Knowledge (XXG)

:Featured list candidates/Featured log/October 2012 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

Featured list logedit
2005
June 13 promoted 10 failed
July 20 promoted 8 failed
August 14 promoted 9 failed
September 3 promoted 8 failed
October 7 promoted 2 failed
November 7 promoted 6 failed 1 removed
December 6 promoted 4 failed
2006
January 11 promoted 11 failed 1 removed
February 3 promoted 8 failed 1 kept
March 13 promoted 11 failed 2 kept
April 10 promoted 5 failed 1 removed
May 10 promoted 7 failed 1 kept
June 9 promoted 10 failed
July 10 promoted 9 failed 1 kept
August 10 promoted 7 failed 1 kept
September 5 promoted 7 failed
October 8 promoted 10 failed 1 removed
November 11 promoted 8 failed 2 kept
December 20 promoted 11 failed
2007
January 18 promoted 11 failed
February 11 promoted 11 failed
March 12 promoted 10 failed 1 kept
April 20 promoted 17 failed 1 kept
May 23 promoted 14 failed
June 22 promoted 9 failed 1 kept
July 29 promoted 20 failed 2 kept/1 removed
August 41 promoted 15 failed 3 removed
September 42 promoted 11 failed 1 kept/1 removed
October 43 promoted 17 failed 2 kept
November 40 promoted 18 failed
December 38 promoted 15 failed 2 removed
2008
January 46 promoted 18 failed 6 removed
February 34 promoted 16 failed 10 removed/3 kept
March 65 promoted 9 failed 4 removed/2 kept
April 48 promoted 25 failed 2 removed/2 kept
May 50 promoted 39 failed 1 removed
June 46 promoted 23 failed/2 quick-failed 4 removed/1 kept
July 85 promoted 27 failed/10 quick-failed 3 removed/2 kept
August 58 promoted 52 failed/7 quick-failed 4 removed/1 kept
September 59 promoted 33 failed/5 quick-failed 3 removed/1 kept
October 75 promoted 30 failed/2 quick-failed 5 removed
November 86 promoted 13 failed 8 removed/5 kept
December 70 promoted 11 failed 3 removed/2 kept
2009
January 63 promoted 16 failed 3 removed/1 kept
February 62 promoted 24 failed/1 quick-failed 4 removed/1 kept
March 47 promoted 14 failed 4 removed/1 kept
April 47 promoted 15 failed 13 removed/2 kept
May 28 promoted 19 failed 15 removed/2 kept
June 56 promoted 14 failed 16 removed/4 kept
July 45 promoted 21 failed 9 removed/5 kept
August 37 promoted 15 failed 8 removed/6 kept
September 25 promoted 11 failed 3 removed/4 kept
October 40 promoted 13 failed 2 removed/4 kept
November 26 promoted 9 failed 2 removed/1 kept
December 24 promoted 14 failed 4 removed/0 kept
2010
January 30 promoted 13 failed 2 removed/2 kept
February 39 promoted 23 failed 0 removed/8 kept
March 38 promoted 20 failed 2 removed/1 kept
April 35 promoted 10 failed 3 removed/1 kept
May 30 promoted 7 failed 2 removed/2 kept
June 33 promoted 6 failed 0 removed/2 kept
July 36 promoted 15 failed 1 removed/5 kept
August 31 promoted 10 failed 3 removed/0 kept
September 36 promoted 13 failed 1 removed/3 kept
October 23 promoted 13 failed 3 removed/0 kept
November 22 promoted 10 failed 2 removed/2 kept
December 26 promoted 7 failed 3 removed/2 kept
2011
January 16 promoted 13 failed 6 removed/2 kept
February 28 promoted 11 failed 5 removed/2 kept
March 21 promoted 6 failed 1 removed/1 kept
April 17 promoted 8 failed 6 removed/1 kept
May 21 promoted 14 failed 2 removed/2 kept
June 21 promoted 10 failed 0 removed/4 kept
July 29 promoted 9 failed 2 removed/1 kept
August 19 promoted 21 failed 0 removed/5 kept
September 22 promoted 8 failed 1 removed/0 kept
October 23 promoted 3 failed 3 removed/0 kept
November 13 promoted 2 failed 2 removed/0 kept
December 13 promoted 9 failed 1 removed/1 kept
2012
January 18 promoted 9 failed 0 removed/1 kept
February 21 promoted 5 failed 0 removed/0 kept
March 17 promoted 8 failed 1 removed/1 kept
April 11 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/0 kept
May 8 promoted 16 failed 3 removed/1 kept
June 14 promoted 15 failed 2 removed/1 kept
July 18 promoted 7 failed 5 removed/1 kept
August 42 promoted 6 failed 3 removed/2 kept
September 26 promoted 6 failed 1 removed/2 kept
October 28 promoted 15 failed 5 removed/0 kept
November 20 promoted 8 failed 2 removed/3 kept
December 16 promoted 14 failed 4 removed/2 kept
2013
January 19 promoted 12 failed 4 removed/3 kept
February 22 promoted 8 failed 0 removed/1 kept
March 19 promoted 13 failed 0 removed/3 kept
April 19 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/2 kept
May 17 promoted 7 failed 1 removed/1 kept
June 24 promoted 7 failed 0 removed/1 kept
July 23 promoted 9 failed 0 removed/0 kept
August 15 promoted 7 failed 0 removed/0 kept
September 26 promoted 9 failed 0 removed/0 kept
October 13 promoted 13 failed 1 removed/1 kept
November 12 promoted 7 failed 1 removed/0 kept
December 8 promoted 3 failed 2 removed/0 kept
2014
January 13 promoted 10 failed 0 removed/0 kept
February 12 promoted 10 failed 3 removed/0 kept
March 28 promoted 8 failed 0 removed/0 kept
April 16 promoted 5 failed 0 removed/1 kept
May 15 promoted 6 failed 1 removed/1 kept
June 11 promoted 6 failed 0 removed/0 kept
July 18 promoted 11 failed 0 removed/1 kept
August 12 promoted 7 failed 1 removed/1 kept
September 16 promoted 13 failed 0 removed/0 kept
October 9 promoted 12 failed 1 removed/0 kept
November 14 promoted 7 failed 1 removed/1 kept
December 5 promoted 7 failed 2 removed/2 kept
2015
January 17 promoted 9 failed 2 removed/0 kept
February 13 promoted 5 failed 0 removed/0 kept
March 15 promoted 11 failed 0 removed/1 kept
April 17 promoted 5 failed 11 removed/2 kept
May 15 promoted 9 failed 3 removed/0 kept
June 14 promoted 4 failed 6 removed/0 kept
July 22 promoted 9 failed 1 removed/1 kept
August 29 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
September 26 promoted 4 failed 1 removed/6 kept
October 18 promoted 11 failed 0 removed/1 kept
November 23 promoted 8 failed 4 removed/1 kept
December 10 promoted 4 failed 1 removed/0 kept
2016
January 16 promoted 10 failed 5 removed/0 kept
February 8 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/0 kept
March 10 promoted 6 failed 1 removed/0 kept
April 12 promoted 6 failed 2 removed/0 kept
May 14 promoted 9 failed 0 removed/0 kept
June 16 promoted 6 failed 2 removed/0 kept
July 9 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/1 kept
August 17 promoted 7 failed 0 removed/0 kept
September 21 promoted 11 failed 0 removed/0 kept
October 8 promoted 5 failed 2 removed/2 kept
November 8 promoted 4 failed 1 removed/0 kept
December 10 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
2017
January 14 promoted 9 failed 2 removed/1 kept
February 13 promoted 7 failed 1 removed/0 kept
March 10 promoted 3 failed 0 removed/0 kept
April 16 promoted 6 failed 3 removed/2 kept
May 16 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/0 kept
June 12 promoted 5 failed 1 removed/0 kept
July 10 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
August 19 promoted 2 failed 2 removed/2 kept
September 15 promoted 6 failed 1 removed/1 kept
October 15 promoted 3 failed 0 removed/0 kept
November 19 promoted 3 failed 1 removed/0 kept
December 25 promoted 3 failed 0 removed/0 kept
2018
January 25 promoted 3 failed 1 removed/0 kept
February 22 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/1 kept
March 15 promoted 2 failed 1 removed/0 kept
April 16 promoted 6 failed 0 removed/0 kept
May 12 promoted 3 failed 0 removed/0 kept
June 16 promoted 1 failed 2 removed/1 kept
July 12 promoted 0 failed 1 removed/0 kept
August 14 promoted 3 failed 4 removed/0 kept
September 11 promoted 3 failed 0 removed/0 kept
October 14 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/0 kept
November 13 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/2 kept
December 10 promoted 5 failed 0 removed/0 kept
2019
January 10 promoted 7 failed 1 removed/0 kept
February 10 promoted 0 failed 0 removed/0 kept
March 17 promoted 2 failed 2 removed/0 kept
April 11 promoted 9 failed 2 removed/1 kept
May 15 promoted 5 failed 1 removed/0 kept
June 10 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
July 12 promoted 2 failed 2 removed/3 kept
August 11 promoted 2 failed 1 removed/0 kept
September 7 promoted 0 failed 1 removed/0 kept
October 8 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
November 13 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/0 kept
December 10 promoted 3 failed 1 removed/1 kept
2020
January 11 promoted 7 failed 0 removed/2 kept
February 10 promoted 2 failed 3 removed/0 kept
March 8 promoted 0 failed 1 removed/0 kept
April 21 promoted 2 failed 1 removed/1 kept
May 20 promoted 3 failed 0 removed/0 kept
June 25 promoted 4 failed 1 removed/3 kept
July 15 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
August 26 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/0 kept
September 17 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/0 kept
October 15 promoted 4 failed 2 removed/0 kept
November 15 promoted 5 failed 1 removed/0 kept
December 21 promoted 4 failed 2 removed/1 kept
2021
January 24 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/0 kept
February 7 promoted 0 failed 2 removed/0 kept
March 21 promoted 8 failed 4 removed/0 kept
April 20 promoted 4 failed 2 removed/2 kept
May 14 promoted 6 failed 1 removed/0 kept
June 17 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/1 kept
July 15 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/0 kept
August 16 promoted 2 failed 1 removed/1 kept
September 11 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/1 kept
October 23 promoted 1 failed 2 removed/1 kept
November 10 promoted 1 failed 1 removed/0 kept
December 9 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/1 kept
2022
January 21 promoted 1 failed 1 removed/1 kept
February 10 promoted 2 failed 2 removed/2 kept
March 20 promoted 0 failed 3 removed/1 kept
April 17 promoted 2 failed 1 removed/0 kept
May 20 promoted 2 failed 1 removed/0 kept
June 2 promoted 3 failed 0 removed/0 kept
July 13 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
August 22 promoted 5 failed 1 removed/0 kept
September 10 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
October 10 promoted 4 failed 3 removed/0 kept
November 9 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/0 kept
December 15 promoted 2 failed 1 removed/0 kept
2023
January 10 promoted 3 failed 0 removed/0 kept
February 12 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/2 kept
March 19 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/1 kept
April 12 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
May 19 promoted 2 failed 0 removed/0 kept
June 19 promoted 4 failed 1 removed/0 kept
July 16 promoted 5 failed 2 removed/0 kept
August 19 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/0 kept
September 24 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/0 kept
October 22 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/0 kept
November 14 promoted 1 failed 0 removed/1 kept
December 15 promoted 0 failed 1 removed/0 kept
2024
January 13 promoted 2 failed 1 removed/0 kept
February 17 promoted 2 failed 1 removed/3 kept
March 26 promoted 5 failed 1 removed/2 kept
April 27 promoted 4 failed 0 removed/0 kept
May 34 promoted 5 failed 3 removed/0 kept
June 29 promoted 6 failed 1 removed/0 kept
July 36 promoted 3 failed 1 removed/2 kept
August 35 promoted 1 failed 1 removed/0 kept
September 23 promoted 5 failed 3 removed/0 kept
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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by NapHit 16:46, 27 October 2012 .


Nominators: SchroCat (^@) 09:51, 18 October 2012 (UTC) and Cassianto 10:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Known for his clumsy character Inspector Clouseau and his many comic roles on radio, Peter Sellers was one of the best known comedians of his generation. This record of his professional work has recently been split away from the main Sellers page as it was out of place there and not a full reflection of his work. Aside from that, we are now nominating this for featured list status because we believe that it now satisfies the criteria. Cheers - SchroCat (^@) 09:51, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 19:12, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments a few more comments from another look at the list, since my last support back in August. Looks good other than this:
  • Sorry to be a pain, but not correctly. Alt text should actually explain the contents of the image, and not repeat what the caption says or could say. Like, an example, in the first caption, instead of "Peter Sellers" say "a man", or something. TBrandley 16:11, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
  • But the contents are of Peter Sellers, not just "a man". Have a look at the image of Blair and Bush at WP:ALT: "The alt text shouldn't say "Two men shaking hands," because that's not why the picture was chosen; it needs to identify the men". I can tweak the text for the images, but identifying the person as Sellers is a must, I would have thought? - SchroCat (^@) 17:24, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
  • I understand that, but the point of alt text is to explain what is in the image itself, for screenreaders. In the alt, it shouldn't identify the man, that's what the image caption is for, alt text is to explain what is in the image, like "a man who is drinking soda" is a good one, just for example, but "Peter Sellers drinking Cola-Cola" isn't, because that's for the image. At the alt text page, it says, "Alternative text (alt text) is meant for readers who cannot see an image, such as blind readers and readers who use a text or mobile browser. It should summarize an image's purpose, and should not duplicate its caption, ." TBrandley 17:39, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
  • In the image captions, rather than saying "Sellers in 1973 by Allan Warren", etc., could you say "Peter Sellers created BBC Radio and this", that's just an example, I know that's not true, but can it be expanded upon, for all images, and their captions?
  • I've done that for the single portrait images; the images from Dr. Strangelove has enough text already, I think? Let me know if you think differently: I'll tweak further. - SchroCat (^@) 07:43, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Tables don't meet MOS:DTT, add table captions to ensure it does
  • Well, instead of repeating what says, could you say like, for example, instead of "Stage credits" as a table caption, say "Stage credits of Peter Sellers", etc. TBrandley 16:11, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Too many external links per WP:ELNO, remove some
  • Hmm, not sure there were that many but OK. SchroCat, I have gone with IMDb and TCM seeing as we have BFI and Screen online and BFI is generally more reliable. Maybe four EL filmographies were too much. -- Cassianto 03:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

TBrandley 23:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
;Prose comments from Crisco 1492
  • You guys really are on a role with these. Here are my comments.
  • This article is not about Sellers himself, but his work. As such, the dates of birth and death are of minimal relevance (years, on the other hand, I've used myself). Might read better if the dates are removed.
  • Filmmakers the Boulting brothers - Perhaps this is acceptable in BrE, but that reads very uncomfortably for me. Perhaps The Boulting brothers, filmmakers (who had worked with Sellers?)..."
  • "this country has produced" - Britain, England, or the UK, or...? This may be worth trimmming the quote.
  • Henry Hall's Guest Night - I'd suggest against linking like this, as this is a single grammatical unit (a title) and should not be split.
  • as a youngster with his family. - How old, roughly?
  • During his career he also released a number of albums, which were collections of sketches and comic songs, the latter of which were undertaken in a variety of comic characters. - Overly complicated sentence, perhaps split like "During his career he also released a number of albums containing sketches and comic songs; the songs were undertaken in a variety of comic characters."
  • Fix CN tag.
  • No worries. How about this?. As per edit summery, the line came from the finger tips of my co-nom who is currently away. I have put this for now and run it past him when he gets back if that's OK :-) -- Cassianto 23:50, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
  • OK, both done i think. I didn't want to lose the whole sentence so I have cited what is there and lost the "contrasting temperaments and styles" bit. I must admit quotes are not my strong point, so I have somewhat ruthlessly added ellipses to make up for the loss of text as this cannot be elaborated on just yet. Can you check if this is OK? -- Cassianto 00:22, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
  • OK, I have replaced the quote and specified Britain. Both Sellers and Chaplin came from England; Sellers from Portsmouth, Chaplin from London. I don't want to say England as when we talk about something great in this country we don't really say "the greatest in England", we say "greatest in Britain". It is usual to include Wales, Scotland and Ireland when speaking of "this country" as per the "United" part of one of our many (unnecessary) titles. I'm sure this was what they meant. -- Cassianto 08:31, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes, great thanks. I have slightly jiggled around the opening so it takes the emphasis off Sellers as a person, and bringing more of a focus onto his career. I see from your copy edit you would say "He made his radio debut on ShowTime in 1948..." as opposed to "He made his radio debut in ShowTime in 1948..." I think someone appears in radio but on television. Or is the problem the two "in's"? If so, would it help putting the year in a parens? -- Cassianto 23:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment on accessibility. The tables all have well-chosen headers, proper scopes, and good captions, so should be easy for a screen reader to use. The sorting is useful functionality as well. The use of colour has good contrast so the text is easily legible, and no information is conveyed by colour alone. The images would benefit from a little more work. Alt text is indeed there for the benefit of screen readers, and is read out just before the caption, so they always need to complement each other. However, on Knowledge (XXG) there is the complication that, by default, every image has a link to the description page for that image, and screen readers will use the alt text to cue the listener to where the link is going. It would be reasonable to leave out the alt text as you suggest where the caption seems sufficient, if it were not for the link (so on decorative images we use |alt= |link= ). In the three images from Dr. Strangelove a screen reader user will hear that there is a link, but will quite probably have no idea of what the link is to. For that reason it is always a good idea to add a few words of alt text, preferably helping a visually impaired reader to understand why you used those three images. For me, the contrast in Sellers' appearance is key: I'd suggest something along the lines of "Sellers with neat hair and moustache in RAF uniform", "Sellers with wild hair and dark glasses is grinning inanely", "Sellers with bald head and thin-rimmed glasses". You may have different ideas, and that's fine as well. I think the advice not to name the subject is simply wrong: not all screen users have been blind all of their lives and many may well have a good idea what the named person looks like. The point being that you don't have to write stilted alt text - just be as natural as you can. Hope that helps, --RexxS (talk) 10:33, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
  • I have now adjusted the alt text for all six images. I adopted your descriptions for the Dr. Strangelove images and slightly elaborated on all the others. For a task which appears so simple, it is actually quite difficult to describe a picture in such minute detail. Crazy!. All done :-) -- Cassianto 12:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes, writing good alt text is more an art than a science, but practice helps a lot! Minute detail isn't needed, but something that conveys a little of what the image represents is always appreciated by those using screen readers. I numbered the alt parameters for you in the {{multiple image}} template (otherwise the alt text doesn't work). Well done though, I'm very happy to support this FLC. --RexxS (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support – It's comprehensive, well-sourced, can't see any reason not to award it FL status. Only one suggestion: maybe the width of the "notes" column in the filmography could be increased in relation to the other columns, since on small screens some of the entries are huge. Betty Logan (talk) 03:05, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Many thanks for your support and comment. I've widened the notes colummn - it was my fault it looked narrow on some screens: I work on a wider screen and forgot to look at what it was like on smaller versions. It's now tweaked. Cheers - SchroCat (^@) 05:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:27, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments welcome back!
  • "1925 – 1980" not sure that needs to be spaced per WP:YEAR?
  • "conducted a survey on modern-day " wouldn't that be a survey "of"?
  • Please check all year ranges per WP:YEAR.
  • For the filmography, is Year the year of general release in the UK? Might be worth noting that.
  • "Won: BAFTA ..." since this is under notes, perhaps you could drop the colon?
  • I'd prefer to keep the colon there, RM. The reason is consistency between the various notes fields, with "Won: (list of 2 or 3 awards", followed by "Nominated: (list of 2 or 3 awards)", appearing a few times. Doing those for which he only won or nominated for a single award in a different format would look odd? - SchroCat (^@) 20:48, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
  • What is the purpose of repeating the nominations/awards in the filmography table and then again in the awards/nominations table?
  • They serve two different purposes: in the filmography people are looking for (and at) the film information and may be doing so in a chronological sequence. They may be unaware that Sellers won an award and only see it through looking at the overall picture. The awards and nominations table is for those who are looking solely at the awards. Other notable filmographies (Woody Allen filmography and Clint Eastwood filmography) have separate articles that deal with awards and nominations: with Sellers we have incorporated them into one artice for ease. - SchroCat (^@) 20:40, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
  • I do take your point, but the list of nominations within the filmography section loses impact if it's not in a separate table, while not having the info in a notes section in the overall list of films overlooks crucial info about the film and role. - SchroCat (^@) 20:50, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Would prefer to see all ISBN numbers the same format.
  • Most, if not all, of the navboxes at the bottom usually only apply to the biographies, not to related lists, they don't navigate between lists...

The Rambling Man (talk) 15:18, 22 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by NapHit 16:46, 27 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): –Dream out loud (talk) 15:53, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that it meets the criteria at WP:FLCR. I created the list entirely on my own, based off of List of MBTA Commuter Rail stations, which is another featured list. I have cited each individual station on the list to ensure the page was completely referenced. –Dream out loud (talk) 15:53, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:49, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Make lead map image bigger, right now it's too small to see.
  • Image caption shouldn't have a period.
  • Can you link Center City please?
  • Philidelphia is overlinked in the lead.
  • Is Daily ridership actually Average daily readership?
  • Why is Year of Fiscal Year capitalised here?
  • "Of the 280 route miles" probably can just say "Of this..." to avoid repeating 280 miles so quickly.
  • PDFs are usually tagged with format=PDF.
  • Don't mix date formats in the refs.
  • You link SEPTA sometimes in the refs, but most often don't. Be consistent.

The Rambling Man (talk) 12:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Issues have been addressed. Yes, the daily ridership is the average daily ridership. Obviously they lines didn't have the exact same number of riders every single day. I think "average" is implied as it was in the source and other places on Knowledge (XXG) (i.e. {{Infobox rail line}}). –Dream out loud (talk) 03:29, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
;Comments from Crisco 1492
  • File:SEPTA map.png - Why use an out of date map?
  • Fiscal year 2012 had an annual ridership of 35,254,300, - This reads awkwardly to me. Perhaps "The system saw 35,254,300 riders during the 2012 fiscal year."
  • Why is "Airport Terminal" capitalised
 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:08, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Out-of-date map is used as that is the only free one available. I can update it if necessary. Updated: New map has been added to lead. "Airport Terminal" is capitalised as it refers to the stations named "Airport Terminal", not just the "terminals at the airport". –Dream out loud (talk) 03:29, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Fixed. –Dream out loud (talk) 00:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Arsenikk 07:20, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
;Comments by Arsenikk
  • The lists must conform with WP:DTT.
  • Think big and think globally. It is very difficult to understand where this is, especially since the US is not mentioned.
  • A specific year for the first part of the system opening would be nice. Early 20th century could mean anything from 1900 to 1949. Was the entire system built then, or have there been later extensions/new lines (it seems that way from the sentence)? Perhaps use "most" or something like that.
  • Stick to either digits or spelled-out numbers in the same sentence; for instance either seven and twelve, or 7 and 12.
  • Is it possible to verify the date at which each station opened? (for most systems this is possible)
  • There needs to be some sort of key explaining the accessibility symbol.
  • Not a single image of a station?
  • Is there some way distance could be included, such as mi/km from a "station 0", or even travel time from the central hub?

Arsenikk 17:06, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how the list doesn't conform with WP:DTT. Can you give specific examples? I also don't see where the numbers are spelled out and used as digits int he same sentence. As far as when the system opened, the official SEPTA source simply states "The regional rail system was built in the early 20th century." To verify the date the stations opened is very difficult since many of these stations opened in the 1800s. If that isn't good enough, I can do more research for more info. For the larger stations and/or newer stations is it not an issue, but for the smaller, older stations, finding sources on opening dates is not easy at all. I didn't include images of stations since I don't see where they'd fit. I could add them to the lead, but then that would just look awkward since the lead isn't big enough to have both a map and images of stations. If you have suggestions on where to add them, then I could go ahead. Note that the similar featured list, List of MBTA Commuter Rail stations, has neither station images nor opening dates. Distance/travel time is not included for several reasons:
  • Travel times can vary between stations depending on time of day, day of week, local vs. express service, etc.
  • Since there are many different lines that all branch out from the same Center City stations, different stations on different lines could potentially have the same mileage. This would be confusing to viewers and not really help determine the stations location.
  • Stations on the Wilmington/Newark Line and Trenton Line are part of Amtrak's Northeast Corridor and their mileage is measured differently than all other lines. Wilmington/Newark mileage is measured from the an interlocking north of 30th Street Station and Trenton mileage is measured from New York Penn Station. Again, this would be confusing to readers and not help determine the station's location. –Dream out loud (talk) 03:29, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
  • As long as there are good, well-thoughtout reasons, this does not need to be included. As for the dates, this depends entirely on availability (if they are not available in published, reliable sources, then they do not need to be included). As for images, they always make an article better, even if there is just one. I believe there is sufficient space for two images in the lead, as wide screens can handle them next to the first table. Arsenikk 20:56, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Basically all the requirements in DTT are not met

  • The list needs to start with a title/description |+ TitleName
  • Every column needs to have a scope ! scope=col | Description
  • The first/main entry of each row needs a scope ! scope=row | Entry

Arsenikk 20:56, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I added the row and column codes, but do I need to add a header? I feel like this would only apply to when there's a table within the article, not when the table basically is the article. It would seem out of place especially since there's a section header right above it. –Dream out loud (talk) 13:59, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
The list of stations scopes look good, but the same must be applied to the list of lines. As for the table caption, this should be included on all tables, even if it is the main table of the article. According to DTT, which any featured list must comply with, this is "easy" to do and has a "high" priority. Captions are necessary not just for the sake of including a description for the casual reader, but provides vital metadata which is machine-readable and heightens the accessibility of the table. For instance, it can allow screen readers to scroll directly to the desired table or can create a table of contents of tables. Arsenikk 19:24, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Done. –Dream out loud (talk) 17:08, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
I hate to nag about the small details, but that is the nature of an FLC. According to DTT: "Table captions consisting of one single word like "actor", "film" or "television" are inadequate as they are not descriptive enough." So "lines" and "stations" are not sufficient; I would have chosen "List of SEPTA Regional Rail lines" etc, or if that sounds too much like the article title, you could always swap around the word order to "List of lines of SEPTA Regional Rail". Arsenikk 20:28, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Fixed. –Dream out loud (talk) 22:33, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 18:47, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Comment
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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by NapHit 16:46, 27 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Bloom6132 (talk), Muboshgu (talk) 20:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

We are nominating this for featured list because we feel it has been improved significantly over the past few months and now meets all 6 FL criteria. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 13:42, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "The award is named for former collegiate..." same problem was in the Branch Rickey Award article. For should be replaced by after
  • "It is considered to be the Heisman Trophy of college baseball." Context is needed for non-American readers, who do not know what the Heisman Trophy is. For example what sport is the award related to?
  • To date, three winners
  • Again next sentence, In total is redundant
  • "Jason Jennings and Buster Posey proceeded to achieve the Rookie of the Year Award..." I think won would suffice in place of proceeded to achieve
  • Not a fan of sentences starting with In 1999 etc. Would change sentence in question to: "The National Collegiate Baseball Writers Association (NCBWA) became the voting body in 1999
  • Why is (x) next to Player in the key?
  • Don't think we need five external links per WP:EL I would cut them down to two or three

NapHit (talk) 21:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 01:26, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Remove unneeded bold in the first key table per MOS:ACCESS
  • The bold was added here because this is what it would have looked like with only the scope row format and no "plain row headers" parameter. Plus, the column headers are bold, so I think the key should reflect that. —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:22, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Add table caption to second table per MOS:DTT
  • Remove unneeded period dots on external links

TBrandley 00:17, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:18, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments very good, just a couple of things:
  • Ref 16, should be The New York Times.
  • In the template, Rodriguez is a redirect, so when viewing Rodriguez's page, the link still appears visible and redirects to itself...

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
Comments
  • who died of brain cancer in 1987 at the age of 51. - Is the age necessary?
  • In that same year, the award was presented to Mike Fiore, the inaugural winner. - Should preferably state immediately that it was created that year "In that same year, the award was established by (who?) and presented to Mike Fiore.", perhaps
  • To my surprise, I haven't been able to find a website that states who it was established by. The official website says nothing about the establishment and Baseball Almanac (which has the most in-depth background info IMO) only says when it was created and who votes for the winner. Sorry. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:30, 26 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:08, 23 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): GRAPPLE X 00:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Bit of an odd one, this. I took the mess that this was and applied a bit of neatness and sense to it, hopefully it works. If anyone's wondering about the change from 2+ projects to 3+, that was simply as going by 2 collaborations threw up a lot of "false positives" with those who had reprised their Twin Peaks role in Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me, but nothing else beyond that. That seemed a bit counter-productive, so I felt raising the bar to three was the best option, as it also has the benefit of implying a genuine continued working relationship. I'll be on hand to answer any concerns quite readily, but from the 15th to the 19th I'll be away from any computers so any responses made in that time will be answered that weekend when I'm back. I promise I'll put the man away again for a while when this one's over. GRAPPLE X 00:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 15:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • centre should be center since this article is related to an American person
    Got it, good catch. GRAPPLE X 23:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Add plainrowheaders to all of the table's coding for MOS:BOLD and WP:ACCESS
    I've left bold headings in the key deliberately; I tried it with plainrowheaders and found that it was not clear enough at a glance given how brief the abbreviations are. I think the bolding makes it easier to flick back and forth between the key and table when necessary, and shouldn't cause much issue given that this isn't a table really designed for navigation of content. GRAPPLE X 23:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
  • "Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise"
    Uh huh. I'll give the article another read through then, I guess. GRAPPLE X 23:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
    That issue was bot-generated. No worries if there's nothing. TBrandley 23:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

TBrandley 22:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Question - what or where is the definition of the inclusion criteria for this list? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:22, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

It's the very last sentence in the lead; it lists anyone who has worked with Lynch on three or more projects throughout his career. My rationale for going with three is listed above. GRAPPLE X 21:28, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Aha. I'm not sure about the title of the list. "Frequent" being "three or more" is a little odd to me. But then, it's hard to think of an alternative... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:37, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
"Recurring"? GRAPPLE X 21:46, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
For info Great work as always, Grapple! I'm sure you're aware of the book "The Complete Lynch" by David Hughes (ISBN 9780753-505984). It has a breakdown of each of Lynch's works, with each film having a section titled "Lynch mob" which details recurring people in Lynch's works. Lugnuts 10:29, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
That sounds really useful. Is the list missing anything that's mentioned in the book? If not, I might still look into it just to keep the refs neater ({{sfn}} refs are a lot easier read than two dozen web cites). GRAPPLE X 12:34, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it's not a bad book (he's also done the same book for Kubrick too). The edition I have is from 2001 and included Mulholland Drive, albeit only 4 pages of coverage (Lost Highway, for example, has 20 pages). Each film typically has the following sections: Cast, Title sequence, Summary, Source, Production history, Casting, The Lynch mob, Quotes, Sound & music, Influenced by, Legacy, Deja-vu, Themes, Cut scenes, Poster, Trailer, What the papers said, Box office, Controversy, Trivia, Apocrypha, Availability, Final analysis, Expert witness and Lynch on X.

For Lost Highway, the Lynch Mob section details Scott Coffey and Jack Nance. For the behind the camera crew it states the following:

"Behind the camera, there were many more familiar faces. In addtion to co-screenwriter Barry Gifford, the crew included producer and unit production manager Deepak Nayar (second assistant director on Wild at Heart, first assistant director on Fire Walk With Me, producer of On the Air and Hotel Room), Fire Walk With Me editor Mary Sweeney, cinematographer Peter Deming (On the Air, Hotel Room, Premonitions Following and Evil Deed), production and costume designer Patricia Norris (The Elephant Man onwards), casting director Johanna Ray (Blue Velvet onwards) and composser Angelo Badalamenti (Blue Velvet onwards). Eric DaRae, who had played Leo Johnson in Twin Peaks and Fire Walk With Me, is also credited, as a "buyer/swing"."

Comprehensive to say the least. Lugnuts 13:54, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Certainly seems so. I'll work on adding Nayar now; given that Da Re seems to straddle the three-role minimum in both cast and crew departments, how would you think it would be best reflected in the list? I don't know if a third table would be worth adding, or if perhaps just adding in prose only the Lost Highway role where his acting appearances are already mentioned. What pages are being used for this, though, just in case I can't find it online? If I can't find a version available to view I can still put a book cite together so long as I know the page ref. GRAPPLE X 04:06, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Have added the source and used it to add Nayar. GRAPPLE X 20:54, 22 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:08, 23 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Toa Nidhiki05 21:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets the criteria for Featured List. For background, the article covers the number-one singles on the Billboard Christian Songs chart from the 2000s. The chart was started in mid-2003 and covers airplay data from all formats of contemporary Christian music, although the dominant format of Christian radio is Christian adult contemporary.
The opening paragraph of the lede explains basic chart details such as the launching of the chart, which publication runs the chart, which form of data is used to compile the chart, and which radio formats the chart includes. The second paragraph takes the centerpiece of the list, a large table containing each number-one single and vital information, and summarizes it to note the most important pieces of information.
Structurally, the main table is based on that of the List of 2000s UK Singles Chart number ones, also a featured list. The table has four sortable columns with vital information as well as a fifth unsortable column that links to a reference to support the information in each the other four columns. Each citation in the table is taken directly from Billboard magazine. Two smaller tables are at the bottom of the article - the artists with the most number-one singles and the songs with the longest runs atop the chart. Both tables are supported by citations from Billboard.
Due to these factors, I feel the list is extremely informative and excellent and it meets the required criteria. Toa Nidhiki05 21:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Support I have no comments on how to improve the article. The article is well sourced and images are relevant. I believe that it meets FLC for usefulness, completeness (has every number one from inception until the end of the decade), accuracy, neutrality, style and prose. Royalbroil 03:54, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Quick comment surely all records that top this Billboard chart are notable and, as such, should be linked? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Good point - I have linked to all the songs. Although some pages do not exist yet they could reasonably be created and thus are redlinked. Toa Nidhiki05 13:28, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Two dab links, Joy Williams and Voice of Truth.
  • "group at reaching the top spot, with " remove "at reaching the top spot, "
  • Our article is "Phillips, Craig and Dean".
  • Our article is "Washed by the Water".
  • Artists sort incorrectly. If the artist is just a name, it should sort by surname.
  • "June 28-June 5" en-dash for ranges.
  • "March 31: "Christian Songs (March 31, 2007)" missing a bullet point.
  • You don't need Category:Christian music.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I've corrected all of them except for the artists bit - how would that be fixed? Toa Nidhiki05 01:17, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Use the {{sortname}} template. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:44, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 16:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "Reference(s)" shorten to "Ref.(s)"
  • Just a suggestion, but perhaps align references in that table to the center
  • Tables don't meet MOS:ACCESS, add scope cols and rows to ensure it does
  • Tables don't meet MOS:DTT, add table captions to ensure it does
  • Add plainrowheaders to the tables for WP:ACCESS
  • One image doesn't even exist on that page. Remove or replace.
  • Add alt text to the images per WP:ALT; it should briefly explain the contents of the image
  • Cut down on red links if possible

TBrandley 00:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I've fixed all the issues, except for redlinks which should be there as the songs are notable and could be articles at some point. Toa Nidhiki05 16:28, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments from Crisco 1492
Fixed all issues. Toa Nidhiki05 16:28, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments I've gone over and this list and made some changes here; please revert if I've made things worse.

  • Is there any article that could be linked to to give more info on what "audience impressions" means? For someone outside of the US, this might be confusing. Does it refer to radio plays, or something else entirely?
  • Consider moving the image of MercyMe up to the top so that the article has a lead image. This would also mean that the edit link for the Statistics would not be displaced.
  • Since this is a list of songs, I feel that the row scopes should be really on the songs themselves rather than the artists. Alternatively, if that doesn't appeal to you, you could always add a No. column that lists the procession and succession of the chart (as in this list), and then make the rows in that column the scope.
  • The Weeks column would be better centre-aligned.
  • Of the songs linked to in the list, more than a fifth of them are red. Per 5(a) of the featured list criteria, I think it would be better if they linked to something, even just stubs.
  • Which artist(s) spent the most weeks at number one during the decade?

A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 23:58, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

No, there is no an article on the subject (which is surprising), but one could be made. According to Billboard:

The audience charts cross-reference BDS data with listener information compiled by the Arbitron ratings system to determine the approximate number of audience impressions made for each plays. Thus, a song that plays at 4 a.m. does not count as much as one played at 4 p.m., and a station with a large audience will influence the chart more than either a station in a smaller market or one with a specialized format that attracts less audience

So basically, it just multiplies the spins by the estimated audience that the station has at the time of the spin. I'll specify that here in some way.
Ah, it's a shame that there's no specific article yet. If you can find a way to expand upon what "audience impressions" means then that'd be good, but I wouldn't devote to much time to it, since obviously it's really outside the scope of this list. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 23:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I'll make a stub for it at some point if only to give it a place to link to; I've elaborated a bit. Toa Nidhiki05 02:39, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
checkYMoved.
As for 3-5, I'll fix those in a bit. I have to go somewhere but I'll fix as soon as possible. I've been wanting to make articles on each number one song, but I was worried making 9 stubs would be frowned upon. However, since that is not the case I will try and make them.
Casting Crowns did; their six number-one singles spent a total of 62 weeks atop the chart. The information is already in the lede, but I can make a new table for it. Toa Nidhiki05 15:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Whoops, sorry, don't know how I missed that... A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 23:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
As an update, I have added a numeral table as that is the easier of the two solutions; I am going to work on center-aligning the weeks column shortly. Toa Nidhiki05 00:30, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
I have centered the weeks column. Toa Nidhiki05 22:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Looks considerably better, nice work! Great to see all the redlinks gone too. I've made a couple of changes here – I've altered the No. column so that the re-entries don't all jump about when it's sorted, plus a couple of other stylistic choices that may just be personal preference. Please do revert if you don't like the changes. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 23:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


  • The list looks nice but you could add another column in the artist table with total # of weeks spent at #1 19:00, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This is what I would recommend doing as well. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 23:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
I've added the table; I'll get the citations up in a bit. Toa Nidhiki05 02:39, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 01:12, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "with a specialized format that attracts less audience compiled by Nielsen Broadcast Data Systems." First, "less" would read better as "a smaller". Second, should "as" be placed before "compiled"?
  • The two By artist tables should have the artist column sort by last name, not first.
  • The pp. in ref 1 should be p., as this is a single-page citation. Giants2008 (Talk) 19:21, 21 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:08, 23 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): NapHit (talk) 20:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

With the Ryder Cup to begin at the end of the month, what better way to celebrate than with a list detailing the matches that have made up this great event. Thanks in advance for your comments. NapHit (talk) 20:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Comment

I agree, column now sorts by winning margin. NapHit (talk) 15:37, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
That looks better.--DavidCane (talk) 21:17, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:32, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "every two years" you should note that this wasn't the case on one occasion.
  • "throughout the years" bit wistful, perhaps "throughout the history of the competition"?
  • "four four ball" -> "four fourball".
  • "However, Great Britain we..." -> "However they..."
  • "performance in 1933" followed by "The 1933 contest at " should the first be 1931?
  • "the last hole of the last singles " maybe mix it a bit, "the last hole of the final singles..."?
  • "eight foursomes and four balls" fourballs?
  • Jimenez has a couple of missing diacritics.
  • Consider ending the History section with a nod at the 2012 tournament...
  • Our article on Lytham St. Annes has a full stop after the St...

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments TRM, I've addressed them all. NapHit (talk) 15:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 20:09, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments – Love the event, but have some reservations about the prose quality. The following are from the lead and first paragraph of History; I haven't even gotten to read most of the body yet.
  • Second "the" in "with the exception of the 2001..." should be taken out.
  • Comma after September 11 attacks would be better as a semi-colon.
  • "with players from each team playing contesting a one-on-one match." Removal of "playing" is necessary here.
  • Same edit needed in "they were unable to match the American's at the Scioto Country Club and lost 9–3."
  • "leaving Easterbrook with a putt to win the contest, which he made the putt...". Second "the putt" is a redundancy and is flawed in the flow of the sentence anyway. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:15, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments Giants, I've addressed them all. NapHit (talk) 18:48, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
    • First word of "Men's major golf championships" should be decapitalized.
    • Try not to have a sentence start with a number, like in "1963 saw the introduction of two sets of fourball to the format". 1977 is also like this.
    • Name typo in "which left Jackiln with a putt to tie the match."
    • Comma after Olazabal's name should be removed.
    • "The United States fearing for their safety requested the match was played a year later in 2002." "was" → "be"?
    • "in what was the United States heaviest defeat in the competition." Apostrophe needed at end of States.
    • Ref 11 needs a publisher (looks like BBC Sport). Giants2008 (Talk) 19:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks again for the comments Giants, all been taken care of. NapHit (talk) 19:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "A fourball match, with two players from each team, each playing their own shot." This is a sentence fragment that is missing an element or two. Needs to be revised a bit.
  • History: "British captain Ted Ray cited the American's "superior putting" as the reason for their victory." "American's" → "Americans'", with the apostrophe moved.
Thanks again Giants, fixed those last two comments. NapHit (talk) 20:13, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Comment The title is somewhat ambiguous and means that I am not sure what to expect from the list. "2012 Ryder Cup" is a Ryder cup match and this type of match appears in the list. However, within that you have (for example) "Furyk/Snedeker vs McIlroy/McDowell", which is also a match, and it is defined as such in the lead section when it talks about "foursomes match" or "fourball match". Is there any way that this can be made less ambiguous or are we stuck with the "match within a match" terminology? Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

You raise a good point, unfortunately I'm not sure how to resolve it. I can see how it can be ambiguous, but technically the competition as a whole is a match with a series of matches within it. If someone can up with a better solution then I'd be interested to hear it. For the time being I think we're stuck with the match within a match terminology. NapHit (talk) 21:23, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Support with one caveat- in the lead you say that the next match is in 2012; this is no longer true as it was played 2 weeks ago. Seems the infobox was updated but the lead was not. --PresN 18:07, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Right you are, should of noticed that. Fixed. NapHit (talk) 20:17, 16 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by NapHit 17:30, 21 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): — Oz (talk) 23:05, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because after months of improving the article, I feel that it meets the FL criteria. — Oz (talk) 23:05, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Support w/comments below
    • In the lead, a comma should be between "Running Back" and "which featured American rapper Flo Rida."
    • Rearrange "Get 'Em Girls was released in November 2010, which debuted at"; perhaps "Get 'Em Girls was released in November 2010 and debuted..." Same with other instances of "which" following the month/year; "which" should follow the album as "which" is referring to it.
    • According to Checklinks, the source titled "Sony Snaps Up Dean and Jess" by the Daily Telegraph could use a WebCite archive link, as it shows some status issue.
  • Overall, well written and comprehensive for topic at hand. Dan56 (talk) 22:38, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
done — Oz (talk) 23:08, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from shaidar_cuebiyar
  • Comment
    • I previously assessed this page for FL1, I subsequently edited it at the time of its FLRC1 and have seen it improved under efforts by Oz. I make the following suggestions:
      1. alt text for infobox photo is a little thin. Try: A 23-year-old woman is shown in upper body shot and almost in right profile. She is smiling and looking slightly to her right. She wears her dark brown-black hair down and is dressed in a black skirt with gold threads. Her right hand is on her hip or waist. The background is deep blue-purple with gold letters S and A visible.
      2. "Mauboy's first number one song" > "Mauboy's first number-one song" cf "peaked at number one"
      3. "The album was certified double platinum by the ARIA," By this stage ARIA is the default certifying agency, where no confusion exists it can be "The album was certified double platinum,"
      4. "a commercial failure" this is a heavy statement for a No. 6 album compared with a No. 11 album – how is the former a failure? If you're basing the statement on certification alone then try a more neutral comment "less commercially successful" or similar. Some description is needed of Been Waiting's longevity (59 weeks in top 50 is notable) thereby explaining why it got 2× Plat when the higher charting albums, The Journey and Get 'Em Girls both got Gold.
      5. By the time of Snopp Dogg, "peaked within the top twenty of the ARIA Singles Chart" becomes "peaked within the top twenty". Unless there's any confusion charting default is also ARIA.
      6. "To promote the film The Sapphires (2012), Mauboy" What does the casual reader know about The Sapphires? A better explanation of her association (more than just a sound track appearance) is needed.
      7. "becoming Mauboy's lowest charting single to date" Some clarification is needed: does this include the "Waltzing Matilda" single? Does this include any other singles released in NZ?
      8. For tables showing charting information consider adding |+ List of albums, with selected chart positions and certifications Adapt as required.
      9. For the refs sectn delink repeat appearances. e.g. New Limited is wikilinked first time in ref but should be delinked thereafter.
      10. Some reviewers may want titles in refs to be formatted according to WP:MoS e.g. "It's an Irish Australian Idol, to Be Sure".
      11. It's good to see use of WebCite to reduce link rot problems. Some more refs might need same.
      12. For ELs I'd adjust the Allmusic one, e.g. at ]
      13. While there add MusicBrainz link(s). e.g. {{MusicBrainz artist|id=18f719e7-e9b4-4216-8869-9083ebc23f7d|name=Jessica Mauboy}}
    • Have fun.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 10:55, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
done I was told in a previous peer review that repeated links in refs are allowed. — Oz (talk) 11:54, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
I can't remember when but I was told otherwise, but reading the various discussions, I can see the point for ref wLs to remain in each cite.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 19:24, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "Mauboy released her debut studio album Been Waiting in November 2008 and peaked at number eleven and spent fifty-nine weeks in the top fifty" This sentence does not read correctly, I would replace the first and with it
  • Should we be mentioning that an album received nominations for awards? I'm not so sure as none of the tables mention it and I would expect to see that info in an awards and nominations article instead not a discography
  • "Mauboy's second studio album Get 'Em Girls was released in November 2010 and debuted at number six and was certified gold." sentence doesn't read well, needs revising
  • "peaked within the top twenty" surely you can say what position it peaked at?
  • In the External links Allmusic should be AllMusic

NapHit (talk) 16:38, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

done — Oz (talk) 20:08, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 23:18, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "featured songs" it does still featured them though? How about "features songs"?
  • "peaked within the top twenty" what position exactly then?
  • "title track"? Could you clarify please?
  • You say 12 singles, I see 13, including that other one
  • Same for Other appearances
  • Allmusic should be AllMusic

TBrandley 17:59, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

done — Oz (talk) 20:08, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "eighteen other appearances and sixteen music videos" switch those round.
  • Don't think you need to link "pop".
  • "which peaked at number eleven" which chart?
  • preceeded -> preceded.
  • Can you add which territory release dates are pertinent to.
  • "Miss You Most (At Christmas Time)" links to a Mariah Carey album.

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

done — Oz (talk) 10:12, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
done — Oz (talk) 21:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support I've looked through the list, as well as everyone else's comments above, and I can't really see anything that needs to be addressed. AARON 16:19, 17 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by NapHit 17:30, 21 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): AdabowtheSecond (talk) 17:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating the One Direction discography for featured list because I have worked hard on it the last three days, and I want to see if it can be brought to featured status. AdabowtheSecond (talk) 17:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Aaron
Resolved comments by Aaron
  • Comment FN: 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19 and 42 are missing dates/accessdates. "More Than This", albeit a live video, had a music video, so it should be included really. To be honest, I would have held off from nominating this until their second album and its lead single was released as a lot of crazy 1D fans will be editing the chart positions and making changes, but that's just a personal opinion. I would change: Preceded by lead single, "Live While We're Young", Take Me Home, One Direction's second studio album, is scheduled for release on 12 November 2012. to Preceded by lead single, "Live While We're Young", One Direction's second studio album Take Me Home is scheduled for release on 12 November 2012. It just flows more and makes it easier to read without so many clauses. The lead could do with more sourcing, such as signing with Columbia etc. AARON 20:45, 3 October 2012 (UTC)


Resolved comments from TSU
Comments by TSU

Done AdabowtheSecond (talk) 18:38, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Can last 2 lines on the 1st para be merged?

How do you suggest it should be sentenced AdabowtheSecond (talk) 18:38, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Nothing much. The list looks pretty good to me. Since OD are new in the business, we cant have further inclusion in the lead and the lead currently is good enough. TheSpecialUser  04:12, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from — ΛΧΣ21 21:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments by Hahc21

ΛΧΣ21 23:59, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 23:26, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
Resolved comments from Erick (talk) 08:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments'


  • Coment
Well, there some certifications not updated, example: WMYB is 6 platinum in Australia and 4 platinum in Sweden. It's all (sorry, my english is very bad, I'm from Venezuela). Biagio2103 (talk) 00:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Done AdabowtheSecond (talk) 12:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:17, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Oppose

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for all the pointers The Rambling Man, I'm kind of busy in real life unexpectantly so bare with me, couldn't fix all your points at this time AdabowtheSecond (talk) 12:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks AdabowtheSecond (talk) 00:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

LWWY is gold in New Zealand. Biagio2103 (talk) 02:57, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Done AdabowtheSecond (talk) 16:13, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 22:26, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "It topped the charts in sixteen countries, and saw One Direction inducted into the Guinness World Records, by debuting at number one on the US Billboard 200 chart, making them the first British group in US chart history to debut at number one with their first album." this sentence is hard to follow and I had to read it several times before I understood what was trying to be said. Its too convoluted and needs trimming down. I would change to "It topped the charts in sixteen countries and was the first time an album by a British group had debuted at number one on the US Billboard 200 chart. They were inducted into the Guinness World Records as a result.
  • Music videos table does not comply with MOS:DTT. Title needs to be the first column and you need to add col and row scopes like the other tables
You have NapHit (talk) 22:26, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

NapHit (talk) 13:53, 19 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by NapHit 17:30, 21 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:39, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Another labour of love of mine, but not one quite so extensive as the field marshals who passed FLC last month. The list is actually a bi-product of the target list I dre up for "Knowledge (XXG) Takes Coventry", a photography contest held in the city at the beginning of September. Coventry is oft thought of as a concrete jungle, but it has a rich and fascinating history. Hopefully this list will go some way towards changing that perception.

Any comments or constructive criticisms are most welcome, but it may take me a few days to reply. If I seem to have neglected something, please do ping my talk page. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:39, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 22:55, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Images need to have alt text per WP:ALT; it should briefly explain the contents of them
    • Done. The captions are sufficient in most cases, but yes, we need to accommodate for screen readers.
  • Unlink listed building per WP:OVERLINK
    • I think the link has value—only Brits will be familiar with the concept, and I'd wager that not many of them fully understand it.
  • "Only around four per cent" Remove "only" per WP:NPOV
    • That's not POV. I think "only" is quite justified when talking about 4%.
  • Speaking of that sentence, change "around" to "about" or something like that
    • Why?
  • In that same sentence, per cent shouldn't be spaced; should be "percent"
    • Wiktionary says "per cent" is acceptable, and the source also uses that variation.
  • "15th centuries" and "11th (CE) century" don't have hyphen, whereas "14th-century" does. Which is it?
    • When the phrase is used to describe something (eg 14th-century original), it becomes a compound adjective and thus requires a hyphen; used as a noun phrase, it doesn't need one. Or to put it another way, I'm better at writing articles than lists.
  • "List of buildings" → "Buildings", as for title header
  • Tables don't meet MOS:ACCESS, it has scope cols, but not scope rows, need to add scope rows also, to first one in each point of table
  • Also, tables don't meet MOS:DTT, add table captions to ensure it does; it has been listed as a "high priority"
  • Add a period dot to "Ref"
    • Done.
  • Just a suggestion, but I would align the references in that table to the center, don't feel like you have to though
  • I don't believe a gallery section is needed. In fact, there is a policy which states that they shouldn't be here, but at Wikimedia Commons. See WP:IG, etc.
    • That policy says " the use of a gallery section may be appropriate in some Knowledge (XXG) articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images." But I'll consider Hassocks' suggestion below and get back to you.
  • Why are red links in the see also section? Remove them.
    • Because they're notable, article-worthy subjects that will have articles in the near future. But you have a point, and I've hidden them until the links are blue.
  • In fact, I don't think that section is needed at all
    • I disagree.
  • Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order

TBrandley 23:44, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 22:15, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
:Quick comment
  • Dormer Cottage is Grade II, not Grade I. The city council list has an error.
    • Interesting. I couldn't find the National Heritage List entry for Dormer Cottage to reconcile the contradiction. Perhaps I was looking in the wrong place; thanks.
  • I find the justification for including Coombe Abbey weak. The building is not within the boundary of the city, so it is out of the scope of the list, in my view; the scope of the list is geographic, not based on ownership.
    • I include it because the Council mention it on their list, and so I think it's worthy of noting here, and including it in the list with an explanatory note is probably the neatest way of doing it.
  • In relation to images, consider adopting the format used here. This avoids the need for a gallery.
    • I'll consider it. I'm hesitant, because I'm not sure the images are useful at a low enough resolution to fit comfortably into the table.
  • Having a couple of sentences of notes about the building (as in the example above) would also be beneficial, even though each entry does have its own article. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 12:43, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
    • You've hit the nail on the head—each entry has its own article, which contains more information than can be squashed into the table, so I'm not sure there's a lot to be achieved from adding details into the table. I generally prefer to keep prose and tables separate. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:04, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
More comments from Hassocks:
  • In relation to making the Ref column unsortable, this code should work: ! scope="col" class="db-dW5zb3J0YWJsZQ"
    • This is, I believe, done.
  • As per TRM's note below, I am still troubled by the inclusion of Coombe Abbey, as it is already legitimately included within Grade I listed buildings in Warwickshire. I would be happy with your suggestion of adding a note below the main table explaining the situation. I have faced the similar scenarios when doing various lists—e.g. listed buildings that have been demolished but not delisted, buildings that may or may not have been churches etc—and a short explanatory paragraph at the end does the job.
    • I've taken it out of the table and added a note to the lead.
  • I'll have another look after you've had a go at the images column. I also have a strong desire to see a notes blurb/column, as TRM says below. I will check back when I can, but unfortunately I only have internet access at work for the time being (I have moved house and the new internet connection is not ready yet – could be a while!). Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 12:43, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


More from Hassocks, following the resolution of the above

  • All of my earlier points are resolved to my satisfaction. Re Peter's comments below: I agree with the use of a separate "Refs" column rather than integrating them into the body of the Notes. Although both styles have proven to be acceptable at FLC, I find having a separate column is more appropriate for the reasons given by the nominator. I too prefer decimal coordinates over grid references, but HJ's rationale for using the latter is sound.
  • I have spotted something else though. I fear that some of the details described in the Notes column—particularly those not directly related to the architecture of the building—are not actually referenced at the moment, in that they are not mentioned in the refs provided. For each building, the Cov city council list and the National Heritage List description are used to reference the content of the row. I spot-checked certain entries (I have not checked all). Examples: for St John the Baptist Church, Coventry, neither source mentions the bit about "sent to Coventry". For St Mary's Hall, again the Mary, Queen of Scots part is in neither cited source. I think we really need citations for all these bits (not that I doubt their veracity, I should add). At a guess, various pages of the Victoria County History should help to support all/most of the historical/social facts in the blurbs; or perhaps the Ian Soden book cited in the lead. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 22:15, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 08:26, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Reluctant oppose
  • I do think it's a shame we can't add a summary of what each building's purpose/notability is here, I made a similar comment at the Maidstone FLC currently running. I know there are articles for each building, but for our featured material to be heavily reliant on sub-articles seems a real shame. I think a model more like Listed buildings in Widnes is appropriate. Our FLs expand for "listed buildings" and "churches" so why not "Grade I listed buildings"?
  • " in the City of Coventry" is it necessary to say "the City of"? And if you insist, should City really be capitalised?
    • City of Coventry is the proper name of the metropolitan borough. -HJ
  • I think the article could legitimately link Coventry, while a common geographical term to us English, perhaps not so for our global audience.
    • I agree. I believe linking in the bold title is discouraged, but I'll see if I can work a link in elsewhere. -HJ
  • "There are 20 Grade I " vs "Of the 21 buildings on this list..."
    • The list includes Coombe Abbey, which owned by Coventry City Council but falls just the wrong side of the city boundary. I'm open to the possibility of removing Coombe Abbey if multiple people really think it's confusing or out of scope. -HJ
  • If you use ref 1 every time, just have it as a general reference.
  • "St. Mary's Priory" is a dab link.
  • Ref column shouldn't be sortable.
  • I would add a column for the image of each place rather than that rather unsightly gallery at the end.
    • I seem to be in a minority on this issue, so I'll work the images into the table, much as I think the gallery is better. -HJ
  • You should link all linkable items every time in a sortable table (e.g. Bayley Lane).

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC) OK, images worked into the table (I still the the gallery was better, but I'll concede the point) and descriptions added. I think all the rest of your comments have been addressed by myself or Rock drum. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:10, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Comments (but leaning towards Support) What a vast improvement since the initial nomination! At that time it was an OK list, with nothing special about it to take it into the featured category. I did not oppose at the time because I also had a list nominated, and did not wish to seem to be in any sort of competition. But Hassock's suggestions, and your implementation of them, have made all the difference (Hassocks has been a mentor to me too). Just a few queries for my own interest, which are not likely to make any difference to my giving support.
  • Why have a separate column for Refs? They are not that important, and could easily follow the text in the Description column (this was asked of me in one of my nominations, and I now do this)
  • I was also advised to centre the date column, (I guess to make it look more elegant).
  • Why do you use GRs rather than coordinates? The latter seem to be more the standard way to give locations in WP; they are also more understandable to non-UK readers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:26, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments. I dislike replying inline and making a mess of a relatively short list of queries so I'll address them here:
  • The refs are in a separate column because it's not just the text that's being referenced, it's the entire row—the date of construction, the location, the grid reference, and the very fact the building is Grade I listed. It's also more aesthetically pleasing, at least in my opinion.
  • I centred the date column, though the difference is almost imperceptible.
  • OS Grid references are more commons in the UK, and are used in official contexts, such as by the Ordnance Survey. They're also documented on the National Heritage List for England entries, so there's no guesswork or original research involved in pinning down coordinates. By highlighting a square, rather than a specific point, grid references avoid the problem of having coordinates that point to an arbitrary location or, for example, the centre of a large property. And I don't think latitude and longitude means anything more to the average reader than a grid reference—the main benefit of including either (imo) is for the clickthrough to the GeoHack tool, which actually turns the string of characters into a location on a map. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:46, 15 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by NapHit 17:30, 21 October 2012 .


Nominator(s):  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it is full documentation of films from a period and area which has received fairly little coverage in English-language media. Jstor has a French example, and this is based on an Indonesian list, but this is possibly the first example in English. With the addition of plot information (where available), this is even more detailed than previously existing examples. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 00:41, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Done
  • Any reason why text is small on key. Consider WP:ACCESS
  • It is.
  • Isn't "filmindonesia.or.id" the publisher, not work
  • Done.

TBrandley 00:31, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Done all. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Support. Had a look over this one when it was going through peer review (don't let my terrible attempt at signing fool you, that's me alright); was happy with it then and I'm still happy with it now. GRAPPLE X 05:43, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comment just a quick one (looks like a tidy list by the way), is there any reason why, say, Si Pitoeng (1931 film) is more notable than Njai Dasima? There are a large number of unlinked films, what differentiates their notability from the linked ones? Or is it just a sneaky way of avoiding red links?! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:55, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Those already linked are those with articles. I may be able to make another five to ten DYK-able articles with the sources available, but ones like Pat Kiam Hap would never have more than what's there already. Others, like Asmara Moerni, would be stuck as eternal stubs owing to the lack of information available (unless I book a trip to Sinematek Indonesia and spend a couple weeks eating and breathing old film reviews, where possible).
The same issues apply to some of these directors and actors; Heuveldorp has almost nothing on him outside of Loetoeng Kasaroeng, and numerous actors are only known for one role. A couple directors, like Fred Young, F. Carli, and Rd Ariffin, may be doable, but I'm linking as I go. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
So in reality, all of those films are of a similar level of notability so should really be linked... The Rambling Man (talk) 09:12, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Assuming a national or interlocal (among different cities) release, possible. However, some (like Pat Kiam Hap above) are essentially known from a poster and the director's memory. I could redlink those if consensus is for it, but I wouldn't expect an article on Pat Kiam Hap or such films to survive AFD. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:15, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments

  • My ignorance, but you say "the country's dissolution" - I thought the East Indies was a colony, not a country?
  • "Dutch companies were also producing documentary films to be shown in the Netherlands" I guess you mean documentaries about the Dutch East Indies? This isn't clear.
  • "The Teng Chun and the Tan Brothers" I would switch this around, just to avoid any confusion that the first The isn't a "the", it's part of someone's name...
  • "Indicates uncertain year of production" I would expect to see that key being used in the year column, not the film title column.
  • Don't think you need the Category:Dutch East Indies as you have the more refined "Films of..." category.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:12, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Support - Man, they had a thing for downer endings in the 20s/30s. Only comment- sometimes you italicize plot summaries when they're vague descriptions ("A martial arts story", "A bandit film, based on Zorro") but sometimes you don't ("A love story based in Cibodas", "The story of a winged horse") - what's the reason? --PresN 18:00, 16 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:09, 16 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Dana boomer (talk) 00:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm renominating this list (now that I have a bit more free time!) after, hopefully, addressing the issues raised in the last review. The main issue last time was the number of red links - since that concern was raised, I have significantly decreased the prevalence of red links. I do plan to continue working on this issue, but at this point, I think that the number is low enough to not be a problem. As far as I know, the other issues raised in the review were addressed. Thanks in advance for your comments, Dana boomer (talk) 00:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 13:53, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Could link freshwater mussels and snails in lead?
  • "populations in Michigan." not sure we need in Michigan here, seeing as we've already established this about species in Michigan
  • Images could do with alt text
  • There are minimal redlinks so don't think this is an issue this time around
  • ref 3 needs the parameter |format=PDF adding

NapHit (talk) 12:09, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, NapHit! I believe I have addressed all of your concerns; please let me know if there is anything else. Dana boomer (talk) 15:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Support Comments – I sympathise with your red-linking problems, I've had to write loads of stubs for insects and plants in my articles on the individual reserves in the Norfolk SSSI. Your article looks pretty sound, just some quibbles/requests for clarification Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:59, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

  • part of fauna of the United Statespart of the fauna ?
  • Done. - DB
  • The federal status descriptions have "listed…", the state status descriptions don't. Is there a reason for this?
  • I was originally thinking it was necessary to distinguish listed species from candidate species, but then realized that the fact that they're listed (rather than candidate) is implied with Federal status = endangered/threatened. So, basically, I hadn't thought it through. Now that I have, I've removed the "listed"s. - DB
  • I'd expect vertebrate classes to be in the order mammals-birds-reptiles-amphibians-fish, any reason for your ordering?
  • This is the way it was ordered when I started?? Really, no reason other than not having a good reason to change the ordering from what it was when I began working on the list. If you would prefer it in the order you give above, I have no problem changing it - it's a simple fix. - DB
  • Each insect order is given a subsection, but the mollusc groups each have a full section, is there a reason?
  • This is the way they were split in the main reference I used. Do you think that some of the insect groups should be combined, or the mollusc group separated? - DB
  • Some of your intros have a redundant "of these" or "of them"
  • I've taken a run through the intros and made some changes - have I addressed your concern? - DB
  • I don't think your link for cricket goes where you intended

Support Comments – Looks pretty good to me; I have minor nitpicks that should be easy to fix. Sasata (talk) 21:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

  • I think the lead sentence should link endangered and threatened species. Unfortunately, species of special concern is currently a dab and not helpful.
  • possibly useful links: natural heritage, subspecies, extinct
  • "federally-listed" don't hyphenate compound adjectives with -ly words, per WP:HYPHEN (check throughout article)
  • caption: "A spotted turtle, a threatened species in Michigan" sounds a bit awkward (other instances too)
  • "One further species is listed as extinct in Michigan" further -> additional (check for other instances too)
  • "A further nine species which previously had" which->that
  • is it necessary to have tables with a single row sortable?
  • why do some of the snails and fingernail/pea clams have two binomials listed?
  • why are some pea clams "peaclams" (without a space)
  • caption: "A European pea clam, a species of special concern in Michigan" Since there's more than 1 clam in the picture, how about modifying to "The European pea clam is a species of special concern in Michigan"
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:43, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Nice to see the list back at FLC.
  • "The list was last updated in 2009, and was the sixth iteration of the listing" maybe "The list was last updated in 2009 to its sixth iteration" to avoid list and listing in one short sentence?
  • "The state also recognizes species of special concern, are not protected under the Act" I think there's a word missing here?
  • "is done by " never keen on "done", perhaps "is undertaken by"?
  • Check that all image captions which are complete sentences have a period.
  • "fox snake" has a space but "watersnake" doesn't. Nor "ratsnake". Is there any reason here?
  • "Critical Habitat" suddenly sneaks in. Is that worth a quick note to say what it means?
  • "of endangered fish" shouldn't that be "threatened fish"?
  • "12 are listed as species of special concern, two as" ... MOSNUM applies here, so "Twelve..."

The Rambling Man (talk) 12:18, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, TRM! I believe I have addressed all of your comments; please let me know if there is anything I missed. Dana boomer (talk) 18:45, 9 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:09, 16 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Pancake (talk) 12:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I created this article from scratch earlier this month and I have been improving it ever since. Now after a few weeks of dedicated work, I feel that it meets the FL criteria. Pancake (talk) 12:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Jona 21:58, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments by AJona1992
  • Singer-songwriter needs to be wikilink
  • When was her debut album released?
  • Not sure if you should say "hit" and "quite low" sounds too fan-y.
  • You don't need to link record chart. Best, Jona 21:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 Done. Thank you for your comments. Pancake (talk) 08:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Support. Jona 21:58, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "at age 19" -> when she was 19  Done
  • I'm not a fan of sentences starting with "In 2001 etc" its poor prose, sentences that start with this prefix should be changed so the prose flows and doesn't read like a list.  Done
  • "she released her critically acclaimed sophomore effort" sophomore should be changed as most readers won't be aware what it means. Also, just use album instead of effort, really doesn't sound right referring to an album as an effort  Done
  • "which adapts" I think you mean adopts  Done
  • Why does the link LL in the table go to EMI? The article makes no mention of EMI in the article  Done
    I removed the link. EMI has a so-called exclusive license to LL in Sweden, but I haven't been able to find a source for that other than the copyright info on iTunes, and I'm unsure if that will suffice as a source. Pancake (talk) 16:21, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
  • The semi-colon should be used for bolding as its a WP:ACCESS issue. Use the conventional heading method as those using screen readers can only identify formatted headings  Done
  • Our article has Allmusic as AllMusic, so refs should be changed to reflect this  Done

NapHit (talk) 14:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 01:31, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Alt text needs to be added to the images for WP:ACCESS, per WP:ALT; it should briefly explain the contents of the image itself  Done
  • Unlink music videos per WP:OVERLINK
    Do you mean in the lead? I don't see how that's overlinking. Pancake (talk) 14:17, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Add table captions to the tables to ensure it meets MOS:DTT, take Train discography for an example of those captions.  Done
  • "Apple, Inc" should be just simply "Apple"  Done
  • "Time, Inc" remove that unneeded comma not apart of the company name at all  Done
  • Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order in this case  Done

TBrandley 23:47, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Where are the release dates referenced and what territory do they relate to? E.g. I looked up Youth Novels (which says 30 January 2008) and the ref says 22 August 2008 for Sweden.  Done
  • Some of the releases weren't just LL, they were LL/Atlantic weren't they?  Done
  • The ""—" denotes a recording that did not chart or was not released in that territory." key should be added to the "other charted songs" table.  Done
  • Hung Medien says "Possibility" was a single, but this discog says it's a "non-single" in the caption, not even sure what that means.
    "Possibility" was not released in any form, so it's not a single. I changed "non-single" to simply "song". Pancake (talk) 14:52, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk) 09:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
*Li co-founded the artist collective and record label INGRID in 2012. - What's the relevance?
I've given a copyedit, be sure to check. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:31, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Pancake (talk) 14:25, 13 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:09, 16 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Diego Grez (talk) 17:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it complies with the criteria. I based it off of two other featured lists (those about schools in some New Zealand regions). It contains information from government sources, and is complete in my opinion. Diego Grez (talk) 17:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from --Kürbis () 08:46, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
*Comments
    • Table should meet WP:ACCESS; add row scopes, for example
      • Improved
    • I would add in-line citations to the lead instead of general references
    • "All schools in the Cardenal Caro Province are municipal (owned by the government of their respective communes) but two:" - "but two: the" should be replaced with "except"
      • Done!
    • "The enrollment of each school changes frequently as students start school for the first time, move between schools, and graduate" - ?
      • Removed the statement. I took it verbatim from one of the aforementioned articles, but it isn't that important to this article.
    • "The numbers of enrollment" - enrollments
      • Corrected
    • ", based on figures from 2012. " - and are based on
      • Fixed
    • "with Colegio de la Preciosa Sangre de Pichilemu as the school with most students, specifically 557." - start a new sentence. "The Colegio de la Preciosa Sangre de Pichilemu has the most students, with 557" also perhaps add other schools with the most students
    • The lead should be copyedited, I am afraid.
      • Gonna ask someone to do so asap

--Kürbis () 17:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:05, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • " 47 schools are located ..." Avoid starting sentences with numbers.
    • Fixed
  • And in that sentence you use both numbers and words for a number, per WP:MOSNUM you should do one or the other.
    • Fixed too
  • Four paras in the lead is a little heavy for an article of this size per WP:LEAD.
    • Mixed some information and took it to the "Schools" section.
  • "of primary education, which lasts until octavo básico. Students begin their secondary education in primero medio, and graduate in cuarto medio" but in the table you refer to these as grades 1 to 8 then 9 to 12. I would give these equivalent grades in the lead.
    • Done. Grades were translated to the English language and put in parenthesis.
  • " In 2010, there were 78 schools in the Cardenal Caro Province" so 15 closed in two years?
    • I'm not really sure, actually. 78 is the number the ministry officially published in 2010. I tried to find information on closed schools in this province, but I could not find anything but a news article on the closure of a school in a neighbor province. There is no current information either on the website of the ministry's regional chapter.
  • What is the initial sort order of the table?
    • Prekínder
  • Shouldn't Prekinder sort before 1st grade?
    • Yup, fixed that.
  • Is a school really a school if it has zero students?
    • La Villa is apparently being repaired/reconstructed. I found document from the Municipality of Pichilemu which shows that the Escuela La Villa had 12 students as of 2011 (something which I'm gonna add). The document (page 25) also shows that several schools were closed during 2011, some temporarily, some permanently, which could explain why 15 schools disappeared. Diego Grez (talk) 17:51, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:17, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 11:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • you have 63 in first sentence and then forty-seven later on. Be consistent in either using digits or spelling numbers out that are double digits. Have a look at MOS:NUM, there is no right or wrong way, just make sure you choose one method and stick to it.
  • ref 4 needs the parameter |format=PDF adding to it.

NapHit (talk) 17:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Lester Foster (talk | talk) 16:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 02:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Per MOS:NUM and WP:NBSP, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 737ng, use 737 ng, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 737 ng
  • Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order

TBrandley 14:32, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I was a bit unsure where to put the nbsp's. Fixed everything (maybe) Lester Foster (talk | talk) 13:21, 7 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by NapHit 15:05, 13 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): — ΛΧΣ21 18:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


Arjona has won and been nominated for numerous awards; he has won one Grammy Award and one Latin Grammy Award, both for his tenth studio album, Adentro (2005). He has been nominated five times at the Billboard Latin Music Awards and four times at the Lo Nuestro Awards. Overall, Arjona has received 13 awards from 57 nominations. I wrote this list from zero and now, after completely rewriting it, i consider it is ready for the bronze star. — ΛΧΣ21 18:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Erick (talk) 22:41, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
:Comments
  • I spotted some missing awards Billboard Latin Music awards of 1999. Again in 1995 in 2004 for an ASCAP award. I highly suggesting going through the physical Billboard magazines on Google Books by year to check for anymore awards or nominations prior to 2006 as they're not posted on the internet.
  • Some of the refs are missing the language parameter.
  • Some of the works and publishers need to be linked (i.e Cadena 3 should be linked as Cadenatres, Terra Networks). Also, the publisher for Terra Networks is Telefónica.
  • I noticed that some of the articles are not linked (such as El Problema).
  • The nominations for the 2012 Latin Grammy Awards just came out and Arjona has four nominations so it needs to be updated. Use the pending template until the winners are announced.

Erick (talk) 19:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, good catch, I don't know how I didn't see that haha. I should have mentioned this earlier, but you only need to link one instance for work and publisher, not multiple times per WP:OVERLINK. My bad. Lastly, what still needs to be fixed is that 2012 Latin Grammy nominations is supposed to be using the pending template, not the nominated because the winners have not been announced yet until November. Erick (talk) 21:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
OOh of course! I will change them to pending. And pliz, don't make me unlink all that stuff u.u. I will do it slowly XD — ΛΧΣ21
Done allΛΧΣ21 21:41, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Jona 23:36, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
;Comments from AJona1992
  • Remove the sentences about the number of albums bowing at number one, this is an awards list not a discography ;)
  • Well, other featured lists of this type include in the first paragraph a brief information of the discography of the artist.
  • Also the information about his debut album is not necessary
  • Mmm okay. I can remove this.
  • Changed "numerous" with "several", which is not PEA. And, again as other featured lists like this, the number of awards and nominations are written at the end of the lead. Anything else? — ΛΧΣ21 22:57, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Zac  23:45, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments from Zac
  • Shouldn't the awards be in ABC order?
  • No. And actually, they are ordered by the importance of the awards.
  • Whose to say the Latin Grammy Awards are not more important than the Grammy Awards for a Latin artist? ABC order is a must. Zac  23:45, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm not really a fan of the lead. The first paragraph reads as if it was taken from a discography article, it just doesn't flow well. I think that mentioning album's and works in order of when they occurred, and then the awards it received would be the best way to do this.

Zac  02:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 12:00, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "The singer received his first ASCAP..." abbreviations should be spelt on first use, otherwise they are no use to a reader who does not know what the acronym stands for
  • Not keen on sentences starting with "In..." its poor prose. I would re-jig sentences that start with the prefix
  • "in the category Best Latin Pop Album" -> in the Best Latin Pop album category
  • "Arjona shared the award with Mexican singer Julieta Venegas, whom was awarded for Limón y Sal (2006)." This should be referenced, as it won't be referenced in the tables

NapHit (talk) 20:02, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 14:24, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Tables don't meet WP:ACCESS, add scope rows and cols, as well as table captions, to ensure it does
  • Any external links?

TBrandley 23:16, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Tables are written using the {{awards table}}. The colours are standard for this type of lists, so i don't see where it doesn't meet accessibility. Also, this is a list of awards, i consider that it does not need any external links, IMO. — ΛΧΣ21 23:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support. Now as all the issues raised by The Rambling Man were resolved, I checked the list once again and couldn't find anything wrong with it. Good job. — Tomíca 18:04, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 19:13, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Oppose bit of a mess I'm afraid.
  • The infobox doesn't list all the awards/nominations, so the totals don't match the awards/noms listed. Looks odd to me.
  • "his first—and only—" just "his only..." then.
  • "Overall, Arjona has received 13 awards from 58 nominations" and infobox says 13 awards won and 44 nominations.... ?
  • Infobox again: how can he have 6 ASCAP wins from 0 nominations when he has one Grammy win from four nominations?
  • Latin Grammys, infobox says 1 win from 9 noms, the prose says "one award from fourteen nominations"....
  • Billboard: infobox says 2 from 7, prose says four from 11....
  • Please check all of these add up and are consistent.
  • "Arjona has received six awards from six nominations" table lists eight wins, infobox says 0 nominations....

The Rambling Man (talk) 09:51, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Comment didn't check too hard then! Lead says 16 awards, infobox total says 16 awards, infobox actually adds up to 18 awards. I don't see Lo Nuestro in the infobox at all. Looks like you forgot them in the lead too... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:53, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

OMG. Sorry, This have been elections day in my country and the dictator we have as president just won again. I am a little sad so I haven't checked too hard. Sorry. — ΛΧΣ21 17:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
I Just checked out and Lo Nuestro was in the table, but due to a problem in the code it wasn't showing. I have fixed both the counts on the lead and on the table. Thanks again Rambling Man. — ΛΧΣ21 17:39, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
;Comments from Crisco 1492
  • The singer received his first American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) award in 1995, after winning twice for his songs "Te Conozco" and "Detrás De Mi Ventana", the latter which he wrote for Mexican singer Yuri. - He won his first award after winning twice? This sentence doesn't have a clear topic.
  • Fixed.
  • Tagged (x2)
  • I removed the tags. The things you tagged are referenced in the article body inside their respective awards, because they are 2 awards he received and we don't need to reference all the awards on the lead. We only add a citation when we add something that is not on the article body, like "he became the first solo artist to receive Best Rock Album".
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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by NapHit 15:05, 13 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Zia Khan 00:42, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because this is well referenced, properly arranged and based upon the pre-existing list of the same category. I believe this fulfills the FLC standards. Please, feel free to make your comments and suggestion. Zia Khan 00:42, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

*Comments regarding WP:ACCESS The table scopes are not valid: where they say scope="col;, it should be scope="col" – the semicolon needs to be a closing quote. Also, there are no col scopes or a table title on your key, and you should ideally use {{dagger|alt=...}}, etc. and include the meaning in each use of the symbol templates. ajmint (talkedits) 09:44, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:41, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Why three refs for his inclusion in the ICC hall of fame?
  • "he is fifteenth in the overall list of most hundreds in a Test career" I don't think he is, looks like he's 21st in the list... can you recheck the Cricinfo source please? At the very least he's currently tied with Justin Langer.
  • "he is seventeenth overall among all-time combined" I count him listed in equal 25th place...
  • Test 17, "14 April 988" was a long time ago..
  • Worth noting that whenever Miandad hit a Test ton, Pakistan never lost?
  • Balls col in the ODI table isn't sorting properly.
  • Ref 4 etc, no need to SHOUT.

The Rambling Man (talk) 09:19, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 14:10, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Unlink cricketer per WP:OVERLINK
    • I've linked it at 1st use in the lede, also, it'll help many of our readers who little know about cricket.
  • Same goes for captain and cricket grounds
    • Same as above.
  • That image's caption requires further details; for example "Former Pakistan captain, Javed Miandad has scored ...", etc.
    • Done.
  • Remove flags per MOS:FLAG
  • Why is score scope rowed and not No.; it should be removed from score, and then added to No.
    • What is the reason for this? This is a century list and the score rows are the best option.
  • Ref needs a dot period at end of it
    • They are!
  • Avoid using a semi-colon for bolding as it is an WP:ACCESS issue, which makes it easier on screen readers, etc. I'd suggest creating an actual sub-section per that
  • Don't use {{cite web}} for external links
    • I think this is the best way for the ELs.
  • Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order

TBrandley 23:54, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 02:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "and became one of five Pakistan player to score a century on their Test debut." "player" → "players".
    • Done.
  • In the lead photo caption, "century" should instead be "centuries".
    • Done.
  • In the Test Cricket centuries section heading, the second word should be decapitalized.
    • Done.
  • "player" needs to be changed tot "players" in note 1 as well. Giants2008 (Talk) 17:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 22:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "matches on 23 and 8 occasions" per MOS:NUM numbers under 10 should be spelled out. It also says comparative figures should be in the same format, so 23 should be spelled out as well
    • Done.
  • "In January 2009, the International Cricket Council (ICC) inducted him into the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame." change to The International Cricket Council (ICC) inducted into the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame in January 2009, breaks up the run of sentences that start with "In...
    • Done.
  • "youngest player ever"
    • Done.
  • "centuries at 13 cricket grounds, including 9..." another example regarding numbering
    • Done.
  • I'm not entirely convinced the image of Miandad is your own work, did you take the picture yourself? Or is it from another source?
    • You are right, this is 15 months ago when I was not a regular user. I have had this one in my PC and I uploaded this. I don't know where this is from, anyway, I've changed the source to "Unknown". If you could find a source for this or any other option in your mind?
Ok, chances are that the image is not free use, so it will have to be removed. You could trying searching on flickr for a free image under a creative commons licence. NapHit (talk) 11:07, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Uploaded an image from Flickr which was deleted by an adminstrator. I don't know how to handle this. Zia Khan 05:10, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
More than likely that image did not have the required licence to used. I'd had a search myself and can't find any images which do meet our licences, so unfortunately I think the article will have to do without for the time being. NapHit (talk) 22:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

NapHit (talk) 18:59, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 12:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
The clue is that 19 ends in teen, so yes they are teenagers. NapHit (talk) 12:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
This is, what I'm trying to say. Puberty and Adolescence are medical terms which don't have specific limits, I know this very well. Zia Khan 12:19, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Okay then. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 12:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Vensatry (Ping me) 05:30, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "He scored a century in the match, and became one of five Pakistan players to score a century on their Test debut". If you check the record, he is the second Pakistani to score a hundred on debut
  • "Miandad achieved his first ODI century", achieved is repetitive here
    • Fixed.
  • Is the ] relevant here?
  • "His highest Test score of 280 not out came in a match against India at the Niaz Stadium, Hyderabad, in 1983"

Vensatry (Ping me) 20:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Further comments

Vensatry (Ping me) 03:27, 9 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 9 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Harrias 16:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

An odd little list that I came across. I have improved it significantly, and think that while it is more than a bit quirky, it meets the FL standards. As always, all comments, questions and suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Harrias 16:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:39, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Awarded for quote in the infobox is missing a quotation mark at the end.
  • Don't think you need to link Welsh.
  • Thanks. To be honest, I just ran out of time when I was adding them before, and then forgot. Should have all of those that have secondary sources available now. Harrias 15:27, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Needs some consistency with the way closing quote marks and full stops are placed. Some full stops are inside the quote marks, some outside... Is there a method in the madness?
  • There is in fact! (Or there should be.) Where the quote has a full-stop or comma inside it in the source, the same is done here, and where there is no full-stop or comma in the source, it is outside. This is how I had previously interpreted MOS:LQ, but reading it again, I think it allows me to place them inside or out to maintain a consistent appearance: how do you intrepret it? Harrias 11:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "I hope you leave here and walk out and say, ‘what did he say?" is missing a ‘.
  • the for in Have I Got News for You isn't capitalised in our article.
  • No need for special mention table to be sortable.
  • No, although if it isn't sortable, the column widths are different to the table above, which looks rubbish. I haven't managed to fix it using fixed column widths either. Any thoughts? Harrias 11:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Ref 3 needs publisher and/or work.

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, as always, for your thoughts. I've fixed most of them, and responded to a couple of the others. Harrias 11:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Table should be in chronological order.
  • Done. I've left the "Special mention" table at the bottom, as it seems more appropriate down there due to it not being a "full win" as it were. However, it does mean it looks a little out of place chronologically. Any thoughts on where it is best suited? Harrias 15:27, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 14:56, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Don't have references in infoboxes, as that is already in the prose.
  • "England cricket team" how about "British" instead
  • "Golden Bull Award" can that be removed? I don't see how it is revlaunt to that.
  • It can be removed, but it is relevant because it is another similar awarded given out by the Plain English Campaign, so I believe it is very relevant. Harrias 10:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Don't use double quotes in references, per WP:MOS, to avoid doubling
  • Telegraph Media Group link that
  • BBC News is a "work", not a "publisher"
  • Remove the location parameter from references, as it is not needed and not used only basically every article, this will fix other concerns that would have been brought up
  • WP:CITE suggests that for Newspaper sources the "city of publication, if not included in name of newspaper" is "typically included". Unless you have a specific reason against it being used, I will continue to include it, as I do in all of my articles. Harrias 10:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

TBrandley 03:10, 30 September 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 9 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Jona 18:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because...I worked hard on this list and would like to see it have a bronze-star at the top. Best, Jona 18:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:01, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • No suitable image for the infobox?
  • "American singer, who has" not sure you need the comma, but the opening sentence is a little odd. Try introducing her before saying what some media outlets have nicknamed her.
  • Also worth noting that Selena died in 1995.
  • "11 albums, six" don't mix when talking about comparable objects, so "eleven albums, six..."
  • "he has won 37 Tejano Music Awards" table says 36.
  • In ref 13, why is there a link to the 1997 BMI awards which Selena was not nominated in?
  • "All My Hits - Todos Mis Exitos Vol. 2" is that a spaced hyphen I see?

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 00:07, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "Selena awards and nominations" → "Awards and nominations received by Selena"
  • Tables don't meet MOS:ACCESS, add scope rows and cols to ensure it does
  • Tables don't meet MOS:DTT, add table captions to ensure it does
  • Ref. 4: "September 1998" day?
  • Ref. 15: Missing access date
  • Avoid doubled periods in references
  • "roadcast Music, Inc" missing something?

TBrandley 01:20, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Erick (talk) 03:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "Premio Lo Nuestro Awards" should just be "Lo Nuestro Awards" because "Premio" means "award" in Spanish, so it would be redundant ("Lo Nuestro Award Awards" is what the section is currently saying).
  • Ref #14, the second link needs the author's name (John Lannert), as does the fifth link (Leila Cobo). Also, be consistent when using full dates or just years. Erick (talk) 03:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 12:23, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • I don't think including her date of birth and death is relevant, the article is about her nominations, not her life
  • "She has been called the "Queen of Tejano music" by many media outlets." I would specify a few
  • "She has won..." as she is unlikely to win further awards, this should be in the past tense, the has needs removing
No it should be in past tense, you cannot refer to someone who is dead in the present tense, regardless of whether she was nominated for award. NapHit (talk) 23:17, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Done Jona 23:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
  • "The Spirit of Hope Award was created in Selena's honor in 1996, and was honored to..." not keen on honor and honored being used in close succession. Also what does honored to mean? I have never heard that phrase used before

NapHit (talk) 18:54, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 13:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "The singer has released eleven albums". Since she is dead and cannot release any more, "has" should be removed.
  • Important one here: in the infobox, I count 78 nominations, not 76, which makes the first sentence of the second paragraph incorrect. Not sure how three supporters missed this basic item.
  • BMI Music Awards: "The Broadcast Music, Inc. annually hosts awards shows...". Don't think the first word should be there.
  • In the Tejano Music Awards table, the awards have a mixture of em (big) and en (little) dashes. I'm thinking that the MoS would say that all of these should be en dashes, as long as they remain spaced.
  • Done

Giants2008 (Talk) 19:30, 7 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 9 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Ruby 2010/2013 03:53, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it fulfills the FL criteria. This is my fifth colleges list, and I've tried to include improvements along the way as they've been suggested for each nomination. Any comments should be speedily addressed. Thanks in advance! Ruby 2010/2013 03:53, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 05:08, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Alt text needs to be added to those images
  • Same goes for universities, U.S. state, and medical schools
  • "it had a spring 2012 enrollment of 74,596" reference?
  • "seven years before Iowa became a state" then what was it before?
  • The Abbreviation in the table should not be in bold, per MOS:BOLD, just remove bolding marks
  • Align text to center in the key
  • "Active institutions" seems like that table caption should be expanding further
  • Same goes for the Defunct institutions table; the table caption repeats the header title, change to "List of defunct college university institutions" something like that I suppose
Changed to List of defunct institutions Ruby 2010/2013 04:43, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "Universities portal" actually, it's the "university portal"
  • Remove red link in references
  • "US" → "U.S."
  • "Consider removing links that add little to the article or that have been repeated in close proximity to other links to the same article, as per WP:MOS and WP:CONTEXT. Guides recommend having greater than 3% words in links, but be sure not to overlink words just to add more links" TBrandley 05:10, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Oh, no problem. :) This, I promise, this is the last comment, ha:
Good idea. Created a couple redirects. Ruby 2010/2013 05:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

TBrandley 04:07, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Support. I have no stylistic concerns, having already supported the layout when it was used for South Dakota's list; the prose looks good to me too (looked first at DYK, second review now still doesn't present anything). Keep them coming in. GRAPPLE X 00:34, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 13:22, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • I'm a bit confused by the number of college and universities, you state there are 60. Yet adding them all together from the numbers given in the next sentences gives us 65. I've noticed one discrepancy, the lead gives two research universities, while the tables gives one. Would be worth checking to make sure the others are consistent.
  • Location(s) column should be Location as only one is given throughout
  • Could do with alt text for the images in the defunct institutions section

— Preceding unsigned comment added by NapHit (talkcontribs)

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments good, some picks...
  • "Distance Learning" is just "distance learning".
  • "Westmar University, a defunct institution that closed in 1997." (etc) shouldn't have a period at the end of the caption because the caption is not a complete sentence.
  • You have images of the defunct institutions, but not the current ones, is that because you're afraid of squashing the table too much?
  • Pretty much. I added the defunct images almost as an afterthought because there was open space. If it looks odd to include them but not images of active institutions, I can always remove them. Ruby 2010/2013 05:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:25, 30 September 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 9 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): PresN 20:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I was looking around this morning to see which sf award list to do next, and when I looked up I had rewritten this one. I now present the Andre Norton award- hooked onto the Nebula Awards and run by the same organization, it's essentially the Nebula Award for the best young adult novel of the year. As such, the list looks eerily similar to Nebula Award for Best Novel, an FL that I passed through here a few months ago, and should reflect comments raised in that and similar FLCs. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 20:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ajmint (talkedits) 20:34, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments some prose stuff, otherwise looking good:
  • Perhaps change "a yearly award" → "an annual award" as a bit of variety for the word "year" later in the sentence?
  • Done.
  • "word length"; I assume this should be "word count" or "work length"
  • Done.
  • "nominating and voting" → "nomination and voting"?
  • Done.
  • "as the awards are separate_ works may be..." I would put a comma there, I had to wrap my head around that bit
  • Done.
  • "determines if the nominated works are _____ for young adults"; I would insert either "suitable", "appropriate" or "intended", depending on what exactly this means
  • Done, used "written", since appropriate has moral overtones and they're just looking for writing style.
  • "which allowed the possibility for works to be nominated"; Highlighted bit isn't really necessary
  • Done.
  • "Scott Westerfield has the most nominations at four, though he has yet to win, followed by Holly..." I would replace these commas with dashes as it is a bit confusing to use them for both interjection and a list
  • Done.

ajmint (talkedits) 23:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 23:42, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Add some image which is need per WP:FL?
  • Not required, actually, but found one- non-free, unfortunately.
  • Link science fiction in first mention
  • Done, had it in the second sentence, now the first.
  • "announced" originally?
  • Made it "publicly announced".
  • I don't think the asterisk is clear enough. Perhaps a dagger?
  • It's been clear enough for the past 21 FLs. If you have regular vision, the blue is enough, if you don't, any symbol comes out the same from a screen-reader.
  • Tables don't met MOS:ACCESS, add scope cols and rows, as well as "table captions", to ensure it does.
  • Ummm.... it has row and col scopes. Check the table code. I've manually un-tinted the row headers, since it doesn't make much sense in this context.
  • Align references in table to center
  • Ooh, you were the one who wanted it that way in the last FLC, too. AKA the only person ever. Just so you know, this is a massive pain in the ass- you have to do it cell by cell. Done.
  • Don't use mixed date formats in references, ref 2 uses different than other refs
  • It is perfectly fine to format "October 2011" as such instead of "2011-10", which is not a standard format.
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between
  • Did you use a bot to generate some of this? Because all of the cites are next to a punctuation mark, except for the ones in the table.
  • "Nebula Awards Homepage" → "Official website"
  • Done.
  • Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order
  • Done.

TBrandley 00:42, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • The opening sentence is a humdinger, with around 56 words in it?!
  • Is the award open internationally?
  • Why isn't The Freedom Maze linked in the infobox?

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

  • "in the previous year" - In the preceding year, perhaps?
No other comments from me... prose looks solid. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:28, 25 September 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 9 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): GRAPPLE X 05:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

This man again. And he's nominating that man again—a man Mel Brooks described as "Jimmy Stewart from Mars". I'm pretty sure this one should be straightforward enough. It's based, loosely, on Spike Lee filmography though the differences should be clear enough. This is as comprehensive as I feel it's going to be (I don't think there's anything missing from it and as you can see from the sourcing there's been quite a few different places combed through to be sure. I even tracked down his television ad!); though I will need to keep an eye on The Cleveland Show (eurgh) to update any future episodes he appears in. Yes, the man who based a film about infanticide on the birth of his own disabled daughter is on a primetime US cartoon now. As always, I'll be on hand to respond to any questions and address any comments pretty promptly. GRAPPLE X 05:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 20:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments

TBrandley 19:50, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I think I've responded to everything you've raised here. GRAPPLE X 20:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
;Comments from Crisco 1492
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:08, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments

The Rambling Man (talk) 09:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 20:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
It may be worth getting the opinion of RexxS on this, as I do think the film should come first as its the obvious row header. I did raise the same issue at the Reagan FLC, but no-one picked up on it. I'll give Rexx a message and see what he thinks so either way the issue is sorted, apart from this there are no other issues I can see with the list. NapHit (talk) 15:20, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
  • see no reason why tables cannot be sortable either
    Had avoided it as rowspans and sort functions don't gel well; removing the former means I have now added the latter. GRAPPLE X 18:36, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "1966's Six Figures Getting Sick" this makes it sound like it was made by 1966, which obviously is not the case. Would reword for clarity
    Rephrased a bit. GRAPPLE X 18:36, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "until Nance's death in..." as Nance is the subject of the sentence, don't need to repeat his name of second use, change to his
    Done. GRAPPLE X 18:36, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

NapHit (talk) 18:04, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments

On the issue of which column to put first: Many screen readers are able to identify a "row header" and speak it when the user is navigating around a table. Let me take the example of the "David Lynch's film appearances and roles" table. Someone using JAWS, for example, could navigate down the Other column. They could set JAWS to read out the headers along with each cell, so they would hear "Other, 1966, Animator"; when they moved down one cell, they would hear "Other, 1968, Editor" - this is because the Year is being identified as the row header.

Now, if we made the Film entries into row headers (I'd prefer to call it Title because the whole row is the film, but that's just a nit-pick), the JAWS user would hear "Other, Six Figures Getting Sick, Animator"; followed by "Other, The Alphabet, Editor". Don't you think that is preferable?

If we wanted to change to using the titles as row headers, we could simply move the '! scope="row"' markup onto the Film entries in the table and most modern screen readers that I'm aware of would respect that and use those titles as row headers. It is possible that older and more primitive readers may ignore the markup and simply pick the first column as row headers, so swapping the Film column with the Year column would cover more cases than leaving it alone.

@Grapple: I don't intend to prescribe (or proscribe!) anything here, but I hope I can point you in the direction of improving access (and for whom you are improving it). You need to agree between yourself and the reviewers what are the best row headers and how to weigh the value of having them in the first column compared with your aesthetic preference for the year first. I can't make that decision for you, but it was that consideration that drove the Discography folks to putting title first. Hope that helps.

On other accessibility concerns, I'd recommend not using constructions like "Here Today Gone Tomorrow"<br/>"Truck Stop" to make lists of titles - using {{ubl | "Here Today Gone Tomorrow" | "Truck Stop" }} will produce a real list for the screen readers while displaying the same for sighted viewers like this:

  • "Here Today Gone Tomorrow"
  • "Truck Stop"

While I'm here, can I just point out that we are moving to HTML 5 very soon. In that version, tags like <center>...</center> are deprecated, so I think our best articles ought to be demonstrating best practice such as using style="text-align:center;" instead. I'd also use style="width:65px;" rather than width=65 for the same reason. It's not crucial because mediawiki software and browsers will cope with ancient markup for some time to come, but at some point it will have to be updated and we can encourage good markup by providing those who will copy and adapt our best work with good examples. --RexxS (talk) 17:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Aha. I had assumed that a screenreader would give the full row rather than being able to break it up, and would read "1966, Six Figures Getting Sick... etc ... Animator"; given that insight I guess it makes much more sense to change it. I'll get to that now; same goes for {{ubl}}, etc. Thanks for that, as I wouldn't have realised it was an issue otherwise. GRAPPLE X 18:06, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Have made the changes to the film table; will do the TV/web one now. I'll set the headings there based on the titles of the episodes in question rather than the series as it would seem to make the most since given the above. GRAPPLE X 18:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Done. GRAPPLE X 19:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification and your time Rexx, much appreciated. NapHit (talk) 20:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Source comments

  • What makes Pitchfork Media (ref 32) a reliable source?
    Per their staff page, the site can be seen to retain employed editors and journalists; their editorial staff consists of several people (the article used in this list was written by one of the site's associate editors). I feel the site is professional enough about its standard of editorial practice (their taste and pretension notwithstanding of course :P). GRAPPLE X 22:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
  • What makes Consequence of Sound (ref 33) reliable? Giants2008 (Talk) 22:07, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
    The site seems to be held in reasonably high regard by more established media, enjoying a partnership with Time magazine (), while its reviews are collected by the harsher-than-we-are Metacritic. As for its editorial practices, their about page mentions that they retain an employed staff and similarly lists their editing staff. GRAPPLE X 22:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Support I just gave this a good look over. After all the suggestions that have been fixed, this page is in prime shape. I vote aye.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:17, 5 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 9 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:49, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I am writing a possible future FT on the North Norfolk Coast Site of Special Scientific Interest, including separate articles on the larger nature reserves it contains. Not all the reserves have sufficient information available to reach FA/GA, so this is a summary of the basic information to ensure that even the 5-ha patches appear somewhere in the topic. I've spent some time on the overview, so I hope the article as a whole makes sense, thanks in advance for your comments, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:49, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 19:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • According to WP:LEDE, this article's lede should have "two or three paragraphs" for the lede. I only see one.
  • Add alt text to all images per WP:ALT
  • "£" clarify that is the UK pound, with a link, also
  • Per MOS:HEAD, headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). So, please remove "the" in "The reserves"
  • I don't understand this. I don't know what the function of the "tl
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:27, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Perhaps worth noting that this is Norfolk in England, not Norfolk in the US (or anywhere else which may confuse a large number of our international readers).
  • "North Norfolk Coast SSSI shown within Norfolk" (perhaps add "in red" after shown here).
  • Any reason why you use metric before Imperial units in this BritEng article?
  • It's primarily a scientific article, so if I had the choice I'd only use metric. Unlike the US, we have a mixture of units anyway. Food, paint and petrol are sold in metric, but our roads have miles and we can buy milk in pints or litres. Kids are taught metric in schools, not imperial. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "The Norfolk Coast SSSI " do you mean "The North Norfolk Coast SSSI"?
  • What's the strategy for naming species and capitalisation? E.g. you have "Eurasian Bitterns" but "natterjack toads"...
  • Birds have an agreed and Knowledge (XXG)-accepted convention that species are capitalised. Practice varies elsewhere - butterflies often capped, plants always lc, but there is no agreed full capitalisation policy for any non-avian group, so for consistency I've lower-cased all the non-bird species (FWIW, my last two FAs followed this practice too). Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Spell out RSPB before using the abbreviation (and even link it?)
  • I've expanded all abbreviations except SSSI
  • What's an NWT?
  • "Also an NNR..." the list is sortable so don't assume this will come after another mention of NNR.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Arsenikk 15:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
;Comments from Arsenikk
  • Does the body of water the area borders have any other name than the North Sea? (sometimes lines of coast have specific names) If it does, it would be nice with a name and link, otherwise just leave it.
  • No, there's no large bay or anything, so it's just the North Sea
  • The article describes the SSSI very nicely, with the amount of detail I would expect, especially concerning the natural aspects. My one concern is that the list does not discuss the reserves as such, nor does it introduce the list as such. Of course start off with a brief summary of the area as a whole, but then the lead needs to summarize the reserves, rather than the area. For instance, how many reserves are there? how large an area do they cover in total? do the reserves hold a higher degree of protection than the rest of the site? why was a tenth reserve added in 1999? why are they managed by different organizations?
  • Good point, I've added a bit to the second paragraph of the lead, and written a three-sentence introduction to the list section. The area is straightforward, and so is the protection (no extra legal difference, but obviously ownership gives control). The pattern of ownership is typical British randomness, land becomes available, somebody buys it or enters into a management agreement, and who it is depends on the circumstances. For example, the Cley Marshes entry points out that land has become available which would link the two existing NWT reserves, and it would be astonishing if any other conservation body bid for it, whereas the RSPB would obviously be interested if the wildfowling marshes adjoining Titchwell became available. The 1999 reserve was created then because that's when its owner decided to donate it, it's as simple as that.
  • As usual I'm just awestruck at how the British manage organize their way in the most complex way feasable, and not instead of a one-organization-manages-all-preserved-areas that I'm used to from across the North Sea. Arsenikk 15:37, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Arsenikk 18:54, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the review and useful comments. I hope the changes are adequate, I don't want to go into detail on the individual reserves, siince they have their own articles (including two FAs so far) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 12:27, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "The SSSI is a long, narrow strip of coastal land that starts between Old Hunstanton and Holme-next-the-Sea, and runs east for about 43 km (27 mi) to Kelling." I think the second use of and should be changed to which
I think you may be right actually, having read the sentence a number of times. Scrap this suggestion NapHit (talk) 12:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "starting in 1912 when Charles Rothschild bought Blakeney Point and donated it to the National Trust which has managed it since." should be a comma after Trust
  • refs that are PDFs need to include the parameter |format=PDF
  • I don't think that's correct, the requirement is consistency. I've written 30+ FAs and a few FLs without ever doing that. The wiki software displays PDF refs with the little Acrobat symbol anyway, so it's redundant too. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
I've had a look at our guidelines for referencing and for example this page references PDFs with the format parameter. Its a little odd no reviewer mentioned this to you before, i've been told a few times on my nominations to include them and have always done so since, as not everyone knows what the Acrobat symbol refers to. Could be worth leaving a message at the MOS page to get some clarification on the matter. NapHit (talk) 12:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

NapHit (talk) 19:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

  • Quick comment – Scanned the references for formatting/reliability issues, and the only minor things I saw were an improper hyphen in the publisher of ref 33 (should be an en dash instead) and the need for a space before the access date of ref 40. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:12, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Support Dana boomer (talk) 19:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC) Comments - Overall, very nice. A few thoughts:

  • "form on sheltered parts of the coast, in the lee of islands or behind spits" Is this a series of three, or are the last two examples of the first?
  • "Grassland is represented by grazing pasture" Is this grazed by wildlife or livestock?
  • "A 2005 survey at six North Norfolk coastal sites" Is there any way to get an update on this, or was it a one-off survey?
  • "who made overnight stays in the area in 1999" Again, any way to update this? It's over a decade out of date...
  • What is a "bird hide"? I'm assuming it's an area of protective cover, but haven't heard this term before.

Once these are addressed, I think I'll be happy to support. Dana boomer (talk) 16:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for review and useful comments Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the responses. Too bad that there aren't any more recent surveys...but I agree that information that is a bit out of date is better than no information at all. Changed to support. Dana boomer (talk) 19:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for support. Believe me, birds can hide very well without help! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:55, 7 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 9 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 10:44, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it meets the criteria. Also this will be the first of its kind. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 10:44, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from --Kürbis () 12:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
*Comments
    • "In the sport of cricket, an umpire is a person who has the authority to make judgements on the cricket field, according to the Laws of Cricket. " - Too much repetition and the last phrase is redundant (which implies that it is a special rule or similar). I would write: "In cricket, an umpire is a person who has the authority to make judgements on the pitch."
    • " Fifteen of umpires are of Indian nationality, six are Australian, five are South African and three are from New Zealand." - remove "of umpires"
    • Overall looks very good. I will re-review later to make a final decision. Regards.--Kürbis () 12:10, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 19:40, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • no need for "the sport of", just use In cricket  Done
  • "As of the 2010 season, an umpire receives 6 crore (US$1.09 million) as the salary for serving in one season." seems a bit having a of 2010 when its 2012 do you not have figures for this year? would also reword slightly "an umpire receives a 6 crore (US$1.09million) salary for officiating during a season."  Done
  • "Fifteen are of..." umpires should come after fifteen  Done
  • "namely Doctrove" namely is redundant  Done
  • not keen on the table width at all, leaves lots of space which is not nice to look at, would remove the width from the table altogether
  • ref 2 makes no mention of the claim it is supposed to support, think you've linked the wrong page, this goes to an overview page, should go to India's page instead  Done
  • ESPNCricinfo are article has it at ESPNcricinfo  Done
  • ref 3 needs a publication date  Done
  • ref 6 Economic Times is a work so news to be in italics  Done
  • You provide locations for some newspapers and not others, provide them for all  Done However re 3 has no location, so didn't added any.
  • You should use the cite news template for newspaper ref instead of cite web  Done

NapHit (talk) 17:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:30, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  •  Done
  • "As of the 2010 season..." it's 2012 now, where's the update?
  • Unfortunately we have no updates for 2012, eiher the BCCI wants to keep its privacy, or the media is only interested in players and cheerleaders.
  • "salary for officiating during a season" regardless of the number of matches they officiate?
  • Yeah, I think so.
  • "The official umpire partner of" do you mean that the umpires are sponsored by Kingfisher Airlines?
  • "The official umpire partner of IPL is Kingfisher Airlines; it gets branded on umpires' uniforms" not great prose at all. Maybe "The umpires are sponsored by Kingfisher Airlines whose branding is displayed on their uniforms" or similar. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:15, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
  • "The receiver of the" recipient.
  •  Done
  • "of points given by the umpires" unclear. Do you mean the umpires award each player a fair play score in every match they officiate, and at the end of the season, the player with the most fair play points wins the fair play trophy?
  • You got it almost right. The umpires give point to both the team after the match, and the one with most at the end wins.
  • Have we had the final of the 2012 IPL yet? If not, why is it written in past tense?
  • It has already held, I guess in the start of June 2012.
  • "The list includes those umpires who have officiated at least one IPL match." are there IPL umpires who haven't officiated at least one match?
  •  Done My mistake.
  • "the list is sorted by last name" not true. Dharmasena is listed before Bowden for example.
  •  Done
  • You link Mumbai in the refs but not Bangalore?
  •  Done
  • Why not link Lord's in the refs?
  •  Done
  • Ref 3 and Ref 6 both same work, but only one has a location.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:17, 4 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 9 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Zia Khan 23:10, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe this is a list with inclusion FL criteria, on a notable topic about a notable individual. Actually about one of the best bowlers in the history of cricket, and one of the greatest all-rounders the game had seen. It'll be an attribute to a Cricket Legend to take this to a FL status. Comments or suggestions are appreciated. Zia Khan 23:10, 20 August 2012 (UTC)


  • Ref. No. 4 does not have an access date.
  • Check the publisher name in ref. no. 14. It is written twice.
  • Had number of dab links last time I checked. So make sure you have none of that.
  • Economy rate column does not sort properly.

--Vyom25 (talk) 05:13, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 12:46, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Comments'
  • "Hadlee was named by the Wisden..."
  • "inducted him into the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame. don't need three references for this
  • "His first Test five-wicket haul came in 1976 against India in a match at the same venue which New Zealand won." comma after 1976 and venue
  • "By the end of his career, he had claimed five-wickets hauls in both innings of a match on five occasions. again really don't need refs for one sentence
Sorry this is my fault, I meant to say don't need five refs for one sentence, not remove them altogether. Sentence does need referencing just excessively. Sorry about that, I really should read what I typed before I confirm it. NapHit (talk) 19:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Reinserted, I couldn't find a specific one for this. Zia Khan 04:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
  • "Hadlee's first ODI five-wicket haul came in 1980 against India in a match at the WACA Ground, Perth which New Zealand lost." comma after india and Perth
  • "only behind"
  • Key should be in same order as table, so Econ should be before Batsmen
  • Wkts column, the entries should not be bold per MOS:BOLD, add plainrowheaders in between wikitable sortable to fix this

NapHit (talk) 22:38, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Quick comment

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 14:16, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Comments very good.
  • Image caption should be descriptive, perhaps you could tell readers it's a statue of Sir Richard Hadlee and tell us where it is.
    • Done.
  • "against Australia, with fourteen five-wicket hauls against " repetitive "against"...
    • Done.
  • Sorry but the tail end of the second para reads like a list of factoids, I think the flow of the prose should be improved.
    • Made some changes.
  • In the key, some "meaning"s start with The, others don't.
    • Fixed.
  • I thought strike rate was normally included in ODI tables?
    • I think this is not necessary in a bowling list.
  • Ref 8. NO NEED TO SHOUT!

The Rambling Man (talk) 11:05, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 23:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Add scope rows to those tables for WP:ACCESS; it already has scope cols
    • Fixed.
  • Why is Wkts in #1 aligned to center, and others there aren't
    • Done.
  • "Consider removing links that add little to the article or that have been repeated in close proximity to other links to the same article, as per MOS:LINKS and WP:CONTEXT"

TBrandley 23:13, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 11:18, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • It seems to odd that first we are telling that he took this much fifers, and then we are telling that what fifers actually means.
  • "reach 400 wickets" >> "take 400 wickets"
    • Done.
  • A bowler's success against a team is determined by the no. of wickets he has taken, and not by the fifer. Therefore, "Hadlee was most successful against Australia" >> "Hadlee took more wickets against Australia than any other team"
This list is not dealing with the amount of wickets he took, but five wicket hauls. As this is the subject of the list, it is correct as it stands. NapHit (talk) 18:37, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
5 wicket haul might be the subject of the list, but this sentence's subject is Hadlee, and as a bowler, his success against a specific team cannot be determined by his fifers. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 10:09, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Of course his success against a team can be determined by five-wicket hauls, what is this list doing if not that? NapHit (talk) 11:12, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
  • "career-best figures for an innings" >> "best bowling figures in an innings"
    • Done.
  • "As of 2012" - 2012 is very big, say it clearly, "As of October 2012"
    • Done.
  • "Result for the New Zealand team in that match" >> "Result for New Zealand in that match"
    • Done.
  • "One of two five-wicket hauls by Hadlee in a match" >> "One of two five-wicket hauls by Hadlee in that match"
    • He took two five-wicket hauls in a match on five occasions, so this should be as this is.
  • Don't you think that the row scope should be actually given to the date row?
    • No, As NapHit says we are talking about five-wicket hauls, and this is the best option.
  • The alt can be better, you could tell that the statue is o brown colour, mustaches, wearing shirt, bla bla bla...

♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 17:02, 4 October 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 2 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): — Tomica (talk) 13:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... I have worked hard on it for certain period of time. Christian Bale is well known actor who deserves his own filmography page so that's the reason I created it. I think that the lead covers the most important content from the table, which is sortable and people can see how much the film budget was and its theater gross. For all the users who oppose I would like to post their comments so I can improve the article. Thank You— Tomica (talk) 13:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ajmint (talkedits) 22:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Perhaps start "The English actor Christian Bale..."? It sounds a bit weird without the definite article.
  • Use the alt text on all uses of the {{dagger}} template.
  • Not sure "Untitled Terrence Malick Project" should be italicised, as it's not a title.
  • References should use en-dashes (–) rather than hyphens (-) when they are spaced.

ajmint (talkedits) 18:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Ruby 2010/2013 21:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • He starred as British journalist Arthur Stuart in the Todd Haynes-directed drama Velvet Goldmine (1998). Critics were divided on the film - critics were undecided on the film, or his performance? (I think his performance is more relevant here)
Done. — Tomica (talk) 19:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Your mention of A Midsummer Night's Dream doesn't actually include the name, just a link. I think this is a flaw
  • When did Bale become recognized as a movie star? At which point in his career (American Psycho? Batman Begins?) I'm sure journalists have commented on this.
  • Despite positive reviews, the film was box office flop -> Despite positive reviews, the film was a box office flop
  • The same year, he starred in The Prestige (2006) alongside Hugh Jackman and David Bowie - I think Michael Caine and Scarlett Johansson had a higher billing than Bowie; it seems odd to include Bowie here
  • "Bale co-starred Russel Crowe -> Bale co-starred with Russel Crowe?
  • Use consistent date formatting

Ruby 2010/2013 04:06, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, page number for Ref 35? Ruby 2010/2013 19:47, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 01:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Add infobox about filmography please
  • Table don't met MOS:ACCESS, add scope cols and rows, as well as table captions, to ensure it does
  • Allmovie → AllMovie
  • Per Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 5 kg, use 5 kg, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 5 kg

TBrandley 00:48, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:47, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • Two dab links, The Dark Knight and Scott Cooper.
  • Be consistent with your slash spacing.
  • TV film -> television film.
  • "but was claimed" why "but"? Just because it was commercially successful, doesn't mean a cult following is unusual.
  • "received a role in the 1994 drama Little Women, which received" repetitive.
  • You link "Walt Disney animated film" but you didn't link "Disney musical drama" which came before it (nor did you call it a Walt Disney muscial...), why?
  • "was "eagerly anticipated"" yeah, before it was seen, but how was it actually received.
  • "he portrayed the serial killer Patrick Bateman. His portrayal " repetitive use of portray.
  • Russell Crowe has two l's in his first name...
  • When you say Johnny Deep, do you mean Depp?
  • "starred alongside " followed by "played alongside" is repetitive.
  • Empty cells aren't good, for unreleased films, their box office cells should contain some explanatory note.
  • What do blank box office cells mean for films that are released? Not clear to the reader.
  • No mention in the lead of adverts (besides the opening one-liner) or video games (at all).
  • According to our article, Flixter is actually called Flixster.

The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 15:29, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
'Comments
  • Have quite a few sentences that start with "In 1992" etc, its not great prose, doesn't flow well presently, try and vary the sentences structures up
  • "and was claimed to have gained a cult following" surely it either has a following or not? currently its a weak statement
  • "positively met by movie critics" received would be better than met, doesn't sound right when referring to a film
  • "it was commercial success" missing a word here
  • No need for television programmes and video games tables to be sortable with only one item in both

"*Done. — Tomica (talk)`

  • ref 24 needs the author adding

NapHit (talk) 22:18, 26 September 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 2 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Holiday56 (talk) 09:29, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because having done much work on the article, I feel the article is ready to be promoted to featured list status. Holiday56 (talk) 09:29, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from I Am RufusConversation is a beautiful thing. 15:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments from Sufur222

Let's see:

And that's about it. If nothing else occurs to me, then I'll have no reservations supporting. I Am RufusConversation is a beautiful thing. 16:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Comment very good.

The Rambling Man (talk) 07:31, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 22:59, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments

TBrandley 02:24, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
;Prose comment from Crisco 1492
  • Nothing about grammar, per se, but about style. The lede you have here is an exact summation of the charts below but doesn't analyse the discography at all. Any stylistic shifts? Changes in recording labels or partners? Scandals over plagiarism? Notable awards for the albums, like a Rolling Stone Best 500 of All Time? What's their signature song, if any? Stuff like that should go in the lede, in my opinion.
If you'd like a point of comparison on my suggested styling, see Chrisye discography or List of songs recorded by Chrisye. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:41, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
I'd understand your point if it corresponded to the discography of a prolific artist, like The Beatles or the example you've given above, Chrisye. But Train aren't exactly the most acclaimed or prolific artists, so information like that would seem rather off in the article. In the case of this list, the lead summarizes the contents of the actual discography, such as single releases, charts and albums — in the vein of discographies of less prolific artists, many of which have become featured lists (see Rihanna discography, Birdman discography and Jordin Sparks discography). Holiday56 (talk) 08:52, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
  • In my opinion it is because they are not as well known that a bit of context may be necessary. Right now it reads like a shopping list, essentially. If there have been no thematic or stylistic variations in this time, fine, but surely there is a song that they are recognised for above all others? Different producers, perhaps? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
The lead's overall style, focusing more on the actual content of the article — release dates, charts, certifications, etc. — is being used by a large number of featured discographies, so I do think its use in discographies has been accepted as informative enough to use and an accurate representation of contents. For certain artists of a similar nature to Train, it may be rather hard to find information regarding topics such as stylistic shifts, scandals, etc. I've done as best as I can to address your comments — I've added some details regarding the band's work with a long-time producer of theirs, additional info on their long-time label, Columbia Records, and information on their Grammy Award win. With a rather mid-length lead, a direct read-out of the band's most successful singles would feel somewhat redundant; to make up for this, special emphasis has been given to their most well-known singles in the prose. Holiday56 (talk) 09:51, 26 September 2012 (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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 2 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): – Muboshgu (talk) 22:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

It;s important for WP:BASEBALL for this to become a FL. Joining the 300 win club is seen as one of the highest achievement in baseball, along with joining the 3,000 strikeout club, 300 save club, 500 home run club, or 3,000 hit club. Incidentally, those are all FLs. This will complete the set. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 17:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • "who won 300" – replace with "who have won," in order to make it the exact same wording as the other FL baseball stat club lists.
  • "No pitcher reached 20 wins in a non strike-shortened year for the first time in 2006, which was repeated in 2009." – it would sound better with "...for the first time in 2006; this was repeated in 2009.
  • "The next member of the club to become eligible for the Hall is Roger Clemens, who is expected to become eligible during the 2013 balloting; however, his election is seen as uncertain because of his alleged links to use of performance-enhancing drugs." – this kinda resembles a run-on sentence. I would suggest breaking it up between the words "balloting" and "however."
  • Footnote: "Though it was illegal to doctor the baseball" – replace with "is." It's still illegal.

Bloom6132 (talk) 11:10, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)


Comments

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 13:09, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments

NapHit (talk) 14:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
*"Early in the history of professional baseball, many of the rules of present day baseball were not in place; the distance pitchers threw to home plate was shorter than today, and pitchers were able to use foreign substances to alter the direction of the ball." - Relevance not clear to people without a background in baseball. - Relevance not clear to people without a background in baseball.
  • Changed to "Early in the history of professional baseball, many of the rules favored the pitcher over the batter; the distance pitchers threw to home plate was shorter than today, and pitchers were able to use foreign substances to alter the direction of the ball."
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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 2 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Arsenikk 20:02, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

This is an attempt at an innovative list; creating a list of every aircraft, its registration, name and service history is deemed unencyclopedic by consensus at the WikiProject, so instead the list focuses on the use of the aircraft by the airline. As an aviation enthusiast, this is exactly the information I want: an image, the numbers and a description, a combination which is otherwise overlooked in airline articles. Any feedback is appreciated. Arsenikk 20:02, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from MilborneOne (talk) 16:11, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
This is a comment.
I appreciate the attempt to create an interesting article without falling into fancruft world and I think Arsenikk has a good job of a fine balance between encyclopedic and a spotters website, I have the following minor comments:
  • Much prefer the model and manufacturer to a single entry that is Douglas C-47 Dakota rather than C-47 Dakota <picture> Douglas
    • The split of manufacturer and model to increase sortability, and the image in the middle was the last reviewer's idea. Anyway, I guess I can merge them. Arsenikk 20:37, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Not sure about the The list consists of an image... bit do we normally explain a table in such detail.
  • It uses the term "Model" a lot which makes me think they have toy model aircraft perhaps types may be better.
  • In the F28 section After discarding purchase the 737-100 doesnt make sense.
  • In the F28 section least-trafficked Norwegian least-trafficked an English term? MilborneOne (talk) 17:14, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:09, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • I really, really like this kind of list. I'm not sure if the title is correct, after all you're talking about the types of aircraft ever used by Braathens, but I can't think of a snappy alternative title right now!
    • If you think up something better, I am open for a change. I'm not perfectly happy either, but I haven't thought of something better and the title is short and concise. Arsenikk 18:35, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
  • "A brand-new " - says who?
    • Perhaps not the best wording so I changed it. My point was that the aircraft could not have been less than six months old at the time, and probably was even newer. For an airplane, six months is "brand new". Arsenikk 18:35, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Link airline the first time.
  • "With 20 aircraft, the Boeing 737-200 was the most bought model." perhaps "The Boeing 737-200, with 20, was the most ..."?
  • "Braathens has operated ..." remove "has" since the airline is defunct.
  • "aircraft have been involved " just "aircraft were involved".
  • "initially few to destinations" flew.
  • "routes flown domestic" domestically?
  • F-27 appears to just be F27 (or F27 Friendship)?
  • Similar comment to F-28.
  • "Braathens only operated jets" -> "Braathens operated only jets"
  • "changed its brand name to Braathens, and changed " changed is repeated too quickly.
  • "Starting with the three last F-27s, Braathens started " ditto with "start" here.
  • Just a general note, it may be worth clarifying that this list is of those types used by the Braathens airline between its inception and its merger with SAS? Just a clear single one-liner? Perhaps ahead of the table?
  • Any reason why there's no image of the Heron?
  • Transair is a dab link.
  • Ref 3 is called plane-spotter.com not plane-spotters.com and is it reliable?
    • Although admittedly a border-line case, my main reason to believe it is reliable is the extreme detail, and that it matches other reliable sources where I have attempted to cross-reference. The documents lists dates in, dates out, registrations, lessors etc. for every single aircraft; all it is used to reference in this article is the number of F100, B737-700 and BAe-146 aircraft in the fleet. Other values, as descriptions, all other aircraft, years in and out are all referenced elsewhere. Arsenikk 18:35, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:41, 8 September 2012 (UTC)


  • Support with comments Nothing major that needs fixing, so I'll support now, but two minor point
  • Domestic/domestically is overworked, can you lose or vary some ("internal" for example?)
  • Your refs using templates end in a full stop, the untemplated ones don't. For consistency, I'd make them all full stopped

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback and support. Interesting comments—I've never even noticed the periods before. I rephrased about half the domestic/domestically words. Arsenikk 21:34, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 21:46, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
  • A suggestion of the name of the list could be List of aircraft used by Braathens
    • Perhaps "List of aircraft operated by Braathens"? Anyway I'll await the name change to after the FLC to not mess things up.
  • "From the establishment..." would change the to their
  • I think the model column should come first followed by the image column. This would make sense per MOS:DTT as it is the clear rowheader, its also a bit odd seeing an image as the first column, without introducing what the image is representing.
  • "after requests from among others Braathens." not keen on this would change to after requests from airlines including Braathens
  • "although it did see some use in scheduled services." -> although it was used in some scheduled services
  • ref 3 needs the parameter |format=PDF adding
  • Instead of using a semi-colon for bolding, as you've done for Bibliography and Notes in the references section. You should the apostrophe's instead as using the semi-colon is a WP:ACCESS issue for those using screen readers

NapHit (talk) 19:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments; all has been seen to. Arsenikk 21:31, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 01:09, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
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 Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 17:12, 2 October 2012 .


Nominator(s): Holiday56 (talk) 08:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because having done much work on the article, I feel it may finally meet the criteria for promotion as a featured list. Holiday56 (talk) 08:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from I Am RufusConversation is a beautiful thing. 16:33, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments from Sufur222

Overall, this looks very good. The speed that you redid this one is certainly impressive. Only a few things:

  • Alt text for the image?
  • "Gettin' Over You" has been certified platinum in New Zealand (see here).
  • Although mickeyfinnegan.com is clearly the website of the director, does this necessarily make it reliable?

Apart from these things, I feel this is ready for FL status. I Am RufusConversation is a beautiful thing. 07:51, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

All done. Holiday56 (talk) 12:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
  • As much as I hate LMFAO, I believe that the list is ready for FL Status after Sufur's comments are resolved. --Khanassassin 11:23, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
    • Comment I believe LMFAO are far from hip hop artists. --Khanassassin 15:20, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
      • "Electro hip-hop" is among the genres listed in the infobox on their page; they are also explicitly referred to as an "electro-rap duo" on their AllMusic page, which also places them in the rap genre amongst established hip-hop artists. Other renowned critical review sites list them as "party hop" (), "pop-rap" () and "rap/dance/pop" (). I'd say that their utilization of the genre in their much of their music has to be somehow acknowledged in the article. Holiday56 (talk) 15:58, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 11:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:03, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. I hope I've addressed all your comments. Holiday56 (talk) 11:10, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Comment

  • "who approved their signing to his label Interscope Records." not keen on the use of approved, would prefer who signed them to his label Interscope Records. NapHit (talk) 19:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Changed. Holiday56 (talk) 05:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


Support The prose struck me as a little informal in places, but given the topic and the lack of any real problems, I'm happy to support Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

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

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.