in xxx with truth). Grand Tours or grand tours? Consistency. "t is rare for cyclists to ride all grand tours in the same year; in 2004, 474 cyclists started in at least one of the grand tours, 68 of them rode two Grand Tours and only two cyclists started in all three grand tours." perhaps "... one of the Grand Tours, 68 rode two and two cyclists started all three..."? " Lance Armstrong has won the most Tour's," potentially confusing, so refer to it in full "the most Tours de France" Same in Coppi's caption. I would have put cyclist before nationality in the table. "Johan de Muynck" not "De". Tony not Toni Rominger (caption). Strictly, it's a table of winners by nationality, not by country. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:15, 21 May 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the comments TRM, I've addressed them all. NapHit (talk) 22:23, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:05, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments – "No cyclist has won all three Grand Tours in the same year, the only cyclists to win all three Grand Tours in their career are,...". I would make the first comma a semi-colon and get rid of the second colon. "Lance Armstrong has won the most Tour de France's". The apostrophe doesn't need to be there. For the photo captions, there should be commas after the names of Bernard Hinault, Lance Armstrong, Alberto Contador, Alfredo Binda, and Jan Ullrich. Also, "their" should be changed to "his" in Contador's caption, and in Ivan Basso's caption, the comma would be better served as a semi-colon (or it could be changed to the "Name, who has won" form). If the magazine in reference 5 is a printed one, it needs italics. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 15:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the comments Giants I have addressed them all NapHit (talk) 15:52, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:05, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support no issues for me. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — Bill william comptonTalk 18:44, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments: List is good, but prose can gain little more lines. I guess few points can be added there: Description of the ranking procedure, which could explain how cyclists are ranked on the basis of their total wins, and how rank is provided when they are still tied (listed alphabetically with same rank). Andy Hampsten is the only non-European cyclist who has won The Giro. Kazakhstan, U.S. and Colombia are the only non-European nations that have winners, or some more facts like this. — Bill william comptonTalk 18:15, 29 June 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the comments, I've added your suggestions apart from one which is the mention of Kazakhstan as I can't find a reference for it unfortunately, all the rest is in order though. NapHit (talk) 16:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC) their is→there is a, (When their is tie). I guess reference 2 is ASP not PDF. done thanks again NapHit (talk) 17:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support: Meets all the criteria, good job. — Bill william compton^Talk 18:44, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comment: Will support upon this issue being fixed: "Lance Armstrong has won the most Tour de Frances, he won the competition seven times during his career." the comma should be a semicolon. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

changed to a semi-colon NapHit (talk) 20:07, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 20:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:39, 1 July 2011 [37].

---

List of Kraft Nabisco Championship champions

Nominator(s): SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 06:33, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because the list meets FLC criteria. SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 06:33, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• Ref 3 the URL shouldn't be showing

• Ref 43 the retrieved date parameter needs fixed. Albacore (talk) 11:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Fixed both.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 19:34, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:00, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments I would mention in the opening sentence that it's a women's tournament. Corrected.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) "a major championship" should that be capitalised and/or linked? Corrected.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Oh, you link it second time round... Need to reconsider that. Corrected.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) "vent has only been staged at Mission Hills Country Club in Rancho Mirage, California, for all of the championships played" reads a bit odd to me, you probably don't need the "for all of ..." clause. Corrected.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) "The trophy is named "The Dinah Shore Trophy," in ..." Maybe "The winner is presented with "The DS T", named for..."? Corrected.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) "The current champion is..." Perhaps "The 2011 champion is..." Corrected.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Sorenstam's caption says "she is the only repeat winner" does that mean in consecutive years? If not, then surely Karrie Webb is a "repeat winner"? Corrected.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) "Champions who win consecutively are" ->"Champions who won in consecutive years..." Corrected.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) T1 and T4 are odd to me. Why not 1= and 4=? Golfing uses the T to signify Tied not the =.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Same comments re: caption and T3 etc apply to champions by nationality table. Same explaination as above.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Don't overcapitalise the headings - "Non-major Wins" -> "Non-major wins" etc etc. I don't see that where is it at?SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:37, 15 May 2011 (UTC) Can the table columns be the same from non-major to major section please? Which section do you mean?SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) The non-major section and the major section, as I said above. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:42, 21 May 2011 (UTC) Corrected, I hope it meets with what you were wanting done.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 18:49, 22 May 2011 (UTC) Don't have See also links which you've already linked in the list. I will be adding this.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Don't have "women's major golf championships" linked in the See also list when it's already linked in the article. Corrected, done with that now.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 18:49, 22 May 2011 (UTC) No point in using table captions if they just repeat the section headings. What do you mean by it?SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) You have captions above each table which say exactly the same thing as the section heading. No point. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:42, 21 May 2011 (UTC) Corrected, done with that now.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 18:49, 22 May 2011 (UTC) Can you check that screen readers can say "¤"? If in doubt, ask User:RexxS or change it for something more usual like a †. I will check into it.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) How's this going? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:42, 21 May 2011 (UTC) I went and asked, working on it.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 18:49, 22 May 2011 (UTC) Corrected per RexxS suggestions.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 04:22, 23 May 2011 (UTC) Thanks for taking time to review my FLC nomination.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments – "The event has been conducted in stroke play competition since the tournament's establishment". To eliminate a prose redundancy, try "The event has been conducted in stroke play competition since its establishment". The "tournament" isn't necessary when it's already been called "The event" in the sentence. See also should go before the notes, I believe. I wish a better source could be found for the Dinah Shore info than the personal site of a professional golfer. Shouldn't some of this be avaliable in more reliable sources? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:28, 24 May 2011 (UTC) Corrected all, and added some extra on the second now third paragraph.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 23:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC) Saw a couple more things when re-reviewing the list, both related to changes made. They should be easy to fix. Reference 3 is listing the LPGA twice. It only needs the one in the typical spot for a reference's publisher. Also, it should probably be given as LPGA Tour, for consistency with the previous references. Publisher of reference 4 should be italicized. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC) Corrected both.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 21:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:03, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comments
  • What's T1, T3, or T4 in the "rank" column? A key is needed.
  • The Multiple champions section lists seven golfers with 2 or more championships. At the same time the caption under Juli Inkster's photo states that she's one of only five golfers with 2 or more championships. What am I missing here?

--Cheetah (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

• Corrected the last one, and the first one I put it into sentence form, but tell me if I need to put it into the key as well. Thanks, SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I just did both.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 21:43, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
    • The sentence is not as necessary, but the key is what I was looking for. Also to make it complete, just add T3 and T5 because it's in the next table.--Cheetah (talk) 22:04, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
      • OK, I corrected it but put the key in the appropriate section(s) of the article for the content they are suppose to go with. Thanks for taking the time to make the article a better one today Cheetah.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 00:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support--Cheetah (talk) 18:58, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
• Comment - Per WP:ABBR AP and UPI shouldn't be abbreviated unless previously spelled out. Afro (Talk) 17:22, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I went and corrected it per the policy, and spelled it out in the first instances of both. I hope this meets with what you were hoping would be done, and by the way thanks for giving my article nomination a review.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 19:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support - It's the only fault I could find with the article. Afro (Talk) 21:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 08:52, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support a very nice list--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫_{Share–a–Power}^{[citation needed]} 19:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:39, 1 July 2011 [38].

---

List of San Diego Padres team records

Nominator(s): Albacore (talk) 22:56, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Next team records article... probably get all of them to FL quality. Albacore (talk) 22:56, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:47, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments Lead caption is a little weak, perhaps "Trevor Hoffman pitching for the Padres in June 2008. Hoffman holds four Padres pitching records." -> "Trevor Hoffman, pictured pitching for the Padres in 2008, holds for franchise pitching records." or something. I just object to the repeat of Hoffman and Padres... Reworded. The "All statistics..." notes should be indented by one colon. Done. I would prefer to see all tables with common columns have the same col widths from section to section. Consistently width="60%", done.

• "All statistics in this section are drawn from the following source.[29]" reads odd too. There is no following source. There's an inline citation.

The Rambling Man (talk) 20:25, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

• Perhaps you could just have: Source:[x] indented by one colon in front of each table? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:47, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

• For the single-season and career records, Batting statistics;[4] pitching statistics.[5] would do. Albacore (talk) 21:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

• I didn't like the original sentence. The multiple refs are fine. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:57, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

• Done. Albacore (talk) 22:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments –

• "No Padre holds a Major League Baseball or National League record for any of the below statistics." Then two sentences later, we hear about how Hoffman is the all-time saves leader. If I were a person without much knowledge of baseball, this would be incredibly confusing to me. I understand why it's not indicated as such, since he played some for other teams. However, there does need to be some further explanation of why he's not an MLB record-holder as a Padre alone; maybe a note would be the best option.

Note added. Albacore (talk) 01:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

• In the first table, "Extra–base hits" should have a hyphen and not the dash. Same for On–base percentage. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:20, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Removed.

• I know that per WP:ACCESS, colored items need matching symbols. Along the same lines, wouldn't the items with symbols here need colors? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

No, per User:RexxS and this comment.

• Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Just noting that all applicable comments from Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Seattle Mariners team records/archive1 have been applied to this article as well. Albacore (talk) 02:41, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comment What does "[last update]" mean in the refs? Is that really necessary?--Cheetah (talk) 20:27, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

It comes up automatically in the Cite4Wiki tool; it's probably not necessary but doesn't really hurt or violate anything. Albacore (talk) 20:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

What if the webpage is updated in 2012, will it automatically update the date to 2012 to stay true to its words (last update)?--Cheetah (talk) 22:00, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Probably not, removed. Albacore (talk) 00:33, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support --Cheetah (talk) 18:58, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

*Comments: "This list documents the " this probably has been brought up already, but not a fan of adding stuff like "this article" or "this list" in. The lead is a bit weak, though not sure what could be added in. Added a sentence. any reason why the only refs are B-R or a couple mlb.com stat lists? Ideally we should be putting in at least one third-party source to these lists. 3rd party source added. Albacore (talk) 17:53, 26 June 2011 (UTC) These are all things I probably should have seen and brought up in the Mariners' FLC, as re-reading that I see the same issues. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC) The Mariners records article has a longer lead, as well as a 3rd party source (ref 3). Albacore (talk) 17:53, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
• Comments - Would it be better to add the references in the Record column? Looks unprofessional as "source:[*]". Afro (Talk) 17:17, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

How so? Albacore (talk) 17:24, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I've implemented where I think they'd be best suited, feel free to revert if you disagree. Afro (Talk) 18:05, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Undone, I don't see how Source doesn't look professional. Albacore (talk) 20:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Well to me it'd be different if it was the information was derived from said source (like I've seen in many articles), but since its just Source and citation italicized it seems so out of place. Afro (Talk) 21:56, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.