Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/September 2020

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 via FACBot (talk) 23:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC) [1].

---

List of viverrids

Nominator(s): PresN 23:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

We return to my animals-in-a-family series (previously: felids/canids/mustelids/procyonids/ursids/mephitids) after a couple months with list #7: viverrids, encompassing the 33 species of viverridae split primarily between the civets and the genets, aka the "mongoose-y cats". Unlike the previous lists, which usually had at least a couple well-known examples, many English-speaking readers may have never even heard of these animals, as they're a group of relatively small carnivores mainly hiding away in the jungles, forests, and shrublands of Africa and southeast Asia. As a result, we're missing images for a few of the rarer African genets, and a few others have to make do with drawings. As always, the list format is based on the prior lists and reflects FLC comments. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 23:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• Under the common genet, I can see "eg. inland cliffs" - is the use of a single dot a typo? Or is that how it is written in US English (where I am we would either use two dots or none at all, but maybe it's different over there.....?)
• TBH I think that's all I have - great work as ever...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: - nope, it's supposed to be e.g., which is how I missed it when removing those asides. Now fixed. --PresN 20:46, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support Couldn't find anything — nice work. ~ HAL333 20:48, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support Very nice as usual, nothing caught my eye. Reywas92^Talk 20:57, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
• Source review – All of the references are to high-quality reliable sources and are formatted well. The link-checker shows no issues, and overall the source review is a pass. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:16, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:11, 27 September 2020 (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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC) [2].

---

List of Media Forest most-broadcast songs of the 2010s in Romania

Nominator(s): Cartoon network freak (talk) 10:01, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it follows the path of its FL preecessor, List of Media Forest most-broadcast songs of 2009 in Romania. This list is longer, though, so comments are kindly appreciated :) Wishing a great day, Cartoon network freak (talk) 10:01, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Just pinging some users on this: @Aoba47, MarioSoulTruthFan, and Paparazzzi:. They can decide whether they leave appreciated comments or not. This nomination didn't get any attention sadly. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 06:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from MarioSoulTruthFan

Resolved comments from MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:37, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

*Any others Moldavian artists? Should be named as well. There are, but I think giving just Carla's Dreams as an example suffices to show the fact that Media Forest does also include Moldovan artists on their year-end charts. Give at least another example. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC) around 100 singles each were listed by Media Forest as the most-broadcast tracks on radio and television respectively. → Why "respectively"? Are or aren't they the same number of singles? Around 100 singles on the television chart and around 100 singles on the radio chart. Thank you for the clarification. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC) around 100 singles → be more precise I think this just makes things complicated. Since we have differing numbers on the radio and television charts. I also did things unprecisely on my other FL. Understood. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC) The first were "I Gotta Feeling" by The Black Eyed Peas → The first were "I Gotta Feeling" by the Black Eyed Peas (similiar to the beatles) had the most songs to be listed as the most-broadcast ones on both radio and television, with eight each. → Similiar to the caption you have on the first image would be more approriate I'm sorry, I don't understan what you're trying to say here. You need to re-write that sentece since it is not clear, use the one in the caption since it is more clear. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC) longer than any other, → remove as anyone can understand that from the former sentence The charts' last top song of the 2010s was "Dance Monkey" by Tones and I. → "Dance Monkey" by Tones and I was the final top song of the 2010s on both listings. Not sure if the label information is that relevant, perhaps a more experienced user can help with that. I will keep it here until there are further reviews. Sometimes you link Media Forest and others you don't, be consistent. I always linked Media Forest, with the exception of when there are multiple citations in a reference. Then I only link it once. On reference 10 is not even linked once. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC) Good work with the list. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:45, 16 August 2020 (UTC) @MarioSoulTruthFan: I answered to your comments. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 13:16, 18 August 2020 (UTC) @MarioSoulTruthFan: I implemented all your comments. Thank you very much for your review; Cartoon network freak (talk) 18:52, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude

• Photo caption - "Smiley (pictured) and Carla's Dreams both had eight songs listed as the most-broadcast ones on radio and television" => "Smiley (pictured) and Carla's Dreams both had eight songs listed as the most-broadcast on radio and television"
• "They are based on the number of times tracks are broadcast" => "Chart placings are based on the number of times tracks are broadcast"
• "The first were [....] in January 2010." - well obviously the first number ones of the 2010s were in January 2010, so I don't think you need to say that
• "this feat was achieved by Carla's Dreams's "Luna" with a total of 15 weeks" - although technically correct, "Carla's Dreams's" looks really weird, so maybe change to "achieved by "Luna" by Carla's Dreams"
• "The latter artist and Smiley had the most songs to be listed as the most-broadcast ones" => "The latter artist and Smiley had the most songs to be listed as the most-broadcast"
• "Kiss FM, Pro FM and Virgin Radio Romania were the trendsetting radio stations" - what does this mean? In what way were they trendsetting?

According to Media Forest, this means that the respective radio station was the first one to broadcast a song (that would become a radio hit eventually and receive support from other radio stations too) on heavy rotation. Any idea how we could formulate this?

After giving it some thought, I think I would say "Kiss FM, Pro FM and Virgin Radio Romania were the radio stations that gave the first airplay to the highest number of songs which went on to top the chart" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• You don't need to say "(pictured)" in each photo caption unless it's unclear who is pictured e.g. in the Lady Gaga caption you don't need to say "Lady Gaga (pictured)" because obviously it's her. It is needed, though, in captions like ""Ecou" by Elena Gheorghe (pictured) and rapper Glance...." to clarify which one of the two she is
• "In 2013, Andra (pictured) contributed with two singles to that year's most-broadcast ones on television: "Inevitabil va fi bine" and "K la meteo"." - the English here is rather odd. I would just say "In 2013, Andra had two singles which were the most-broadcast on television: "Inevitabil va fi bine" and "K la meteo"."
• Think that's it from me - good work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Thank you very much for your review! I implemented everything and answered to your question. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 15:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: So I actually took a look at another ref and they seem to be clearer there: "The title of 'TRENDSETTER 2019' is designated to the radio station that broadcast the songs that reached No. 1 in the MediaForest Weekly Charts the most during 2019." With that in mind, I added things to the sentence in the lead. Hope it's fine now. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Oppose from MaranoFan

Given that the first three comments I left at the peer review have not been addressed.--NØ 03:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

@MaranoFan: I have addressed your comments. However, I do have a comment on your second one: I prefer using "the top ten most broadcast Romanian and foreign songs" over "the top ten most broadcast songs" because I want to stress the fact that there are two different charts for both radio and television airplay that list the Romanian and foreign songs separately. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 15:11, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Aoba47

• For this part, "around 100 singles each were listed", is there a reason why a specific number cannot be provided?

I purely think this is not needed. We would have different total numbers for both the radio and television charts, and everything would result in a wordy sentence. Wordier than some of the article already is due to the subject matter ahaha. I think an approximation is the good way to go in this case. Also, I've been doing this for my other Romanian chart FLs too. Cartoon network freak (talk) 18:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

• This is more of a personal preference, but I would avoid using "latter" as done here, "The latter band and Smiley", and just say "Carla's Dream and Smiley". Your current wording is not wrong, but I just wanted to raise this to your attention to think about. Feel free to disregard this if you prefer the current wording.

This actually makes a lot of sense, thank you for pointing that out.

Everything seems to have already been addressed by the above reviewers. I just have a clarification question and a more stylistic suggestion. Otherwise, great work with this. Aoba47 (talk) 18:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@Aoba47: Thank you very much for your comments, I left replies. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 18:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your responses. I support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 20:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

• I went ahead and linked the unlinked publishers
• Reliability and formatting looks great, pass for source review Aza24 (talk) 08:14, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Promoting- checked out MaranoFan's issues, and with the nominator's comment on why the specific wording is used, the only thing left is to archive references- which is now done. --PresN 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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 via FACBot (talk) 23:45, 27 September 2020 (UTC) [3].

---

Grade I listed buildings in Rhondda Cynon Taf

Nominator(s): EdwardUK (talk) 18:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... with Grade I buildings in Wales being those of "exceptional interest" it seemed a worthwhile subject to be improved to a high quality, and a recent peer review suggested it was close to level required. As a first attempt at a featured list this specific topic was chosen as it had such a limited scope and with the intention that feedback and experience gained can be used for improving similar but longer lists. EdwardUK (talk) 18:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Comments Support by Hog Farm

Will be claimed for wikicup points

• "Newman 1995, pp. 434-5, 521." - Spell out 435 here.
• Add a short description
• "In 1746 Edward Williams was employed" - Comma after 1746
• Link River Taff
• " In 1746 Edward Williams was employed to build a bridge over the River Taff. The 27-year-old self-taught architect had gained a reputation for the quality of his stonemasonry but this was his first bridge. His three-arched design lasted less than three years before being washed away in a flood when the build-up of debris around the piers caused the flow of the river to be obstructed" - The cited page range is 73 to 78, but pages 73 and 74 don't seem to contribute any of the material from this, so they should be dropped from the page range.

• done - also changed url to match

• "Following this Edwards rebuilt the" - Comma after this
• Check on Worldcat to see if Smiles has an OCLC

• done - also added volume details

• ") to connect the industry to the docks at Cardiff, both of these passed through Pontypridd contributing to its development into a major market town" - semicolon instead of the comma, and add a comma after Pontypridd
• "and by 1875 when the Hetty shaft was sunk at Hopkinstown the population of Pontypridd had reached 8,000" - "when the Hetty shaft was sunk at Hopkinstown" is an appositive, and should be set off by commas.
• "In 1981 only 35 mines remained in Wales " - Comma after 1981
• For the date listed and the reference number in the table, use an intext citation so it's more obvious where the information is coming from, rather than linking the reference number to the external source.

• part done - added to date listed, but not changed reference number

• "In addition to being Grade I listed Pontypridd" - Comma after listed
• "1791-95" MOS:DATERANGE wants 1791–1795
• "Located on the west side of Hopkinstown the Hetty Engine House" - Comma after Hopkinstown
• The note needs a citation.

• done - I think this should cover it as there wasn't one that I could take from the standard templates.

Once these are addressed, I'll take another look at it. Hog Farm _Bacon 02:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I have made all the changes except for replacing the external link in the "Reference Number" column with an inline citation as this is consistent with all the other UK listed building and scheduled monument lists, also had I used the {{Cadw listed building row}} template it would have been linked automatically. Note that I chose not to use the header and row templates for reasons mentioned in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Grade I listed buildings in Monmouthshire/archive1 - because the "Function" column and the image upload and commonscat links are undesirable, and it forces the text to be centre aligned. Thanks for the comments. EdwardUK (talk) 09:43, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

That should work. I'm ready to support this one, although others are likely to have additional comments. Hog Farm _Bacon 14:24, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Support by KJP1

Placeholder - shall get to this on the weekend. KJP1 (talk) 18:00, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Commented at the peer review, and the list has only improved further since then. A few minor comments/suggestions but nothing to stand in the way of my support.

• In two points in the lead, mention is made of South Wales. In the opening sentence, it's "the south of Wales", and in the fourth para. it's "there were 620 mines in south Wales". I think it should be capitalised (?), and I wonder if South Wales would help the reader, probably at first mention, i.e., "a county borough in South Wales". Incidentally, I think the lead now nicely contextualises the article.

• changed opening to South Wales and moved link to Wales to later in section

• 3rd para. - "In 1746, Edward Williams was employed" - you've flipped his names, from William Edwards. An easy thing to do! Will also need changing (x2) in the 6th sentence of this para.
• 3rd para. - "which used circular holes through the haunches reduce the load". First, I think there's a missing "to" after haunches. Second, is "haunches" a bit specialist for the general reader? "through the two ends of the arch"?

• changed - I chose "haunches" as this was used by Coflein and Newman (Cadw uses "spandrels"), but think that the simplified version is better.

• Bibliography - you could authorlink Newman and Smiles.
• Bibliography - You could also, for consistency, give the url for Glamorgan. As an aside re. the url for Hughes, I've had editors complain about links to Google Books, as it's seen as favouring a commercial site. Therefore, unless the url gives a snippet, I tend to use Worldcat. That said, there are very respected editors who loathe any url links at all, so it's merely a suggestion.

• Added Worldcat for Newman, and inline page-url for Hughes – for online book sources I usually give the url for where I read it (google, archive.org or others) to make it easier for verification, but with Newman I used a print copy and some of the referenced pages not visible online.

• Criteria - It looks to me that it meets all 6 criteria.

Pleased to Support. Great to see the lists of Welsh listed buildings being developed. KJP1 (talk) 09:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

All changes made. Thanks - EdwardUK (talk) 12:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Image review - pass

• All images are free and compliant with MOS:IMAGELOC. Hog Farm _Bacon 13:32, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 01:40, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

• Would link Historic England (ref 3), Cadw (refs 4, 6, 7, 12, 18, 20, 23, 25) and The Independent
• Are you sure that "The National Archives" is the publisher for ref 5? A lot of countries probably have a "National Archives" so surely the full name is different?
• When ever you have pp. with two numbers you should use an em dash " – " rather than a hyphen/minus sign "-" (small difference but this is the standard – is already done correctly in ref 17 anyways)
• Newman in the biblio needs isbn 13 (use the converter)
• Reliability is good – mostly government websites or those with statistical info Aza24 (talk) 02:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

• All changes made – I have added a link for The National Archives and this appears to be the full name. EdwardUK (talk) 15:45, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ah I see, well the link should be enough to avoid any confusion. Good work here – pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 06:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333 04:37, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:06, 27 September 2020 (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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 26 September 2020 (UTC) [4].

---

List of paintings by Thomas Cole

Nominator(s): ~ HAL333 19:46, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Cole was the first American landscape painter and the founder of the Hudson River School, a romantic art movement. ~ HAL333 19:46, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Leaning oppose Support

• it thrills me to see a list of paintings here, but as much as I hate opposing (or leaning towards oppose in this case) there are some rather big issues. Aza24 (talk) 04:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Major issues

• Every painting should have a column for if they're on canvas or panel (and if they're oil, tempera, water color etc.)

 Done

• With the above being said the entire notes section seems to only fill up space and not give anything valuable. The panel and canvas stuff could be in a new column per the comment above, the "also known as" could be in a note after the titles or under the titles themselves (perhaps with "small" parameters) and the "Recently sold, replaced by museum-quality replica" should be in a note or under the info in the collection column

 Done

• The country/state/city should really be listed after the museums – I'm not sure which would be most appropriate, perhaps state for the US and then city for other countries?

 Done

• I'm really confused by separating the height and width columns, I don't think any other lists of works on Wikipedia seperate them, and they are never seperated in the art world. Ideally they should be put together and would be better sortable by square centimeters.
• Would like to see a color for the sketches/studies to separate them from the actual paintings. I would recommend a neutral color like #FED or #FFFFDD that doesn't draw too much extra attention to them. This being said, moving them to a different section entirely might be worthwhile as well.

 Done

Minor issues

• Image column shouldn't be sortable

 Done

• I'm fairly confident that the words "Sketch" and "study" if directly relating to a painting he made later should not be italicized. (e. g. Study for The Angel Appearing to the Shepherds)

 Done

• Would put all of the "c." in a template:

  {{circa|year}} or {{circa|year–year}}

 Done

• The "excluding frame" notes are unnecessary – paintings are almost never measured with their frames included

 Done

• This may be just me, so take this with a grain of salt, but for tables like these the information may all look far better formatted if all centered. See my in process List of works by Leonardo da Vinci or the monster of a list List of works by Vincent van Gogh
• I am yet to read carefully through the lead or look at sources, but I would rather hear back from you first. I hope this doesn't discourage you, as you are a fabulous contributor and we need more FL for lists of paintings. Aza24 (talk) 04:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I really had no idea how to format it - I couldn't find any other lists like it. These two lists are very helpful. I've addressed some of your comments. However, I have a pretty big examination coming up, so I'm taking a bit of a wikibreak. I'll be able to address the rest if your comments beginning on Sunday. Thanks! ~ HAL333 22:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't blame you for being unable to find good examples of paintings lists. Besides the two I mentioned most of them only exist for the sake of existing and have little references and no lead. List of paintings by Johannes Vermeer is alright as well. The same issue seems to arise with lists of compositions for composers, besides decent ones for Bach and Beethoven, most are a lazy bullet list or weirdly proportionate table. Anyways take your time with the changes, it's looking better already Aza24 (talk) 00:18, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I've also noticed that I'm missing a few of his works, so I'll be making a deep dive into his works. I was really busy over the past week and a half, and consequently, this is somewhat sloppy work on my part. ~ HAL333 22:47, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments on the lead

• Wikilink (and capitalise) Industrial Revolution
• Self-taught needs a hyphen
• "One of Cole's first landscapes Lake with Dead Trees (1825)" - need a comma after landscapes
• "the "the truly American forest"" - the the?
• "painted the The Course of Empire" - and again :-)
• "personal opposition to Andrew Jackson" => "personal opposition to US President Andrew Jackson" (for the benefit of those, including me, who didn't know who he was)
• "Later in life, Thomas transitioned" => "Later in life, Cole transitioned"
• Think that's it on the lead. I will look at the table later..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

🤦 Done ~ HAL333 18:07, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Dank

• I'm a sucker for beautiful lists. For this review, I'm not commenting on anything that's already been covered above.
• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing.
• "Final works": Completed works?

 Done

• I haven't checked out the images yet.
• There's an argument that "Oil on canvas 64.1 x 89.2 cm" doesn't sort as expected because it comes after all the numerical entries (such as "64.2 x 89.7 cm"), but I can also see the argument that this might be the sorting you want. I fixed an apparent inconsistency with "Rhode Island School of Design Museum of Art". Otherwise, I see no problems with the table links and coding.
• FLC criteria:
  • 1. I'm going to pass on my usual copyediting. Lots of the paintings aren't set in New York State, so it's hard to justify "Nearly all of his works depict the wilderness, "the truly American forest", typically the Hudson River Valley and Catskills".

 Done I clarified that. ~ HAL333 23:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

• • 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
  • 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
  • 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
  • 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
  • 4. It is navigable.
  • 5. It meets style requirements. You make excellent use of images (but that's about all I'm qualified to say).
  • 6. It is stable.
• I'll leave it there until you get back from your break. - Dank (push to talk) 03:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments on the table

• Does "final works" have a specific meaning in art? I had to think for a moment what it actually meant

 Done

• Most of the paintings have the medium missing - this info is known, surely?
• There's one sketch listed in the first table - surely this should be in the second?

 Done

• In the second table, the collection column is centre-aligned, but in the first it was left-aligned

 Done I was originally planning on centering everything, but I decided against it. ~ HAL333 22:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

• Is there a way to work in a wikilink to Study (art)?

 Done

• Think that's it..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

  Most of these comments are a result of Hal responding to my comments but being mid process in doing so. I agree with Chris that "final works" is rather odd and while I recognize that the "final works" is to contrast with the studies (which are effectively drafts for the "final works") it may be better to remove the sub sections and put the studies in another section entirely (in the process moving the "final works" to just the paintings section) Aza24 (talk) 00:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

  I broke it off into two sections: "Paintings" and "Preparative works". I was hesitant to title it studies because one is called a sketch. However, a provided a See Also link to Study (Art). Does that work? ~ HAL333 22:31, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

*Y"1837 portrait..." avoid starting sentences with a number. YIs this list comprehensive, i.e. do we have a source against we can check every painting Cole ever made is listed, or is it an {{incomplete list}}? I think I'm missing one or two. There have been a few sales and auctions in recent years. I'm currently going through a list and checking whether each one is in a public collection. ~ HAL333 00:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC) I just finsihed going through all his paintings. All public documented ones are here now. ~ HAL333 22:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC) YMedium, Dimensions -> dimensions. In the table, the dimensions should use the multiplication symbol, not an "x", and I would also expect them to be converted to Imperial too. Good news is the {{convert}} template facilitates all that. I'm hesitant to switch it to imperial. The metric system is kind of the go to in the art world. For example, infoboxes place the metric measurements before the imperial ones. ~ HAL333 22:03, 6 September 2020 (UTC) I'm not saying switch it, I'm saying include both. It's common practice across the encyclopedia because while some understand cm, some only understand in. The convert template is your friend! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC) Ah, okay. ~ HAL333 04:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC) Some entries are missing medium, some are missing dimensions. What is the sorting methodology for the "Medium, dimensions" column? YWhy isn't Louvre linked? YNewark Museum is The Newark Museum of Art. What makes some of his paintings more "notable" than the others? I'm asking why some have articles and all the rest don't (and aren't even red-linked)? Some of the more well-known works have their articles; however there a quite a few that I would think are notable. Should I just wikilink them all? ~ HAL333 22:17, 5 September 2020 (UTC) That's the crux of my comment really. Some have articles and have been deemed "notable" per Wikipedia standards, why not all the others? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC) A sea of red it is? ~ HAL333 22:42, 5 September 2020 (UTC) I'm just looking for consistency. And if you check out WP:WIAFL, you'll see that a list as a navigational aid is part of the criteria. You may need to make a few more articles! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:44, 5 September 2020 (UTC) As I'm making these articles, it is becoming readily apparent why they didn't exist. There are barely any sources on them. Google and Jstor have next to nothing. ~ HAL333 20:14, 6 September 2020 (UTC) So they're not particularly notable then? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:07, 6 September 2020 (UTC) I'll make a few more. It seems to be completely random which ones I can find info on. ~ HAL333 04:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC) For year ranges with circa, please ensure you have it formatted per MOS:DATE. YPeace at Sunset source says c. 1827, not 1827 precisely. Suggest all are re-checked. That's all I have, will be claiming WikiCup points etc etc for the review. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 09:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Sorting of Medium and dimensions column This has been brought up by multiple reviewers; however, I do not know how to tackle it. I'm not sure if sorting it by surface area would be feasible. What about the works which are circular, oval, and curved rectangles? Should I leave it as is (sorting by medium), or get rid of it all together. ~ HAL333 20:04, 7 September 2020 (UTC) I would separate medium and dimensions altogether into separate columns and then sort by longest dimension. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 20:07, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Further comments

@HAL333: - some of the dimensions are missing, is this because you are still in the process of adding them, or are they unknown......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:39, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I haven't gotten to them yet. I'll be able to make some more progress this weekend. ~ HAL333 18:35, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

No problem :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:10, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude, The Rambling Man, Aza24, Dank, Hopefully I have addressed all of your concerns. ~ HAL333 23:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support - Exciting to see a paintings list going through FL, I really don't think there are any at the moment. Will do a source review below: Aza24 (talk) 23:15, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support (assuming TRM is satisfied). I did a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. Where I added "(1836)", "(1833–1836)" would be better if the first painting in the series was displayed in 1833. Excellent work. - Dank (push to talk) 00:25, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing shortly Aza24 (talk) 23:15, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

• wrong date for ref 4 (and in the wrong place – or is that the template?)
• I would remove location from ref 6 since it's the only one with a location (needs ISBN as well)
• capitalize "Historic" in ref 8 (same in 65)
• capitalize "Memorial" in ref 13
• ref 26 is broken
• should probably have spaces in title of 45
• Would rather see LACMA spelled out (Los Angeles County Museum of Art) in ref 111 and 120
• ref 6 is the only ref without a retrieval date, although I'm not sure if this is just because it's a book
• That's all I got. Reliability looks good – nice to see a lot of referencing to the Museums themselves.

 Done I acted on everything except adding the access date to the book. ~ HAL333 19:14, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Splendid, great work here. Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 01:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 26 September 2020 (UTC) [5].

---

List of international goals scored by Alfredo Di Stéfano

Nominator(s): Harrias ^talk 14:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Alfredo Di Stéfano was one of the best footballers of all-time, and something of a rarity for playing for two international teams. Although he was highly successful at domestic level in Argentina, Colombia and Spain, he never quite reached the same peaks internationally. He score six goals in six games to help Argentina win the 1947 South American Championship, but that was the sum total of his international success. He never played in a World Cup or European Championship, and didn't really see eye-to-eye with his national team coach either. This list is modelled on those that have gone before, although I've had to improvise for how to include his two playing nations. I opted for one table including all his goals, rather than splitting it into two tables, but let me know what you think. As always, all input welcome. Harrias ^talk 14:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• Link friendly to Exhibition match.
  • Linked in the prose, not sure if it is needed on every occasion in the table too, what do you reckon? Harrias ^talk 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Looking at similar lists, Zlatan Ibrahimovic for example, these tend to link all uses in the table. I don't think I'd argue for or against either way really, unless someone points out a compelling reason. Kosack (talk) 17:56, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
      • Linked it throughout the table for consistency. Harrias ^talk 18:55, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
• "Brian Glanville suggested that was unable to dictate play", something missing from here.
  • Added the missing word. Harrias ^talk 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Two very minor points I noticed on a quick run through. Kosack (talk) 15:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Cheers Kosack. Query above. Harrias ^talk 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Happy to support following the issues addressed her and in Chris' comments. Kosack (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

The opening sentence is incorrect, as he actually played for three national teams - he also played for Colombia. He didn't score any goals for Colombia, but it probably still needs to be mentioned...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:43, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

• I disagree, ChrisTheDude. The opening sentence is 100% correct: it omits Colombia because the matches he played for them were unsanctioned. The lead makes passing reference to it for completeness, but it is not significant enough to be included in the opening sentence. Harrias ^talk 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Fair enough. I didn't realise that his matches for Colombia are not recognised as official internationals -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

More comments

• "He was twice named the Ballon d'Or winner" - I think "He was twice awarded the Ballon d'Or" would work better personally
  • Agreed, changed. Harrias ^talk 16:54, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
• Note a "The South American Championship was the predecessor to the Copa América." seems odd placed after "Di Stéfano made his international debut for Argentina in December 1947" given that the sentence makes no mention of the South American Championship
  • Oops, moved things around, and forgot to move the footnote. Sorted now. Harrias ^talk 16:54, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
• Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks as always ChrisTheDude. Harrias ^talk 16:54, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from 13:35, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Comments References 8 and 9 aren't centered. @HAL333: No, all the references are left-aligned. References 8 and 9 look slightly different because they are single digit, that's all. Harrias talk 06:51, 24 August 2020 (UTC) Nice work. ~ HAL333 19:24, 23 August 2020 (UTC) Okay, that makes sense. ~ HAL333 13:35, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333 13:35, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Added one publisher link – reliability is good and formatting is consistent. Pass for source review Aza24 (talk) 05:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

Standard WikiCup claim disclaimer

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:56, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

*Could link Association football positions to "set positions". Done. Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) " He scored six goals, including..." too many run-on clauses for me here. Split and rephrased slightly. Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) "were not recognised" were not, or are not? Are not: changed. Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) Did he score for Colombia? No, but because these weren't official matches, it is difficult to find an RS that deals with them at all. Harrias talk 10:11, 14 September 2020 (UTC) "He moved to Real Madrid in 1953" first mention of a domestic team, seems anomalous. It is where he is most famous for playing, I don't think it is undue. Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) "Santiago Bernabéu " is a disambiguation link. Solved. Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) "Of Di Stéfano's 37 goals" table says 29. And I think this information (along with apps) should appear much earlier in the lead. Oops, fixed the 37 to 29. I think the placement of this summary is appropriate, but I have added , ..and scored 29 international goals during that time." to the first sentence, as you are right that his goal tally needs greater prominence. How is that? Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) Sevilla is Seville in English. Quite, changed. Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) Brussels is linked but Santiago isn't? Unlinked Brussels, missed that one. Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) Blank cell for score against Wales. How odd, added. Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) Glanville can be linked in the refs using authorlink. Indeed, linked. Harrias talk 10:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC) That's it for a first pass. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 09:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC) @The Rambling Man: How is it now? Harrias talk 10:11, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC) [6].

---

List of accolades received by Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum

Nominator(s): PK743 (talk) 13:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel the list meets FL criteria. This article provides a listing of the notable awards and nominations received by the 2017 Indian drama film Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum. This film is notable for garnering its cast and crew members, especially Fahadh Faasil, several awards and nominations. I hope to receive constructive comments to improve this list. PK743 (talk) 13:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

;Comments Show the actor's full name in the image caption Done "It was produced by Sandip Senan and Anish M. Thomas under production company, Urvasi Theatres" => "It was produced by Sandip Senan and Anish M. Thomas the under production company Urvasi Theatres" Done "grossed ₹179.3 million at Kerala Box office" - firstly, "box" definitely shouldn't have a capital B. Also, when you say it grossed this amount at the Kerala box office, does this mean it grossed this much only in that one state? Was it not shown in other states? The source seems a bit unclear on that point. Done In the article as it stated "The movie is all set to touch the 18 Crore collections at the Kerala box office", film was released worldwide but there no reliable sources of worldwide collection. If that genuinely is the figure for just one state (not the whole of India) then I would simply say "grossed ₹179.3 million in Kerala" and remove the unnecessary words "box office" altogether...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:24, 4 August 2020 (UTC) Done The Hindu should be in italics Done "At 65th Filmfare Awards South " => "At the 65th Filmfare Awards South " Done "At 48th Kerala State Film Awards" => "At the 48th Kerala State Film Awards" Done " At 7th South Indian International Movie Awards" => " At the 7th South Indian International Movie Awards" Done In the table, people's names should sort based on their surname, eg Alencier Ley Lopez should sort under L, not A Done Think that's it from me..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Thanks for your comments and support appreciate it. PK743 (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 15:43, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

;Comments There is a comma after At the 65th National Film Awards, but not after At the 65th Filmfare Awards South, At the 48th Kerala State Film Awards, and At the 7th South Indian International Movie Awards. I would add a comma after the latter three prepositional phrases to be uniform. Everything else looks great. ~ HAL333 14:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC) @HAL333: Done Added commas. Thanks for your comment. PK743 (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support Nicely done. ~ HAL333 15:43, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

@HAL333: Thanks for your support appreciate it. PK743 (talk) 16:57, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Ab207 (talk) 07:36, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

;Comments Does North American Film Awards qualify WP:FILMCRITICLIST? We should be extra sure as its the only one in the list without a Wikipedia article to demostrate its notability, and supported only by a primary source. North American Film Awards are awarded from 2016 successively, which is attended by prominent people from Malayalam film industry.[7][8][9] Due to COVID-19 2020 NAFA edition is postponed.[10] @PK743: As FILMCRITICLIST says "Awards included in lists should have a Wikipedia article to demonstrate notability." I'd insist on going ahead with the article creation if it has to be included.--Ab207 (talk) 10:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC) @Ab207: Removed North American Film Awards. PK743 (talk) 07:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC) APHerald link [2] is redirecting to its main page with no archived link either. Does not seem to be a reliable source per WP:ICTFSOURCES. Replaced it with a new source. Apart from above, I find no major issues. -- Ab207 (talk) 09:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC) @Ab207: Thanks for your comments. PK743 (talk) 04:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support My concerns have been addressed. Good work overall. --Ab207 (talk) 07:36, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ab207: Thanks for your support appreciate it.PK743 (talk) 08:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

• Refs 2, 3, 4, 6, 14 need authors

Updated authors in the mentioned refs.

• The AP herald link was not redirecting to its main page like the user above said – for me at least

Replaced it with a new source.

• Ref 20 should have a "|language=Malayalam" parameter, not the "in Malayalam" outside of the ref template

Resolved the error and added language inside template.

• Reliability looks ok – AP Herald is not on the WP:ICTFSOURCES list as far as I can see Aza24 (talk) 08:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

As the link is broken and redirecting to Indian Herald replaced it with Firstpost Article.

• @PK743: Courtesy ping for nominator who may have missed these and the above comments Aza24 (talk) 08:05, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

@Aza24: Thanks for your comments. PK743 (talk) 04:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Good work! Pass for source review.

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 23:17, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments – "and one International Film Festival of Kerala." This needs "award" after it, or it sounds like the film received a festival, which clearly wasn't the case. Resolved According to MOS:LAYOUT, the see also section should go before the notes. Rearranged the sections according to MOS:LAYOUT. "Alphabetical" doesn't need to be capitalized in note b. Resolved The references have a mix of author's last names appearing either before or after the first names. Pick one style and stick with it through the citation list. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC) In some articles only initials are mentioned rather the full last name, wherever author name is mentioned its in the sequence of last name before first name. @Giants2008: Thanks for your comments. PK743 (talk) 07:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support – My concerns have been satisfactorily addressed. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:17, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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 via FACBot (talk) 00:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [11].

---

Mahesh Babu filmography

Nominator(s): Ab207 (talk) and MSG17 (talk) 23:35, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Mahesh Babu is an Indian actor who is currently one of the most famous male leads in Telugu cinema. Over the past couple of months, both of us have put significant work into the article, which included reworking the lead and citations as well as changing the table's structure. I think that it now fits the criteria and is ready to be reviewed. MSG17 (talk) 23:35, 21 July 2020 (UTC) (PS: This is our first FL nomination for either of us.)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

;Comments "His first lead role as an adult was the in the 1999 film" - too many "the"s in there Done "took a break that lasted for three years. During that period, he acted..." - it wasn't a complete break then? Done - it was a combination of a break and long production time on Khaleja No reason to put "cameo" in italics against Needa. Also, if the role was not actually named, I would put that in this cell and move the reference to it being a cameo into the notes column, otherwise people will think he played a character called Cameo. Done Directors' names need to sort on surname, not forename/initials Done No reason to put voiceover in italics Done Make sure the refs are consistent in how you display the work/publisher. Currently I can see both "The Times of India" and "timesofindia.indiatimes.com", also "Rediff" and "www.rediff.com". Generally speaking, you should not show anything like "www" and ".com" Done for all except idlebrain.com, due to the title having the ".com" in it Check that all refs have dates of publication (where available) and accessdates. Currently, ref 11 has neither. Done (some refs, such as all the idlebrain reviews and some Times of India ones, do not have a pubdate) Thin that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
• Support: No major issues (maybe redirects and inconsistent film spellings can be fixed like Rajakumarudu, but that's your choice). Do call me when nominating other film lists for FLC. --Kailash29792 (talk) 11:49, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! I've fixed the spelling and look for others, if any. --Ab207 (talk) 19:04, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 22:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ref 4 has no date and an incorrect title?

Accessdate and date were mixed up, fixed this and title

• The Times of India should ideally be linked every time (ref 5 and 9, 29 for example)

Fixed

• Link these as well: Vogue India, Oneindia, Firstpost, The Hindu, Deccan Chronicle, Hindustan Times, International Business Times, The Hans India, Zee News, Idlebrain.com, Rediff, Bangalore Mirror

Fixed

• Ref 11 should have "The Times of India" and should be under "|work="

Fixed

• Ref 12 seems to be the wrong date

Fixed

• Ref 25 should be The Times of India

Fixed

• Ref 35 and 39 appear to be the same ref

Fixed

• Why is Ref 38 (the Youtube video) even here?
• In fact why are any of these videos here?
• Refs 56–58 is missing the authors

Fixed, sorry Radhika Rajamani!

• Since you're not including staff writers for the other refs, "India, The Hans" (which shouldn't even be formatted like that) should be ommited

Fixed

• Reliability looks ok, rest of the refs are good Aza24 (talk) 22:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the comments. I have now addressed most of them. As for the YouTube videos, they are links to the film themselves when no other source has character names. I did this after looking at other FLs, such as the filmographies of Suriya, Vijay and MGR, that also used links the same way. MSG17 (talk) 02:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok. Upon looking further in WP:ICTFSOURCES, Idlebrain.com does not seem to be a reliable source and should be replaced. Aza24 (talk) 03:43, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Mostly done Except for one instance where the source is an exclusive interview. --Ab207 (talk) 06:07, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 06:25, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support this nom. Yashthepunisher (talk) 08:49, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup points to be claimed from this review. Why isn't Needa linked? There isn't an article on the film, and I don't think there is enough accessible information on the movie to make a properly sourced article. No reason it shouldn't be red-linked though. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 13:51, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Actually, I meant Major, not Needa. If Needa isn't notable enough, fine, but I imagine Major is notable enough to be linked, albeit red. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 13:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Linked to Major (film). Its currently a redirect to the bio of the subject on which it is based, but would likely be an article after satisfying WP:NFILM. --Ab207 (talk) 17:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Pokiri has different targets in the lead and the table. Fixed " set multiple box office records upon release[5][6][7] " such as? Looking at my references and other information, the ""multiple" part really isn't specified beyond a few regional records. I have changed the wording to be clearer and focus on the bigger picture. "cemented Babu's reputation as a "superstar"" I would attribute that claim to Vogue India. E.g. I have never heard of him, so "superstardom" is very much in the eye of the beholder. Attributed. "Babu took a long-term break for personal reasons" well he did a job the following year according to the table. The film was released the following year, so it may have been in production at the same time as or even before Athidhi. "at a time that was particularly harsh on other big-budget productions" reads odd to me, I guess you mean a number of other films with substantial budgets were box office failures? Yes, that's what I mean. " success[24] and earned Babu his fifth Filmfare Award for Best Actor – Telugu[25] as well as" awkward ref placements, can put them at the end of the sentence. Fixed "second highest grossing" hyphen needed. Fixed "substantial profits[32] despite " awkward ref placement. Fixed In a sortable table, items that are linked should be linked every time, not just the first instance because when re-ordering the table, it is not certain that the linked item will appear first. Fixed That's all I have on a first pass. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 10:55, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Thank you for the review. I have responded to all your comments. MSG17 (talk) 19:56, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Support by Lee Vilenski

I'll take a look at this article, and give some comments on how it meets the FA criteria in a little while. If you fancy doing some QPQ, I have a list of items that can be looked at here.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• Puri Jagannadh's action-thriller Pokiri - can we reword to avoid WP:SEAOFBLUE? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
• Same with: psychological thriller 1: Nenokkadine and drama film Seethamma Vakitlo Sirimalle Chettu. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
• failed to make back its budget - quite an informal way to say this. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Changer to "failed to recover". Better? Kailash29792 (talk) 07:09, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• Sea of blue at Koratala Siva's political film Bharat Ane Nenu . Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Fixed

• Do we need a note to say it's two characters they played? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, because he has also played a characters with multiple personalities/names. It is standard practice for Indian filmographies due to the high amount of films where the lead actor plays multiple roles. MSG17 (talk) 12:37, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• Is the unreleased yellow part of the MOS? A dagger on its own would be fine for me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Not mentioned at WP:FILMOGRAPHY but retained to maintain consistency with other FLs, Scarlett Johansson on screen and stage, Jake Gyllenhaal filmography for instance. -- Ab207 (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• Happy to pass Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:03, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:18, 20 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [12].

---

List of Leeteuk performances

Nominator(s): Lulusword (talk) 20:24, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because he is a prominent figure in South Korean entertainment industry, having an extensive filmography. I have been working on this article since January, and I believe it has meet the criteria. Lulusword (talk) 20:24, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:22, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

;Comments on the lead His stage and real names should not be in bold No reason for comma after the brackets with his date of birth "and acted in several films television dramas" - there's a comma missing here somewhere "He made his television debut through bit part apprearance" => "He made his television debut with a bit part appearance" (note that the last word was spelt incorrectly) "He had since acted" => "He has since acted" "Super Junior Mini-Drama (2006) Super Junior's Music Diary (2007)" - comma missing "which aired on selected screens" - TV screens? Cinema screens? What does this actually mean? "which lead him" => "which led him" "in variety show category" => "in the variety show category" "the 60th anniversary the Korean War armistice" => "the 60th anniversary of the Korean War armistice" "He had hosted the competition eight times" => "He has hosted the competition eight times" "which had since grew" => "which has since grown" "South Korean cooking show, The Best Cooking Secrets" - no need for that comma "he frequently hosts the South Korean awards ceremony" => "he frequently hosts South Korean awards ceremonies" "such as Melon Music Awards" => "such as the Melon Music Awards" "He had hosted multiple concert events" => "He has hosted multiple concert events" Think that's it on the lead. I will look at the tables later..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 4 June 2020 (UTC) Thank you so much for the comment. I've fixed all the bits you point out. Lulusword (talk) 10:31, 4 June 2020 (UTC) Comments on the tables Refs should be centre-aligned All the table headings should be plural, not singular, so "Films" not "Film", etc "apart of MBC's Triple Drama slot" => "a part of MBC's Triple Drama slot" All the TV dramas are television shows, so titling the next table "television shows" is wrong. In fact, all the TV shows should probably be in a single table. If you really want to keep them separate then you should title the second one "Other television shows". "We Got Married (Season 3)" - the specific season should not be mentioned in the first column. See, for example, Woody Harrelson filmography, which just lists him as appearing in Cheers, not Cheers (seasons 4-11) "episode 104 – 132." => "episodes 104 – 132." "I Can See Your Voice (Season 1–7)" - again, don't put the seasons in the first column "episode 234 and 235" => "episodes 234 and 235" "Law of The Jungle in Papua New Guinea (episode 216 - 219)" => "Law of The Jungle in Papua New Guinea (episodes 216 - 219)" "We Got Married (Season 4)" - again, don't list the season "Featured host for Chuseok special episode, (episode 338), " - don't need those commas "Please Take Care of My Vanity (Season 2 and 3)" - again, remove the seasons "Host on episode 10" => "Host of episode 10" "Host on episode 6" => "Host of episode 6" "SJ Returns (Season 1 – 4)" - as above. If you think it is appropriate to mention the season(s) for all these shows, it should be in the third column. "Super TV (Season 1 and 2)" - same again "Real Life Men and Women (Season 2)" - same again "Hidden Track (Season 1 and 2)" - same again "Leeteuk with co-host, Itzy's Lia at the 9th Gaon Chart Music Awards red carpet" => "Leeteuk with co-host, Itzy's Lia, at the 9th Gaon Chart Music Awards red carpet" In the See also section, put a bullet point before the link None of the notes are complete sentences, so they should not end in full stops "honorably completed their military services" => "honorably completed their military service" "Apart of the annual outdoor music festival" => "A part of the annual outdoor music festival" Think that's it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC) I've merge the tables for television shows and made the corrections. It does look better in one huge table. Lulusword (talk) 13:27, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

The only outstanding thing I can see is that the notes are not complete sentences, so should not have full stops. I did mention this above, but they are still there. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:39, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I must have overlooked them. I've fix the issue now, hopefully I didn't miss anything else. Lulusword (talk) 08:35, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Bilorv

(Intending to claim WikiCup points for this review.)

• "K-pop boy band Super Junior" is a sea of blue that could be remedied by unlinking boy band.
• The lead should be at most four paragraphs long; I'd recommend merging the last two paragraphs and listing fewer award/concert hostings.
• The "Television shows" has a hardcoded width in pixels that makes it very thin on my monitor, and very wide when I minimise the screen. By removing this width specification, it makes the tables display appropriately on a wider range of monitors and web browsers.
• I'd expect each table to be sortable by every column other than "Ref", particularly useful for sorting "Television shows" by name or network.
• Some tables use "Ref." and some use "Ref" but I think all should use {{Abbr|Ref.|References}}.
• Each table should have a caption (achieved by |+ Title of the table) e.g. "List of Leeteuk performances in film" for accessibility reasons (so people who use screen readers know what the table is about).
• Should The Best Cooking Secrets be "2017 – present" rather than "2017 – 2020" (like the value below it)?
• Super Junior Kiss the Radio should use "2006–2011, 2016" rather than "2006–2011; 2016" (for consistency).
• When are networks linked and when are they not (e.g. SBS isn't for Salamander Guru and The Shadows but is in the following Star King)?
• Why is File:20180820 Leeteuk ISAC Chuseok Special.png displayed at a size considerably smaller than the image above it?
• I'm not a fan of File:Leeteuk Analog Trip press conference (cropped).png, which looks a bit bad quality to me, and has logos and is very tall. I'd suggest removing, but if it is to be kept, could it be cropped (to a similar body portion as the other images)?
• ... to celebrate those who had honorably completed their military service is not neutral, and I think the note could be removed completely as it doesn't give any more information than the title "Military Service Awards".

Thanks for your work on the list. — Bilorv (Black Lives Matter) 15:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Bilorv, thank you for the comment. I've fixed most of the things you point out but as I can only edit on mobile, I am not sure how the layout looks now as I can only rely on "view on desktop site" setting. The table was hard coded with pixel mainly because it is quite large and take up the whole space, but since you pointed out the issue, I have move the pictures to the top of the table. I also changed the Analog Trip press conference image with a better quality image. Is that okay? Leeteuk's departure from The Best Cooking Secrets had been announced and the last episode featuring him will air on July, so I use "2017–2020" as the year range, while SJ Return is still filming, with episodes written up to January/February 2021 and does not have confirmation on when the season will end, so I use "2017–present" for it. Is that okay or should I still use "2017–present" for both of them? Lulusword (talk) 09:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Alright, I've made one edit about the refs being unsortable here but otherwise everything has been suitably addressed—thanks for those answers. Probably good that these tables have been designed with mobile foremost as that's where most of our readers are viewing, and it does look good on my desktop at least. Support (with references taken on good faith as I can't speak Korean). — Bilorv (Black Lives Matter) 19:02, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:35, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

WikiCup entry

• "He had hosted" has.

• Done Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• "which were screened in selected cinemas." where is this cited?

• I sourced to KOFIC which indicate the number of screens, is this acceptable? Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• "a host when he hosted t" repetitive.

• fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• "he enlisted in the military" shouldn't that really be "he was conscripted into"?

• I'm not sure about this, because news article always used the term "enlist" when Korean entertainers go into the military, I rarely sees the term conscription. Should I change it, regardless? Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• No it's fine. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

• "He started hosting" why not just "He hosted"?

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• Film title should be the row scope, not the year of release.

• Do you mean film title should come first or film title should have the grey background, because the most recently promoted filmography list Javier Bardem filmography looks similar to what my table looks like now. Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• That's what I mean but it's not a deal-breaker. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

• Television shows, don't use colour alone to denote something, per MOS:COLOR, a symbol as well please.

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• Note column need not be sortable as it's free text, not useful.

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• Sortable table needs each linkable item to be linked every time as after sorting you aren't sure which one lists first.

• Can you clarify what do you mean by this? Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• Items in sortable tables which are linked should be linked every time. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 06:29, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

• Television show title should be the row scope.

• same as above Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• See MOS:DTT for information on "scopes". The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

• Tables with one entry need not be sortable, looks silly.

• fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• Spaced hyphens should be en-dashes per MOS:DASH.

• fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

That's it on a first pass. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks for the comment! :) Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• Quick comment – I haven't done a full review of the sources, but on a glance I can see that references 5 and 6 have all caps in the titles, which should be removed per the Manual of Style. Giants2008 (Talk) 15:27, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

• Fixed. Lulusword (talk) 16:21, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

• A lot of sources! From a first glance it looks like you've included translated titles and "in Korean" markings so that's awesome to see. Anyways, doing (full) source review now Aza24 (talk) 06:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
• ref 4 missing date

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:53, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ref 15 shouldn't be in all caps, per WP:MOS (as far as I remember at least)

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:53, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

• ref 2 in 50 missing author
• refs 79 and 80 missing authors (at bottom of page)
• is there a reason is "Naver news" for refs 25 and 49a instead of just "Naver" like the rest?

• Fixed. Lulusword (talk) 06:34, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ugh I hate to call you attention to a tedious task, but most of the "Naver" sources are missing the authors. This may because some of them are at the end of the articles
• In fact, it looks like a lot of refs are missing authors (probably because a lot are like the above, at the end of the page), if you want we could split the refs in half and each go through checking for authors? The sources look good otherwise. Aza24 (talk) 07:05, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

• That will be cool. Please let me know which half I need to do. Lulusword (talk) 07:48, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
• I've started from the top. If I'm not finish by the time you check in, you can start at the bottom. Otherwise, I think I can do it. It's tedious but it's not that hard :D Lulusword (talk) 08:14, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

• I have some other things I'm in the middle of but I'd be able to go through the other half tomorrow. If you want to do so before then feel free to, but if not no worries. Aza24 (talk) 04:56, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Well, I've finished adding authors to all news articles that have them. Lulusword (talk) 06:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks for getting through them, I was just about to do so but it looks like you beat me to it. Anyways, great work here, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 23:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333 19:57, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:07, 20 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [13].

---

List of Hot Country Singles number ones of 1962

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:03, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Another list of number-one country songs. If 1963 (currently at four supports) and this one pass, it will mean a run of 50 consecutive years all at FL status. This time round the artists included Patsy Cline, possessor of undoubtedly one of the greatest voices of all times, and Marty Robbins, my father's favourite when I was a child - I have strong memories of his music drifting through our house....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:03, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing.
• FLC criteria:
• 1. The prose is fine. I've done very minor copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. There were no redirects to avoid in the table. The coding in the table seems fine now; I've added a table caption that will be readable only by screen readers.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. You make excellent use of images (but that's about all I'm qualified to say).
• 6. It is stable.
• Support. - Dank (push to talk) 17:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support Everything looks good. I'm just not a huge fan of the lede image and its lighting. If you wanted to to, you could change it to this more colorful picture, perhaps cropped. Not a huge deal though. ~ HAL333 20:53, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

I linked some works/publishers, pass for source review – reliability and formatting is good. Aza24 (talk) 21:34, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support — Great work! ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 10:59, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:29, 20 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [14].

---

List of descriptive plant epithets (I–Z)

Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 22:38, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay, let's get this show on the road. The other half of this list is at List of descriptive plant epithets (A–H), and yes, I got permission to nominate this half before the other half is finished ... but it's almost done. (I was advised at WP:VPT not to put the whole list on one page.) There are a lot of annoying little technical points to consider here; I've mentioned some of them on this list's talk page. Hopefully, when we get the annoying stuff out of the way, the end result will be fun and useful for a wide range of readers. Many thanks to Dudley Miles for FLC-specific input, and especially to all the great writers of plant species articles ... this list is largely an attempt to highlight their excellent work. This list tries to do a lot of different things at the same time ... maybe too many things for the typical Featured List. It's all good, and any effort that reviewers are willing to put into making this a better list will be appreciated, regardless of the outcome of this FLC. - Dank (push to talk) 22:38, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I just swapped in 10 cropped images created by PawełMM at the Graphics Lab ... beautiful work! - Dank (push to talk) 12:40, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

We just finished List of descriptive plant epithets (A–H). - Dank (push to talk) 17:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Links to Glossary of botanical terms are all done now. - Dank (push to talk) 19:08, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Guerillero

The list is gorgeous. Very nicely done. A few thoughts

• Since you are using Stearn 2004 and Stearn 2002, you should probably include a year for at least that one in the sfn
• Why does only Coombes get a citation in the table?

--Guerillero | Parlez Moi 14:45, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

• • I'm really glad you liked it. I replaced "Stearn2" with "Stearn 2004" throughout; happy to make other replacements if required. All six of the main sources are (mainly) alphabetical glossaries or reference works, but Coombes alphabetizes by genus rather than by species, so readers will need page numbers to find the cites to the species. Everyone I asked was okay with leaving page numbers off for glossaries. A pageless citation to, say, Harrison wouldn't add any new information when we've already got an "H" column (which I can't take credit for thinking of ... that was Dudley's request). As a bonus (and this is in the footnotes), for those few places where a citation is necessary, the fact that the first 5 sources cited don't usually need page numbers means that the superscripts for those sources don't change, so readers who get familiar with the table will be able to tell who's being cited just by the number. - Dank (push to talk) 15:47, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Another issue that we don't usually see at FLC is: if we add templates for every citation, then we might need to split this list into three pages instead of two pages, and no one wants that. - Dank (push to talk) 13:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Mattximus

The lead needs some work. Leads in featured lists should not start with self-referential statements such as "This is the second half of a list" or include any mentions such as "this is a list of". A better opening sentence will include the definition explaining what descriptive plant epithets are and their purpose.

Thanks for your comments. Does this work for you as a first paragraph? If so, what are you looking for in a second paragraph? "Since the first printing of Carl Linnaeus's Species Plantarum in 1753, plant species have been assigned one epithet (name) for the species and one for their genus (a grouping of related species). These scientific names have been studied and catalogued by a variety of botanists, including William Stearn. Stearn (1911–2001) was one of the pre-eminent British botanists of the 20th century: a Librarian of the Royal Horticultural Society, a president of the Linnean Society and the original drafter of the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants." 01:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I made the change (with a slight modification). Let me know. - Dank (push to talk) 00:19, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Some concerns are "ianthinus" which is not in any reference, so it is unreferenced? How do we know you've included all unreferenced names? Mattximus (talk) 00:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Part of the answer is my last comment before your section: the page is already so large that it may not load for some readers. If we add templates for every citation, repetitively, all the way down the page, then we might need to split this list into three pages instead of two pages, and no one wants that. One thing I can do that may help is to move the sentence about Gledhill being a reference for every row back up from the footnotes; I'll do that now. So, every row in the table has at least two sources: Stearn's Dictionary, and Gledhill. - Dank (push to talk) 01:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

• My main query is that I found the explanation of what the list covers confusing, and after reading the lead several times I am still confused about your sources. In paragraph 2 you say that all species epithets come from Stearns' dictionary, in para 3 that Gledhill's book is the source for all species epithets in column 1. You are not allowed to start the article "This is a list...", but I think you need to start the second or third para with something like "The article covers descriptive epithets for plant species listed in (sources)"
  • I'll be more precise about Gledhill and make an edit to deal with your next point; I think those two edits may fix the problem. - Dank (push to talk)
• "All species epithets in the following list come from Stearn's Dictionary, except for words following "from" (which are related words from Classical Latin) and epithets following "Cf."" This is confusing as all cases of "from" or "Cf." are in the meaning column, not the epithet one. Presumably you mean alternative epithets given in the meaning column?
  • Great suggestion. In the original version, I had to do it that way because there were a lot of epithets from Stearn in the 3rd column and in the footnotes; I missed the fact that there are now none in the footnotes and only a few in the 3rd column. I've just made a few edits in the 3rd column along the lines of "Stearn lists ...", so now I can change the wording in the intro to what you're looking for (I think). - Dank (push to talk)
• "this excludes all genus epithets" I think it would be better to leave this out and just say that it is a list of species epithets.
• The query by Mattximus about unreferenced items could be dealt with by adding a citation to Gledhill's The Names of Plants to the Epithets heading.
• "Links to species". "Links to" in this heading is superfluous.
• "Contents:" I think this should be above the key.
  • I don't follow; I don't know how to split {{Compact ToC}} into two pieces. I had it above the Key section originally, and you asked me to move it down. - Dank (push to talk)

• Ah I had not seen Compact TOC done that way before. My point is that it seems to me more logical to have a contents for the whole article, not just for a few sections. You can do this by deleting "|seealso=yes |notes=yes" and adding at the end of the lead __FORCETOC__. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Done. - Dank (push to talk) 15:13, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• You should give the issn for Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society.
• This is an impressive list. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:41, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Much appreciated. I have done or am about to do everything you asked for, except as noted. - Dank (push to talk) 14:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• I am not clear why the key has "cited to" instead of "cited in"
• You seem to have deleted the explanation that H and S columns are not referenced because the works are in alphabetical order. You could add this as citations to the headings.
• As many of the items in the Meaning column are additional epithets, you might consider changing the heading to "Meaning and additional epithets". Dudley Miles (talk) 17:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• All done (see if you agree). - Dank (push to talk) 17:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Still one niggle. I do not think it is helpful to readers to explain under a note to C why references are not supplied for H and S. (Also why use efn suffixes (such as efn-ur) to give note 1 and then the other notes as i to vi?). You could have a note to H: {{efn|name=source|References are not supplied for Harrison's ''Latin for Gardeners'' and Stearn's ''Botanical Latin'' as the entries are in alphabetical order.}} Adding a note to S {{efn|name=source}} would make one note for both. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• This is a disability issue (of sorts), and I'm not going to budge on this. Making multiple single-letter columns wider than they need to be, for no real gain, makes complicated tables ugly at best, especially for those of us who need a zoom of at least 120%. The C column is already wider than one letter because of the superscripts, so that's a better choice for where to put the footnote. It's not far from the H and S columns ... it's not like readers who would see a footnote next to the H or S are going to miss it next to the C ... and it's just as relevant to the C column. If you don't like it there, we could put it anywhere else, but not in the H or S column. And even in the C column, "iii" won't work; that would widen the column. I switched to upper-case footnotes for that to make it an "I". I could live with other options, including "γ", but probably not "iii". - Dank (push to talk) 19:23, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support. I thoroughly disagree with your last comment, but we can agree to disagree on that. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks kindly. - Dank (push to talk) 19:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• "those that he doesn't cover verbatim" => "those that he does not cover verbatim"
• Why does the contents table go all the way from A to Z when the article only covers I to Z?
  • It's one list across two pages. Click and see! - Dank (push to talk)
• I would put note D in the column header rather than against the first asterisk
• "Cyperus imbecillis,* Agrostis imbecilla*" - should that first asterisk be before the comma?
  • Well, it's less than ideal, so I've moved the ones with asterisks to the last position throughout. - Dank (push to talk)
• This also occurs in a few other places
• "Illustration of Epacris impressa" seems to be missing/not displaying. Don't know if this is a Commons issue?
• Same for quite a few of the others
  • All of the images are coming up for me, but on a few occasions, I've had to refresh to get them all. For anyone who's wondering why this very long list is split across two pages ... this is an example of what can go wrong. It would be worse if I combined the two pages into one.
• "Fatty; oily" - random first capital, none of the others have one
• Think that's it from me - great work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:04, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks, all done. Sorry about the very long list ... most of my plant lists will be a breeze compared to this page. - Dank (push to talk) 19:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support - still can't get all the images to load but I'll accept that's a technical issue rather than a defect with the quality of the article itself..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks Chris. Please let me know if the problem persists. - Dank (push to talk) 18:10, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 07:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

• If you're going to link Infobase Publishing and Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society I would link University of Chicago Press (which should be without the "the"), Cassell (publisher), Oxford University Press and Cambridge University Press
• The ISBN 13s should either be without any dashes or with all of them. At the moment they're all missing one dash, they should have 4 in each. The 4th dash should be after the 4th digit (e.g. Coombes: 978-1-6046-91962). I'm fairly certain that's the rule but if you need to check you can use the converter to convert to ISBN 10 and then convert them back to ISBN 13 where the 4th dash will be filled in.
• Would also link Smithsonian Institution Press in further reading and tweak ISBNs like above
• Reliability and rest of formatting looks good. Aza24 (talk) 07:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks much. I removed the links to Infobase and the journal, and removed all ISBN and ISSN hyphens. If that works for you, then everything's done, I think. - Dank (push to talk) 13:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Lol that is one way to do it – I mean I guess I expected you to just link and add the hyphens but removing the links/hyphens entirely is also a acceptable solution. (Consistent formatting is what's important) Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 19:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
      • Thx again. - Dank (push to talk) 01:29, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 23:43, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Comments The only thing that I noticed is the caption for Ensete ventricosum. I would change drawing to "painting". ~ HAL333 20:49, 18 September 2020 (UTC) On it, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 20:50, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333 23:43, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks much. - Dank (push to talk) 23:58, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:23, 20 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [15].

---

List of awards and nominations received by Demi Lovato

Nominator(s): Jaberts123 (talk) 03:48, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I have been making a significant amount of changes to the page to ensure it is around the same layout and inline with similar awards pages of singers and artists. It is referenced well and is easy to navigate with a nice introduction. Jaberts123 (talk) 03:48, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

 Note: You made two FLC nominations with Demi Lovato discography. Unfortunately, we only allow one nomination at a time. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 11:50, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks for the note! Do you know which list would be considered first? --Jaberts123 (talk) 18:22, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Entirely up to you which one to proceed with, but you need to withdraw one -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:52, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
• UPDATE nominator withdrew the discography nomination. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:36, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

;Comments on the lead "66 awards, with 208 nominations" => "66 awards from 208 nominations" "The album spawned three singles "La La Land", "Get Back" and "Don't Forget"." - as none of these songs seem to have won or been nominated for any awards at all there is no reason at all to mention them in this article. The same probably applies to some other singles mentioned later. "During the time of the release" - this doesn't make sense, especially when one of the things that supposedly happened "during this time" actually occurred three years later. "In 2009, Lovato released her second study album" - what is a "study album"? "preceded by its "eponymous lead single"." - no reason for those quote marks "releasing two singles "Skyscraper" and Give Your Heart a Break. " - conversely, quote marks are missing here I will look at the table later -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:01, 28 June 2020 (UTC) Comments on the table Any entry that starts with a " should sort based on the first actual word. Currently everything that starts with a " sorts together at the top People's names (Lovato, mainly) should sort based on the surname, not the forename Billboard Latin Awards - Échame la Culpa is missing the quote marks Quite a few of the rows have the recipient and category columns the wrong way round (eg the last one under Billboard Music Awards but there are quite a few more) BMI Pop Awards - all the song titles are missing quote marks BreakTudo - no reason for Solo to be in italics Do Something Awards - I don't believe Sonny with a Chance was nominated as best TV star Glamour Awards - I don't believe the X Factor was nominated as best TV personality Why is Lovatics in quote marks in some places but not others? MTV Movie Awards - if Demi Lovato: Simply Complicated was a TV show then it should be in italics "Echame la Culpa" has an accent on the E in some places but not others People's Choice - Grey's Anatomy cannot have been nominated as Favorite TV Guest Star Same section - The X Factor (U.S.) cannot have been nominated as Favorite Celebrity Judge Teen Choice - Sonny with a Chance was not nominated as Choice TV – Breakout Star Female. This applies to lots of the rows in this section. Webby - #TheYouTubeAd That Puts Stars In Your Eyes - this spacing doesn't look right at all. Surely either it should have no spaces at all or else all the words should be spaced correctly? Young Artist Association - the films were not what was nominated Comments on the refs Many refs have no access date Ref 23 has no formatting at all and is also tagged as a deadlink Same with ref 66 And ref 4 And ref 99 Refs with titles in languages other than English should also show a translation of the title Ref 10 lists no publisher Nor does ref 22 The title of ref 25 is not "archived copy". It also lists no publisher. IMDB is not considered a reliable source Ref 112 has no publisher The title of ref 109 is not "archived copy" The publisher of ref 108 is not "Watch Teen Choice on FOX" The actual title of ref 114 is "Selena wins the "coolest award" she's ever received", not what is shown here. This may well apply to some others. There's a lot more like the above. Basically you need to do a sweep of all the refs and make sure they are all correctly formatted. The (at least) four that are tagged as dead links also need completely replacing Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC) ChrisTheDude, all comments are resolved and done. Thank you for the help! --Jaberts123 (talk) 03:42, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from SNUGGUMS

I unfortunately must oppose right now as this still has a long way to go even after addressing the above comments. Can't say I feel comfortable with the use of File:Demi Lovato 09-16-2017 -8 (36458528123).jpg when it clearly show's the authors name written in the corner, plus it would be best to use pic of Demi attending an award-related event when this page pertains to her accolades No mention in the lead of awards/nominations for Camp Rock, Princess Protection Program, "Give Your Heart a Break", "Made in the USA", "Neon Lights"? "(2009-2011)" should read "(2009–2011)" per WP:DASH Given ChrisTheDude's comments on removing works from the lead that didn't win any awards or even get nominated for them, we can safely omit the Don't Forget album, the "Here We Go Again" song, and the Tell Me You Love Me album. I'd replace the lattermost with how the "Tell Me You Love Me" song won a BMI Pop Award. MOS:FONTSIZE discourages making text appear smaller than it naturally would; doing so needlessly makes it harder on the eyes to read I'm not sure "Listicles" are appropriate or common to include on these types of pages Some citations are still missing titles, accessdates, and publication names. Also, they all should list authors as well as publication dates whenever available. "Celebrity-gossip.net", "Crushable", "CelebMix", "Video Static", and IMDb should be replaced with stronger sources "www.ascap.com" → ASCAP (and don't italicize this acronym) Remove the ".com" from "BMI.com", which also shouldn't have italics "www.neon.hu" → BRAVO OTTO "GRAMMY.com" → Grammy Award Not sure how credible this is, but it either way doesn't even mention "Échame la Culpa" "E! Online" and "Br.eonline.com" should both read as E! (not italicized) You seem to have mislabled "Nickelodeon divulga os indicados da segunda fase do "'Meus Prêmios Nick'" (which translates to "Nickelodeon discloses nominees for the second phase of 'My Nick Awards'" in English) as "Taylor Swift é indicada ao Kids Choice Awards 2015 do México, Colômbia e Brasil", and "taylorswfit.com.br" of that link should read "NaTelinha" "mp3musicawards.co.uk" is redundant when you already have "MP3 Awards" in the citation outdated URL, and "www.mtvema.com" should read MTV Europe Music Award "Mtv.com" and "www.mtv.com" should read as MTV MTV News shouldn't be italicized "EW.com" → Entertainment Weekly Don't italicize MTV Italy "Millennial.mtvla.com" → MTV Millennial Awards "Oceanup.com" → OceanUp (with italics) "PeoplesChoice.com" → People's Choice Awards (a term that shouldn't have italics) Another bad link "awards.realscreen.com." → Realscreen Awards "Shortyawards.com" → Shorty Awards Another outdated link faulty URL that makes no mention of Demi "TVGuide.com" → TV Guide Sorry, but that's quite a lot of problems to sort through, especially with refence formatting. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 20:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC) I was able to fix some of the changes you suggested. I moved the small text under the category section of the list and normal text sizing, so for example all of her nominations that featured other artists or were for a TV show/movie were moved under the category for which she was nominated.--Jaberts123 (talk) 03:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC) UPDATE: I fixed the references so they have authors first and last, publishers, dates and access dates if applicable for all. I fixed the introduction and took the suggestions to make it better (removing works that did not receive awards and nominations and also added in awards she won for philanthropic work), I added back listicles because they are part of her achievements in her career. I'm still trying to figure out adding in a new photo from an award ceremony she went to.--Jaberts123 (talk) 03:04, 1 July 2020 (UTC) A new photo has been uploaded onto the page where it shows Lovato at an award ceremony in 2017--Jaberts123 (talk) 20:28, 1 July 2020 (UTC) File:Demi Lovato, 59th Annual Grammy Awards.jpg unfortunately was a non-free file and WP:Non-free content criteria says such images cannot be used when free images are available, so I boldly replaced it with the properly licensed File:Demi Lovato Backstage Billboard Muisc Awards 2018 (cropped).jpg as that isn't copyrighted. A possible alternative in regards to award show pics is File:Demi Lovato 2, (Cropped).jpg. I used the photo File:Demi Lovato 2, (Cropped).jpg instead.--Jaberts123 (talk) 22:42, 1 July 2020 (UTC) SNUGGUMS, all comments are resolved and done. Thank you for the help! --Jaberts123 (talk) 03:42, 8 July 2020 (UTC) You still haven't fixed a hyphen/dash issue for Sonny with a Chance in the lead or replaced the subpar sources I mentioned above (aside from IMDb). Additionally, Us Weekly (aka Us Magazine) is a horrid gossip rag that should be avoided, some citations continue to lack accessdates, and I still see improper formatting of references. Furthermore, Demi's own YouTube channel cannot be used as a citation for accolades unlike a video/article that specifically mentions them. Even if "Other accolades" is worth keeping around, there's no point in having a subheading (currently titled "Listicles") when there are no other subsections within the section. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 04:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC) Fixed again, however will look at the references again and change the formatting. I removed the YouTube Creator Award that was linked to her YouTube account for I could not find a link that mentions the award, there are just pictures of here holding the award. Replaced US Weekly with The Hollywood Reporter. As for the other links the were mentioned to be replaced, there are no other links that show the awards that she won, for example "Celebrity-gossip.net", "Crushable", and "Video Static". Thanks again for all the help --Jaberts123 (talk) 04:59, 8 July 2020 (UTC) Unfortunately if there's no reliable source for an award then it will have to be removed. If a big star like Lovato receiving an award wasn't covered by any reliable sources, then if must be a pretty obscure award and probably not really worth mentioning (I notice that at least two of the awards sourced to the sites you mention in the comment above don't even have WP articles)....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 8 July 2020 (UTC) That reminds me of another thing; there already is consensus that award ceremonies that don't have or warrant their own Wikipedia pages (e.g. "MVPA Awards", "Open Minds Gala", "Realscreen Awards", "Youth Rock Awards", and "Z Awards" in this case) aren't supposed to be listed on accolade lists anyway. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:55, 8 July 2020 (UTC) All fixed. The awards mentioned above have been removed from the page.--Jaberts123 (talk) 02:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC) Things are looking better when going through again, but citation#2 is malformatted. See Template:Cite tweet for how to properly use tweets as citations, and while their use should be limited, Mike Adam seems OK to use in this case. You still need to replace "Celebrity-gossip.net" (ref#4), not sure PopSugar (ref#104) is high quality, Teen Vogue should be italicized unlike Teen.com (which should be removed from the "Photos: Demi Lovato at the 2011 Do Something Awards" title in ref#26), "Shortyawards.com" from ref#98 is supposed to read as "Shorty Awards", link InStyle for InStyle awards, and remove of JIM Awards, Mental Health Advocacy Award, and MP3 Awards since that ceremony don't seem to have or warrant their own pages. If possible, I'd try to get something other than a Tumblr link for Webby Awards. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:13, 5 August 2020 (UTC) SNUGGUMS thank you for the help, these have been fixed. However, there is no other link to replace "Celebrity-gossip.net" (ref#4), PopSugar has been replaced, InStyle is linked InStyle, Teen.com is removed from title and is no longer italicized whereas Teen Vogue is still italicized. Shorty Awards is fixed, and I could not find a different link to replace Tumblr link. Thanks again! --Jaberts123 (talk) 20:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC) You're welcome and we now are almost there. If you can't find anything to use in place of celeb-gossip.net for its attributed content, then just remove that listing altogether, and tweets need to be quoted verbatim when citing them. See Cozy Little Christmas and Never Really Over for examples of what I mean. I also forgot to mention that InStyle should have italics for the table listing on its award. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:02, 5 August 2020 (UTC) SNUGGUMS, InStyle and the tweet have both been fixed. I was able to find a proper link to replace celeb-gossip.net! So everything has been fixed! Thank you!--Jaberts123 (talk) 00:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Following major improvements, I now support this nomination. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, SNUGGUMS! --Jaberts123 (talk) 04:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:36, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

;More comments on the refs Ref 1 - the work is LA Times, not ALMA Award Ref 2 - not a reliable source as per above Ref 3 - the work is not archive.is, it should be whatever the work was for the original source Ref 15 - no work or publisher listed Ref 25 - publisher is shown as American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers whereas elsewhere it's ASCAP Ref 33 - no accessdate or publication date listed Ref 34 - no accessdate or publication date listed Refs 44 and 45 need to indicate that the sources are in Dutch Ref 64 - no work or publisher listed Ref 71 says the source is in Spanish but it isn't Ref 72 - the title of the source is not "Archived copy", also no work or publisher is listed Ref 73 lists no publication date or accessdate and also doesn't note the language Ref 74 needs to list the language Ref 75 is missing most of the necessary info Ref 79 is missing most of the necessary info Ref 80 - no work or publisher listed Ref 84 - no work or publisher listed Ref 94 - no work or publisher listed Ref 100 - no accessdate or publication date listed Ref 104 - no work or publisher listed Ref 114 - no work or publisher listed, also language needs noting Ref 118 is missing most of the necessary info -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:00, 10 July 2020 (UTC) ChrisTheDude all these comments are resolved and done. Thank you for the help! --Jaberts123 (talk) 20:02, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

More comments

• "Lovato released her third studio album Unbroken, releasing two singles" - repetition of "released/releasing". Change the second one to "featuring"
• ""Skyscraper" won Best Video with a Message and Choice Summer: Song" - according to the article on the awards, the category was called Choice Music: Summer Song, not Choice Summer: Song
• "was nominated for two awards at the 2012 Teen Choice Awards: Choice Summer Song" and "Choice Love Song"" - why are these category titles suddenly in quote marks (or half quote marks in the case of the first one?
• "Lovato was nominated for three awards at the 2018 Billboard Music Awards, including Top Female Artist and received" => "Lovato was nominated for three awards at the 2018 Billboard Music Awards, including Top Female Artist, and received"
• As an aside, Cutest Musician's Pet is possibly the most moronic award I have ever seen in one of these lists, but that's nothing to do with the quality of this article :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, ChrisTheDude. All the comments have been fixed. Quotation marks have been removed from award category names, comma was added in 2018 BBMA, releasing was replaced with featuring, and the Teen Choice Award category name was changed! Thank you for all the help! :) --Jaberts123 (talk) 00:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:10, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, ChrisTheDude, for the support. --Jaberts123 (talk) 19:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 21:28, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments – The second sentence of the lead is quite long and reads oddly for me. At a minimum, it appears to need "as" before "the main character". The publisher of reference 3 (Los Angeles Times) should be italicized as a print publication. The same goes for ref 114 (Glamour Magazine UK). Ref 12 is missing an access date. The all caps in the titles of refs 18, 19, 30, 33, 48, 49, 58, 59, 73, 101 should be removed. The hyphens in the titles of refs 19, 73, 94, 117, and 118 should be converted into en dashes to meet Mos guidelines. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:23, 30 August 2020 (UTC) Thank you, Giants2008, for the comments. I have fixed what you mentioned, but please let me know if the sentence in the lead is still too long. Thank you, again! ----Jaberts123 (talk) 23:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from GagaNutella

• Infobox: Latin Billboard Music Awards and Billboard Touring Awards, Billboard is in italic. GAFFA Awards (Sweden) you don't need to mention Sweden. Glamour Awards, Glamour is in italic. InStyle Awards, InStyle is in italic. Guinness World Records is in italic. Wikilink MTV Millennial Awards Brazil.
• Table: Wikilink Billboard Touring Awards. Bravo Otto (Hungary) you don't need to mention Hungray. GAFFA Awards (Sweden) you don't need to mention Sweden. Change MTV Millennial Awards (Brazil) to MTV Millennial Awards Brazil. Don't use quote marks on Lovatics. (with ...) or (for...) should be placed on the Recipient(s) and nominee(s) column. Wikilink everything possible on the Category column.
• MediaWiki:Toc isn't working.
• Ref: 34: The Grammys isn't in italic. 63: Entertainment Weekly is in italic. 68: Deadline is in italic. 75: it isn't working. 84: change PeoplesChoice.com to People's Choice Awards.

I will run AutoEd to clean up the article. GagaNutella^talk 19:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you, GagaNutella for the comments! I fixed the People's Choice link, removed the MediaWiki:Toc, however for Billboard, Grammy, Glamour, etc. I was told those were to be in italics. Also, multiple other music artists have Bravo Otto and GAFFA with their respective countries because multiple countries host different GAFFA and Bravo Otto awards. Wikilinked Billboard Touring Awards and MTV Millennial Awards Brazil. Thank you, again! ----Jaberts123 (talk) 02:48, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Please, do the fixes on the table and then I will support. GagaNutella^talk 18:36, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Everything is fixed. Thanks, GagaNutella --Jaberts123 (talk) 20:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Still missing: Glamour Awards, Glamour is in italic. InStyle Awards, InStyle is in italic. Guinness World Records is in italic. Wikilink MTV Millennial Awards Brazil. Change MTV Millennial Awards (Brazil) to MTV Millennial Awards Brazil on the table. GagaNutella^talk 21:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Don't Glamour, Guinness, and InStyle have to be in italics since they are awards from the magazine? Because looking at Gaga's awards, those are italicized, too. Just fixed MTV Brazil, too Jaberts123 (talk) 21:27, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Yes, they are. But they are incorrect on the infobox. That's the point. GagaNutella^talk 01:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Oh gosh, I am so sorry. I kept misreading, I thought you meant in the table for some reason. Okay infobox is fixed. My apologies again. Thank you for the help, GagaNutella! Jaberts123 (talk) 03:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support very good! GagaNutella^talk 04:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you, GagaNutella --Jaberts123 (talk) 23:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

I'll be back to do this one sometime tomorrow Aza24 (talk) 08:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC) Sorry for getting back to this late, comments:

• At the moment the most outstanding issue is that some works/publishers/websites are linked, some aren't – it needs to be one way or the other, either is fine Since most are linked I'll list the ones that aren't: Shorty Awards, World Music Award, ASCAP, some of the Billboard, Young Artist Awards and MTV were the ones I found
• Ref 10 missing author and date
• What makes refs 18 and 19 reliable?
• Refs 18 and 19 should have a "|language=Hungarian" parameter (they are missing dates as well)
• Ref 20 needs a "|language=Portuguese" (translated title, like ref 22, would be nice as well)
• What makes ref 27 reliable?
• Not sure how 32 is reliable, the WP page for the site says that users can register to post content
• ref 44 missing date
• Author for 73 listed twice
• Got to 80s, will come back for the rest later
• Everything else looks good. Reliability is fine. Aza24 (talk) 06:53, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks so much, Aza24. All have been fixed! Jaberts123 (talk) 17:38, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

• Shoot I totally forgot about this one, doing the rest now. Still unsure how ref 18 is reliable
• Refs 90 and 91 are the same and should be combined (like how you did for ref 45)
• ref 92 (Taylor Swift & Justin Bieber Lead Radio Disney Music Awards Nominations) is missing author
• ref 110 missing author
• ref 119 missing date
• That's it for me... fix these small things and you're good

• Thank you again, Aza24! In terms of Ref. 18, it shows all the nominees for the awards that year, including for Demi's category. Thanks! Jaberts123 (talk) 01:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

• The reason I asked about ref 18 was because it is a blog and blogs are generally unreliable. That being said, since it's citing statistical information I think it's fine, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 04:26, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

• Oh, got it! Thank you for clarifying! And thank you for the review, Aza24. Jaberts123 (talk) 18:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:12, 20 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 14 September 2020 (UTC) [16].

---

Wales national football team results 1876–99

Nominator(s): Kosack (talk) 21:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

The first of a possible series of Wales international football results lists. I've used the format for the one promoted Scottish list as a template and brought this list up to a level I believe is worthy of FL status. I look forward to any comments. Kosack (talk) 21:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• "Wales player their first home fixture " - spot the typo ;-)

  Ahh, I actually saw that and forgot to change it, done now. Kosack (talk) 14:17, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

• "played 62 fixtures, winning 11, drawing 8 and losing the remaining 44" - that doesn't add up to 62
• First three general refs (statistics) need access dates
• Thunk that's it from me - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Thanks for the review Chris, I've addressed the points above. Kosack (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:16, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Harrias

• Per MOS:OVERLINK, delink well-known places; certainly London, Cardiff, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Belfast. Honestly, given that the location will be linked from the ground page, there is an argument for removing them all. - Removed
• I assume match #12 should be in 1882? - Fixed
• In light of the recent RFC on table captions (closed back in May) and how FLCs have to follow MOS:ACCESS, a table captions should be included in all tables. This quote by PresN might apply to this list: "In the case that the table is the first thing in a section where the section header is essentially the same as what the caption would be, and therefore looks duplicative visually, you can make the caption screen reader-only with the {{sronly}} template, e.g. "|+ {{sronly|Example table caption}}" instead of "

  I added a hidden caption to the "Head to head records" table. Harrias ^talk 18:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

• The "Head to head records" table also needs row and column scopes adding.
• Add a WP:Short description.
• "..losing 4–0 at Hamilton Crescent in Partick." The table says "Hamilton Crescent, Glasgow": be consistent. (I know Partick is in Glasgow, but the article should pick one or the other.)
• "The match makes the Welsh side the third oldest international football team" I'm not keen on this phrasing: maybe rephrase the whole thing to: "The team are the third oldest in international football, behind only Scotland and England. They played their first match on 18 March 1876 against Scotland, losing 4–0 at Hamilton Crescent in Glasgow." (or Partick, whichever you're going with.) It might just be me: don't feel obligated to change if you don't think it is an improvement.
• "..with Scotland winning.." Avoid noun plus -ing.
• "..with the British Home Championship, a round-robin tournament, holding.." Same again.
• "..with Jack Doughty scoring.." And again.
• "..higher than third in the British Home Championship.." As it is clear what competition you are talking about, I think you could optionally shorten this to "..higher than third in the Championship.."

That's it from me: a nice list, I look forward to the rest of the series! Harrias ^talk 12:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

@Harrias: Thanks Harrias, I've amended all of the points above. Let me know what you think. Kosack (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support, I made a couple of copy-edits to the article you might want to check, but I'm happy it now meets the FL criteria, great work. I'll keep an eye out for any more in the series, but feel free to ping me if you want a review and I've missed it. Harrias ^talk 18:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

NB: Will claim WikiCup points etc. Harrias ^talk 18:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 21:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

;Comments The team are --> Shouldn't that be "The team is"? It's a British English thing, we refer to sports teams in the plural. Harrias talk 20:43, 25 August 2020 (UTC) In note c, Reports vary over the exact attendance due to poor weather conditions. Some reports estimate as few as 100 attended, although most sources estimate around 200. You could change the second "estimate" to "approximate" to make it sound less repetitive. Everything else looks great! ~ HAL333 19:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC) @HAL333: Thanks for taking a look, I've addressed the second point here and I think Harrias has explained the first. Kosack (talk) 21:05, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support Nice work. ~ HAL333 21:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 19:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup points will be claimed etc etc I think the title should comply with MOS, i.e. full years in the date range. This is always an odd one as football, and sport in general, articles seem to generally not follow this. For example all of the pages listed in Category:National association football team results by team stick with the same format used here (when the ranges don't cross centuries of course). Kosack (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC) I've asked for guidance at WT:MOSNUM as I don't think there's a strong argument against compliance with the MOS date range guidelines. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Year ranges in sporting article titles is worth a read. Looks like a lot of pages need to be moved!! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC) "The team are t... The team played... " repetitive, short sentences, can be merged as they are inter-related. " the same opponents " why not just "them". " into a competition with the British Home Championship" can't quite put my finger on it but this reads a little odd to me. "which held its" bit anthropomorphic for me. The first edition was held, it didn't really "hold itself" Match No. -> Match no. I may be bold to suggest that you siphon off the H/A (N soon?) into its own column so people can sort on that too. No h in Bramall Lane. I'm a bit of a pedant for using consistent numbers of decimal places (e.g. in the % win cells). The template is already rounding to two places, but seems to ignore zeroes. I've tried to force it, but it doesn't seem to be working. Any idea how to do so? Kosack (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Perhaps as these results will never change, you could just hard code the answers? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 15:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Oliver has full stops, Stead has commas. Consistent publication formatting please. That's my lot. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 10:09, 31 August 2020 (UTC) @The Rambling Man: Thanks for the review, I've addressed all of the points above and left comments on two of them. Kosack (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC) @The Rambling Man: I've moved the article (and the others ready for the future) inline with the MOS now and fixed the percentage issue also. Kosack (talk) 18:27, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support nice work. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 19:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

• I'm not sure if this is actually a guideline but I almost always see the specific refs above the general ones, you may want to do so here – I'm fine with either way though.
• Amazon says that the Guinness publisher is officially "Guinness World Records Ltd"
• The ISBN for the Oliver book should also be ISBN 13 not ISBN 10 (use the converter)
• Everything else looks good, these are such minor things that I'm just going to do them. Pass for source review, cheers! Aza24 (talk) 07:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:13, 13 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 14 September 2020 (UTC) [17].

---

List of accolades received by Avengers: Endgame

Nominator(s): Surge_Elec (talk) 16:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I created this list on 5 September 2019.

Originally the description was this. [18]

However, other users said that the current description is better.

Since the beginning, the awards were ordered by date of ceremony. That has not changed.

Please give your comments / inputs.

Surge_Elec (talk) 16:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I think the reason it's still ordered by date of ceremony is that the last one is still {{pending}}. After August 1, when the Hugo Award ceremony takes place, we can order it alphabetically. However, we could still do it now. El Millo (talk) 18:55, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Is it required to make this FL? If it yes, I'd do it right now. Surge_Elec (talk) 18:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Do you think it has to be ordered alphabetically for achieving FL? Surge_Elec (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I've started the process of ordering the awards alphabetically. Surge_Elec (talk) 19:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

DONE. I have ordered it alphabetically. Surge_Elec (talk) 20:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

;Comment The sorting in the recipient(s) columns needs a lot of fixing. Anything starting with a " needs to sort on the first actual word. People's names need to sort based on surname, not forename. Also, the sort order in the result column is Won > Runner-up > Pending > Nominated. I would suggest that "Pending" should sort at the bottom. That's all I found - good work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC) Kindly clarify "People's names need to sort based on surname, not forename." So, Dan DeLeeuw, Matt Aitken, Russell Earl, and Dan Sudick would be changed to Matt Aitken, Dan DeLeeuw, Russell Earl, and Dan Sudick. At one place right now, Mark Ruffalo is first, then Josh Brolin. So, Josh Brolin would come first. No, you don't need to change the order of the names in the cell, but any cell that contains the name of one or more people needs to sort based on the person (or first person)'s surname. So if the cell contains the name Mark Ruffalo (or contains multiple names but lists his first), that cell needs to sort under R, not under M as it does currently. To achieve this you will need to use a sorting template (see WP:SORT#Specifying a sort key for a cell) Anything starting with a " needs to sort on the first actual word: I didn't get it. Can you show what you mean? So what would this change to: "Payoff One-Sheet" (LA/Lindeman Associates) A cell that contains that text would need to sort under P. Currently all cells that start with a punctuation mark sort together at the top, which is wrong Do you mean that these also need to be sorted alphabetically? Surge_Elec (talk) 14:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC) Hope my responses above clarify the situation -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:51, 29 June 2020 (UTC) One other thing I just noticed - the St. Louis Film Critics Association row has the recipient in the category column and the category in the recipient column -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:54, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

• I fixed one sort value whic hyou had missed and am now happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
• I support it as well. El Millo (talk) 04:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC) Withdrew support, as I didn't know this was supposed to come from people who had reviewed the article instead of editors who just supported the proposal. El Millo (talk) 20:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from User:SNUGGUMS

File:Kevin Feige (48462887397) (cropped).jpg is appropriately licensed Something about using "(won)" when winning a sole nomination doesn't seem grammatically correct, and either way reads awkwardly. Perhaps "(which it won)" would be better.  Done Surge_Elec (talk) 03:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC) I'm not convinced you need to link receipients (i.e. cast members and movie title) multiple times in the tables Comment: I've seen it as a common practice in accolades tables. Comment: I've also seen this as a common practice in accolades lists. Surge_Elec (talk) 04:07, 13 August 2020 (UTC) MOS:FONTSIZE discourages making text look smaller than it naturally would appear. Doing so needlessly makes it harder on readers' eyes.  Not done smaller fonts utilized in the same fashion in featured lists like List of accolades received by The Lord of the Rings film series and List of accolades received by Mad Max: Fury Road. They're used sparingly, a total of three times in the whole list. The following terms shouldn't have italics: Walt Disney Studios  Done Marvel  Done Box Office Mojo  Done Rotten Tomatoes  Done CNN  Done Florida Film Critics Circle  Done Comicbook.com  Not done Comicbook.com is a website and belongs in the |website= parameter, which italicizes its content automatically AwardsCircuit  Not done Same that Comicbook.com What makes "Comics Beat" a trustworthy publication?  Done Us Weekly is a subpar source that should be avoided  Done Comment: You can discuss and decide and we can do accordingly. Surge_Elec (talk) 04:07, 13 August 2020 (UTC) Get through these, and we should be set. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:56, 13 August 2020 (UTC)  Dones,  Not dones and Comments by El Millo (talk) 02:13, 13 August 2020 (UTC) While I do appreciate how the article has improved, I'm not sure it's appropriate for you of all people to do so when you've already expressed support for the nomination. Either way, using codes to make fonts smaller is frowned upon for good reason, and that also shouldn't be used in other lists. It's easier to read the text without coding that decreases the size. The nominator should get a chance to address my comments. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC) I think the use of the {{small}} here template qualifies as sparingly, and it isn't being used in prose but within a table, which, if I understand correctly, at the very least isn't as frowned upon as using it in prose. List of accolades received by American Hustle and List of accolades received by 12 Years a Slave (film), two other featured list that use the {{small}} template in the same fashion; it seems to me this counts as common practice, as I've seen no featured list with parentheticals of this kind not wrapped within the {{small}} template. El Millo (talk) 03:38, 13 August 2020 (UTC) Comment: This I didn't understand. Kindly clarify. Surge_Elec (talk) 04:07, 13 August 2020 (UTC) This is all in reference to the (also for Captain Marvel) and (also for Spider-Man: Far From Home) clarifications in the table. El Millo (talk) 04:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC) Comment: Ok. Regarding this, I thought it was fine as it is. If it isn't by Wikipedia standards, you can discuss and decide and we can do accordingly. Surge_Elec (talk) 04:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC) I would remove the "small" code from parentheticals in the table. Also, I forgot to mention that being a website doesn't give something a free pass to be italicized. One can cancel those out by putting italic code in the "website"/"work" parameter, or simply use "publisher" in place of it. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:00, 13 August 2020 (UTC)  Done  Done As you told. Surge_Elec (talk) 16:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC) @SNUGGUMS: The decision to italicize website in templates such as {{Cite web}} comes from consensus at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 63#Italics of websites in citations and references – request for comment. You can't ask for wide community consensus to be overridden in order for this list to be "improved". Box Office Mojo, Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are exceptions to this, also agreed upon at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film/Archive 20#We should not be italicizing RT, MC and BOM. Also, I would remove the "small" code from parentheticals in the table, you didn't even acknowledge what I showed you, that every featured list I've come across that has these kind of parentheticals has them it a smaller font. The content of these reviews and the requests for improvement must come from policies, guidelines, and common practice found at other good-quality articles of the same kind. El Millo (talk) 16:48, 13 August 2020 (UTC) Even in List of awards and nominations received by Leonardo DiCaprio, whose nomination you participated in, all the (Shared with ...) parentheticals are wrapped within a {{small}} template, and they were already there in the original featured version. El Millo (talk) 17:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC) Not sure how I missed that bit in the DiCaprio list, and I probably didn't know of the MOS:FONTSIZE guideline back then, but I regardless did cite that guideline above for removing smaller font coding here and also previously mentioned that other lists shouldn't use that either in their tables. In other words, I did acknowledge it by saying they also shouldn't have implemented it. Just because other lists make a mistake in using something doesn't mean we should repeat that in this page. There is no convincing rationale to make things harder on readers' eyes by decreasing sizes from what they naturally would be. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 17:44, 13 August 2020 (UTC) Guidelines should reflect already existing common practices, and this is clearly a common practice. And it's not like this violates the guideline altogether, since the guideline isn't an outright prohibition of the use of a smaller font. This matter should probably be discussed somewhere else –perhaps in the WP:MOSFILMS–, but it shouldn't, as things stand right now, be an impediment to give this list the featured status, as it clearly hasn't been for all the examples that were listed here before. El Millo (talk) 19:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC) Not exactly a major impediment, but it still detracts from overall quality and it's beyond me why anybody seems to think smaller text is beneficial at all. On another note, when looking through the table, nominations for recipients such as Robert Downey Jr. and Josh Brolin are probably worth mentioning in prose when they got a bunch of those (including multiple wins) for their work in the film. Starting three consecutive sentences with "it" also gets repetitive after reading it again. I would prefer for Surge elec to work on this list in the future when neither of us nominated it for FL. The reviewers shouldn't do too much editing for things they're assessing. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:48, 13 August 2020 (UTC) On that last note: I thought the Supports weren't reviewers, just people that agreed with the proposal in order to get it reviewed. I'll continue with the edits and I'll withdraw my Support from up there. El Millo (talk) 20:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

• Good call on withdrawing your own support when you were becoming increasingly involved with page contributions. As for me, I now support following improvements to lead and citations. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:38, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Went through the sources, couldn't find any missing dates, authors or publishers – good job with linking the publishers btw. The only thing I did find was that Dragoncon can probably be linked to Dragon Con? Either way, Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 05:55, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done. El Millo (talk) 06:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Birdienest81 (talk) 01:09, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

====Comments by Birdienest81==== It would by beneficial to mention the Rotten Tomatoes score at the end of the second paragraph.  Done El Millo (talk) 07:51, 12 September 2020 (UTC) I think using this article from Variety and/or using this article from The Hollywood Reporter are better references than the ones listed for refs 26 and 27.  Done El Millo (talk) 08:08, 12 September 2020 (UTC) Here is a list of the nominations for the 2019 Seattle Film Critics Society which also includes the actual people that were nominated for Best Visual Effects. I think it is better citation than the one listed for ref 49 since it mentions the actual people nominated.  Done El Millo (talk) 08:27, 12 September 2020 (UTC) You could use this article to mention the nominations it received from the St. Louis Film Critics Association.  Partially done: That one doesn't contain the winners, this one does. El Millo (talk) 08:27, 12 September 2020 (UTC) Otherwise, I think it is a good list --Birdienest81 (talk) 07:44, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support: I think this list is worthy of featured list status.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 01:15, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:09, 13 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:27, 8 September 2020 (UTC) [19].

---

Orson Welles filmography

Nominator(s): ~ HAL333 21:11, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

This is my first attempt at a director's filmography. Welles is an iconic director, and his prolific filmography, including his many partially-completed works, is very interesting. ~ HAL333 21:11, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:49, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

; Comments from Medusa who is remembered for his innovative work → who is best remembered for his innovative work Welles' second film was the The Magnificent Ambersons (1942) → Welles' second film was The Magnificent Ambersons (1942) External links is empty Otherwise great work. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 06:01, 14 August 2020 (UTC) CAPTAIN MEDUSA  Done Thanks for the comments. ~ HAL333 14:17, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support – ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 11:49, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• "which he also starred in as Charles Foster Kane" => "in which he also starred as Charles Foster Kane"
• "Welles then directed the film-noir" - second consecutive sentence to start with "Welles", so maybe change this one to "He"
• "which he also starred in opposite his estranged wife" => "in which he also starred opposite his estranged wife"

"which he also starred in alongside Charlton Heston" => "in which he also starred alongside Charlton Heston"

• "which he also starred in as Falstaff." => "in which he also starred as Falstaff."
• "In 1937, Welles collaborated" => "In 1937, he collaborated"
• Think that's it from me - great work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done I appreciate the comments Chris. ~ HAL333 23:16, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 03:47, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments – The alt text should not merely say "See caption", because that is what the screen reader will say out loud. The person who uses the screen reader will probably not be able to see the caption (hence the reason why they are using a screen reader to begin with, if they are visually impaired). D'oh! ~ HAL333 02:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC) Apart from that, images utilized are licensed and tagged (no action needed). "In 1971, Welles was awarded an Academy Honorary Award …" – is there another word other than "awarded" or "received" that could be used here for variation? Perhaps "conferred", "granted", or "given". Also, it's probably best to put the year after "Award", so that the sentence begins with the subject and allow the reader to connect chronologically with the next sentence (which starts with "Four years later").  Done Just curious – any particular reason why Mel Brooks is mentioned in the last sentence of the actor paragraph? No need to remove it, but I think it would be better to put his name at the very end (i.e. "and History of the World, Part I (1981) by Mel Brooks) in order to avoid MOS:SEAOFBLUE. Unless, of course, you feel that it would confuse the reader into thinking that Brooks directed the two films mentioned immediately before History of the World. I inserted "comedy-film" to break up the blue. Hopefully, that'll do the job. ~ HAL333 03:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC) —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:43, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support – all comments addressed. Looks to me like it meets all 6 FL criteria. Great work! —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:47, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now Aza24 (talk) 06:45, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

• At the moment there are very few works/publishers linked to you can either go through and link them all or unlink the ones currently linked (refs 22, 159, 107, 137, 144, 145, 151, 174
• ref 144 was broken for me
• Lol what is the link for ref 149 for?

• It was missing a hashtag so it just went to the surname and not the cited book. I was confused for a second too. ;) ~ HAL333 00:53, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• Ref 165 broken formatting
• ref 110 needs isbn 13 (link to converter)
• Reliability and the rest of formatting looks good Aza24 (talk) 06:55, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done ~ HAL333 00:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Good work, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 08:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:14, 7 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC) [20].

---

List of Hot Country Singles number ones of 1963

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I apologise if everyone is thoroughly sick of lists of country number ones by now, but here's the latest. Random fact: one of 1963's chart-toppers was "Whispering" Bill Anderson, who was the first artist I ever saw in concert, when I was six years old (I didn't go under my own steam) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Harrias

• In light of the recent RFC on table captions (closed back in May) and how FLCs have to follow MOS:ACCESS, a table captions should be included in all tables. This quote by PresN might apply to this list: "In the case that the table is the first thing in a section where the section header is essentially the same as what the caption would be, and therefore looks duplicative visually, you can make the caption screen reader-only with the {{sronly}} template, e.g. "|+ {{sronly|Example table caption}}" instead of "
• "..single week, however, before the.." Remove "however", it is unnecessary.
• "..during the spring.." Per MOS:SEASON, don't using seasons as a reference time-frame.
• "..but it would be the.." This might work better as "..though it was the.."
• "In May, Hawkshaw Hawkins also topped the chart for the first and only time.." Not technically true, as it went back to the top in June.
• "In the fall.." Same as above.
• "He spent the highest total number of weeks at number one in 1963.." It is unclear if this means that he spent more time at the top than anyone else, or if he spent more time at the top in 1963 than he did in any other year.
• "The song would remain at.." Maybe change "would remain" to "remained".
• "..he would go on.." And maybe "he went on" (can you tell I'm not keen on "would", except in very specific situations?
• No dablinks. (No action needed).
• Images all have alt text. (No action needed).
• Images all seem appropriately licensed. (No action needed).

Nice work; nothing major, just a bit of tidying needed. Harrias ^talk 13:38, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

@Harrias: all done, I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:59, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support: I reverted one change back, because on reading through the flow I think what you had was better. I will claim WikiCup points for this review. Harrias ^talk 14:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Dank

• If you'll let me put my copyeditor hat on for a moment ... reading the above comments, I know when writers hear people objecting to "would", sometimes they get exactly the wrong idea ... that they should never use it. Just my opinion, but the two instances of "would" that you've got left (after Harrias's comments and your edits) are exactly right.
• You know my standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing.
• "In May, Hawkshaw Hawkins topped the chart with "Lonesome 7-7203", his first and only single to reach number one.": It's a common metaphor, it's not wrong, but I think it's a little bit gruesome to talk about dead people doing things. How about this? "In May, Hawkshaw Hawkins's "Lonesome 7-7203" topped the chart, his first and only single to reach number one."
• I see no problems with the chart links and coding.
• I see Harrias has checked out the images.
• A short description is not needed for this list IMO because the name of the list is sufficient.
• FLC criteria:
  • 1. The prose is fine. (Some will object to "a number of", and I'm not a fan, but topic sentences often have statements that would be too broad in other contexts, so I'm not complaining.)
  • 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
  • 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
  • 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
  • 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
  • 4. It is navigable.
  • 5. It meets style requirements. You make excellent use of images (but that's about all I'm qualified to say).
  • 6. It is stable.
• Support, since this is close enough to the finish line. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 15:44, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Many thanks for your support, Dank. I have amended the sentence about Hawkins, although I have worded it ever-so-slightly differently to avoid that whole "do you put 's or just ' after a name ending in s?", which I can never seem to get right :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:55, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Good call. - Dank (push to talk) 15:56, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support I tried, but I couldn't find anything. ~ HAL333 19:15, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Chris, I have no idea how you could think people would be "sick of your lists" – your commitment and output is awesome!

• Pass for source review – I tweaked the ISBNs around and linked a publisher. Aza24 (talk) 09:32, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Support from WA8MTWAYC

Support This is a great list, I also couldn't find something. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 21:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:25, 7 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC) [21].

---

Hawthorn Memorial Trophy

Nominator(s): MWright96 (talk) 14:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Here is another Formula One Award being put up for nomination by yours truly, the Hawthorn Memorial Trophy. The award is presented to the most successful British or Commonwealth driver over the course of Formula One season and has been won by many of the sport's famous names. I believe this list meets the criteria to be at a featured level and look forward to all comments and concerns. MWright96 (talk) 14:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support – Great work! ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 09:44, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• "It was launched on 1 May 1959 by the Royal Automobile Club (RAC) as an appeal" - I don't really follow what this means. How was the award an appeal?
• "The winner was given the trophy at an annual ceremony" - bit vague. I would say either "The winner was initially given the trophy at an annual ceremony" or "The winner was given the trophy at an annual ceremony until 19XX" if the exact date is known
• "Of the 19 recipients, all but six have gone on to win the World Championship on 24 occasions" - as worded, this says that 13 recipients have each won the World Championship 24 times. Suggest rewording to "Of the 19 recipients, all but six have gone on to win the World Championship, with a total of 24 wins between them"
• One of the Mansell images is obviously cropped from another - I would suggest not having them right next to each other to mix things up a bit
• Think that's it from me. Nice work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:30, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @ChrisTheDude: All points have been addressed. MWright96 (talk) 19:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Harrias

• "..for Mike Hawthorn, the racing driver who.." I think replacing "the" with "a" would make more sense here.
• "..by the Goldsmiths Company freeman K. Lessons.." I'm not sure what this means?
• "..who has the most wins of any other driver with ten." Remove "other".
• I'd love to see the table expanded to have a "position" column, noting what position the driver finished in the world championship. It would give more context to the award, and to "records" such as Jenson's ninth.

Overall, a great listicle. Harrias ^talk 08:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

• @Harrias: Have taken action on all four of the above points. MWright96 (talk) 11:02, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Nice work as usual. Harrias ^talk 11:24, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
  • NB: I will claim WikiCup points for this review. Harrias ^talk 14:19, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 13:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

*I'm not sure what "national memorial" means when it's international (Commonwealth nations)? Might be worth expanding that Hawthorn had actually retired immediately after his championship win as a result of the death of his teammate? "The trophy, created by.... " this sentence has too many run-on clauses... "the 1959 championship" etc, I'm not keen on these easter egg year links, I usually advocate for including "championship", "edition" etc to be in the link to ensure our readers know they're not being linked to just the year article. Not addressed? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 10:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC) The F1 template does not include the ability to add extra text following the year. MWright96 (talk) 11:00, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Probably a good reason not to use it then... The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 11:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Taken up suggestion. MWright96 (talk) 12:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC) " 50 times, followed by Australians with seven victories, New Zealanders with three wins and one Canadian winner. Of the 19 recipients, all but six h..." MOSNUM, comparable items should be consistently all words or all numbers. Worth noting that Hamilton has won the last eight in a row? Not convinced you need the asterisk as you have the position each driver finished in the championship explicitly mentioned. Pop up text over Pos. needs an apostrophe for Drivers'. Some of your references are subscription-only and not marked as such, e.g. ref 2. Category:Formula One-related lists could be used instead of Category:Formula One. That's all I have, nice list, I'm claiming WikiCup points for the review etc. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC) @The Rambling Man: Have made changes in line with the suggestions raised above. MWright96 (talk) 10:52, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 13:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Source review – There are no obvious dead links according to the link-checker tool, and the reliability and formatting appear to be okay. The source review has been passed. Giants2008 (Talk) 20:24, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:19, 7 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 8 September 2020 (UTC) [22].

---

List of Gregory Peck performances

Nominator(s): Cowlibob (talk) 13:13, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Gregory Peck is one of the greatest Hollywood actors. He is known for his roles in Roman Holiday, To Kill a Mockingbird, and westerns such as Mackenna's Gold. As always look forward to constructive comments on how to improve it. Cowlibob (talk) 13:13, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• Captain Horatio Hornblower (the film title) should sort under C
• Andrew "Jorgy" Jorgenson sorts incorrectly under A
• Dr. Anthony Edwardes / John Ballantyne - were these two separate characters?
• 57th Academy Awards should probably sort under "Fifty-seventh" (ie under F)
• Think that's it from me - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:01, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Thanks for the review. I think I've sorted the above. He played a character who was called by different names during the film. Cowlibob (talk) 10:07, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, one other thing I just noticed - the list is called "List of Gregory Peck performances" and yet it contains three films/shows which he only produced, and therefore he didn't perform in them...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:58, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: I've not been a fan of this list name as it doesn't cover everything and can also be a bit ambiguous. How about if I switched it to "Gregory Peck on screen, stage and radio"? This is similar to other FLs like Ethel Barrymore on stage, screen and radio and George Formby on screen, stage, record and radio. Cowlibob (talk) 16:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

I think that would work -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:53, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Changed.Cowlibob (talk) 21:46, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• The only thing that I noticed is that all the photos are from Peck's earlier career. You should add one from the 1970's or '80's. If you wanted to maintain the black and white aesthetic, there are several potential photos.

Nice work - a really fantastic list. ~ HAL333 17:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

@HAL333: Thanks for your comments. I've added in a photo into the television section from his 1982 role as President Lincoln in The Blue and the Gray. Cowlibob (talk) 11:35, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333 11:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support this nom. Just one thing, add periods in all the alt texts. Cheers! Yashthepunisher (talk) 08:53, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Yashthepunisher: Done. Thanks for the support. Cowlibob (talk) 17:31, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

• Source review – The formatting and reliability of the references both look fine, and the link-checker tool shows no obvious problems. No issues to report on the sourcing front. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:20, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:09, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

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