Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/log/July 2023
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Keep
[edit]- 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 removed by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list removal because of the large amount of unsourced content and original research. DrKay (talk) 06:45, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi DrKay. On a very quick review I see the "other candidates" section is the one that seems most problematic. I agree this section is OR and the article should be de-listed if this is retained. Would simply removing this section solve the issue, or are there other parts that are problematic? FOARP (talk) 09:15, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- There are unsourced paragraphs in every section and I've already tried to trim the other candidates section without success. DrKay (talk) 10:44, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah I'm OK to Support delisting based on failures of at least criteria 3c and 6 (due to the apparent edit-warring in the edit history). FOARP (talk) 12:01, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – as per nom, the article is in some disrepair. Idiosincrático (talk) 18:06, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support for removal per nomination, no references on each paragraph. Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 15:11, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been removed, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:29, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- 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 removed by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [2].[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list removal because it does not meet the criteria for a featured list:
- Attribute 2: the lead of the article is a generic lead that could be for the main page of this airline, and does not set out the inclusion criteria. It is indeed not clear why the destinations of SAS Braathens are excluded but those of other previous versions of the airline are included. Whilst the list (which is much lower down in the article) has inclusion criteria above it, these criteria appear to be user-created, not cited to a reliable source.
- Attribute 3b: The list contains information that is inherently not capable of being supported by the references cited to support them, since these references were published before the dates given (in some cases many years before). For example the end-date of the service to London Stansted is given as 2002, but this is cited to a news report published in 1998. The service to Umea is given as having a start-date of 1997 and an end-date of 1999, but this is cited to a report dated 1996. The service to Rome is listed as "non-continuous" (?) and ending in 2002, but this is cited to a book published in 1996. This pattern is repeated over and over throughout the list so listing all the examples would be tedious. Since (some of) these services obviously continued under SAS Braathens it is worth asking whether they really ended in 2004 or whether they continued under SAS Braathens, and if so, which did, and which didn't?
- Attribute 3c: The list largely reproduces prose content from the main article airline article about Braathens, and from History of Braathens SAFE (1946–1993) and History of Braathens (1994–2004). Indeed, it largely repeats the prose content above the list in the same article.
Moreover this list is a massive failure of WP:NOT which expressly forbids providing exhaustive lists of all the services of a commercial enterprise. I understand featured-list review assumes that these issues should be dealt with before something is proposed for listing, and of course standards have improved, but especially the WP:CRYSTALBALL issues mentioned above should have been picked up on even back in 2010. I guess the fact that the citation were foreign-language ones and not accessible via the internet prevented them from looking at them, but even so the publication dates of these news reports are there for everyone to see. FOARP (talk) 08:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Reviewers here may also wish to read the outcome of Wikipedia:Featured_list_removal_candidates/List_of_Cathay_Dragon_destinations/archive1 which dealt with similar content. Whilst the prose-quality and effort expended on this article appears higher, the problem of how the start-end dates of the services listed could not be sourced are essentially the same - the sources in the article were published years before the dates they are supposed to support. FOARP (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Pinging the commenters at the Cathay Dragon discussion for their feedback given that the issues here appear similar even if the prose quality is higher: @PresN, RunningTiger123, Aviator006, Mattximus, and Sun8908:. FOARP (talk) 14:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- And @OhanaUnited: who I missed, apologies. FOARP (talk) 15:19, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Aaaand San who I also missed, apologies again. FOARP (talk) 15:23, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I can't do an in-depth review right now because I only have my phone, not my computer, but at first glance, I think this is in better shape than the Cathay Dragon list (which was gutted after it became an FL). The sourcing and lead at least look better. Still may need to be delisted, though. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:29, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- And @OhanaUnited: who I missed, apologies. FOARP (talk) 15:19, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Pinging the commenters at the Cathay Dragon discussion for their feedback given that the issues here appear similar even if the prose quality is higher: @PresN, RunningTiger123, Aviator006, Mattximus, and Sun8908:. FOARP (talk) 14:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – As per nomination. Idiosincrático (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support for removal per nomination (especially because of false citations). Sanmosa Outdia 22:48, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support for removal per nomination Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 15:08, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been removed, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.