Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/July 2013

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 29 July 2013 (UTC) [1].

---

List of works by Chairil Anwar

Nominator(s):  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:37, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it meets the criteria. Unlike our just featured poet, Amir Hamzah, Chairil was diligent in dating his works. He was less diligent, however, in actually ensuring they were his works: a couple were blatant (and uncredited) translations, which can be seen in the tables. Despite this and his relatively low output, he is credited with essentially revolutionising poetry in Indonesia: he has been called both "Indonesia's greatest literary figure" and "the perfect poet". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:37, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from CassiantoTalk 00:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Minor comments from Cassianto Anwar, a notorious womaniser, died at age 27; several sources suggest syphilis as the cause of his death. – Could we get away with a pronoun at the start of this sentence? Sure, reworked. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Would you be "criticised" for plagerism, or accused of it? It was more or less shown (and that which was caught during Anwar's lifetime was quickly amended), so I wouldn't say "accused" as that implies a chance of being innocent. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Cool thanks. -- CassiantoTalk 00:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Who are Teeuw and Raffel? Fixed Teeuw. Raffel is explained in the first paragraph. So he is, gosh I didn't see that! -- CassiantoTalk 00:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Everything else looks pretty good! -- CassiantoTalk 22:11, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support — Nice work! -- Cassianto^Talk 00:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the review. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:21, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from SchroCat (talk) 07:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments from SchroCat "Anwar's passionate individualism (the line "I want to live another thousand years" from "Aku" is oft-quoted), as the years passed, developed into a feeling of mortality and surrender; ultimately it is difficult, if not impossible, to identify a single theme which unites all of Anwar's work.[7]" This is a big line and it took me a couple of read throughs to get the shape of it. I think it's because of the large bracketed clause in the middle. Perhaps the following (or a variant of it, at least, may serve better? Anwar possessed a passionate individualism, and the line "I want to live another thousand years" from "Aku" is often quoted. As the years passed, this individualism developed into a feeling of mortality and surrender; ultimately it is difficult, if not impossible, to identify a single theme which unites all of Anwar's work.[7]" Alright, used your wording. "highly multi-interpretable". This may well be right, but it sounds and feels wrong: why not lose the "highly"? Okay, done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:21, 21 July 2013 (UTC) Two very minor quibbles, but very nice! - SchroCat (talk) 21:56, 21 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:21, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Support: all good as far as I can see. Another excellent piece. - SchroCat (talk) 07:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 17:48, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Comments – "moved to the capital at Batavia" – remove "at" Sure. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2013 (UTC) "There he began mixing with the local literary scene." – mixing? I think a better term would be "immersing himself in" (or any other term you think is better). Alright, done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2013 (UTC) —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:07, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support – meets FL criteria. Great work! —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:48, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 29 July 2013 (UTC) [2].

---

72nd Academy Awards

Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk) 16:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating the 2000 Oscars for featured list because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I read the requirements and criteria. I also followed how the 1929, 2009, 2010, 2012 Oscars were written. I am still making more updates and changes currently.Birdienest81 (talk) 16:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Support. Great job on prose and visual appeal! SoapFan12 02:13, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support: Looks great, just add (|format=PDF) for ref. 35 – Underneath-it-All (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Done: Added (|format=PDF) for ref. 35

-Birdienest81 (talk) 16:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

• Nothing in the controvery section was actually a controversy, just incidents. Reywas92^Talk 04:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Fixed: I integrated the sections mentioning the missing ballots and stolen Oscars into the Ceremony information. I believe they are still worth mentioning because they happened in the course of the production of the ceremony. As for the Whitney Houston debacle, I removed it because I felt it was more appropriate in the eponymous singer's article.

-Birdienest81 (talk) 17:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support: Looks good to me. Excellent presentation, well done. --smarojit ^HD 02:47, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support. I made two minor changes, but also I found the reference 40 has to be consistant with other LA Times refs. I found no other issues. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:56, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:35, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

* Oppose just because this has so many supports and I found a number of issues.. "During the ceremony, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences presented" you've already abbreviated AMPAS, so use it. "and last hosted the 70th ceremony" -> "and had last..." as he may have hosted it since. Suggest linking Nielsen ratings in the infobox. "Films receiving the most nominations were American Beauty with " -> "American Beauty received the most nominations..." "Award for his directorial debut" I'd say "on" rather than "for". Caravan links to Himalaya (film), why aren't we calling it Himalaya? "Solomon and Gaenor" replace the "and" with an ampersand. Check whole article for en-dash usage (per WP:DASH). Why is Host in bold? "high-definition" is a dab link. "Food-4-Less" isn't hyphenated. "from each other.[40][37]" numerical order for refs please. Ref 33 and 34 are identical, check others. Check ref titles for en-dash infringements. Baltimore Sun is The Baltimore Sun. -The Rambling Man (talk) 18:14, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Fixed: I have fixed most problems with some notations/coments/questions Per se WP:DASH rules. The winners table looks fine with the en dashes (according to Rule 4: separating list items) "Himalaya (Nepal) in Nepalese - Éric Valli"? etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC) References 33 and 34 were on the same page. However, they were pointing to two different facts that so happened to be on the same page. Nevertheless, I changed the references to avoid further confusion. Same page so re-use ref. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC) For the ref-tiles, many of the articles' title were written that way on the website itself. Should it be changed, and how? As I said, ensure compliance with WP:DASH in the titles. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC) -Birdienest81 (talk) 19:43, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Fixed: I fixed everything. -Birdienest81 (talk) 04:45, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 29 July 2013 (UTC) [3].

---

David Niven on screen, stage, radio and in print

Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 09:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

David Niven was quite an extraordinary individual; a talented actor who won an Oscar and a BAFTA, a best-selling author of fiction and non-fiction and a decorated war hero who returned to the UK at the start of the Second World War, despite being advised by the government to stay where he was. He appeared in comedies, dramas, costume work and war films: in all of them he was a suave and debonair character, which matched his character in his private life too. This list has been separated from the main Niven article, and its scope increased to include his extensive television and radio work. SchroCat (talk) 09:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

• Quick comment – This April 1952 issue of Billboard mentions an LP release by Niven entitled The Second Elizabeth, while an issue of Gramophone mentions another release entitled The Magic Orchestra. I've seen similar lists for Terry-Thomas and Peter Sellers incorporate musical releases, so perhaps these could be included in the Niven list? Just a thought. Holiday56 (talk) 13:28, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

• Excellent: the discs didn't come up in the book searches I've done, so I'll add these shortly: many thanks for spotting the listing! - SchroCat (talk) 13:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Support – Well-sourced and accurately represents the scope of his career. Excellent work. Holiday56 (talk) 13:29, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments –

• Television: In the note, the semi-colon before ref 38 should be a period instead.
• The hyphens in the titles of refs 1 and 2 should be en dashes instead for style reasons. Giants2008 (Talk) 20:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

• Cheers Giants: both sorted. - SchroCat (talk) 19:24, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Jimknut (talk) 01:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments - "The British actor David Niven" How about just "British actor David Niven"? Because in British English the definite article should be used - SchroCat (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC) "He made his screen debut as an uncredited extra in the film There Goes the Bride: he went on to appear in nearly a hundred films, the last of which being Curse of the Pink Panther." I would drop the colon after "Bride" and make this into two sentences. I'll swap it to a semi-colon: the two clauses belong in the same sentence - SchroCat (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC) In the radio and television charts the heading of "Channel" should be changed to "Network". No: in British English they are channels, not networks - SchroCat (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC) In the television list "Interviewee" is listed once under "Role" and further down the list it appears under "Notes" This should be made consistant Good spot: now all in the notes section - SchroCat (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC) In the television section Light's Diamond Jubilee (October 24, 1954) has no Network (Channel) listed. Look here. Yep: info split between this and the erroneous '64 entry: now updated - SchroCat (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC) In the television section is "Light's Diamond Jubilee: "The Girls in Their Summer Dresses" (October 10, 1964), ABC, CBS, NBC and DuMont". No such series is listed in the 1964-65 TV schedule, no such series is listed on IMDb, and DuMont went out of business in 1956! Jimknut (talk) 20:26, 12 July 2013 (UTC) Yep, my fault: the jubilee was in '54. Thanks very much for your time and comments: much appreciated! - SchroCat (talk) 21:17, 12 July 2013 (UTC) More comments - How about mentioning at the end of the intro that four of Niven's films (Dodsworth, The Prisoner of Zenda, Wuthering Heights, and The Pink Panther) have been added to the National Film Registry? Also, how about mention at the end of the intro that Niven has two stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame (motion pictures and television)? I've added the stars, but I'm not too convinced of the Film Registry. This list is about Niven and the lead is a very brief summary of the individuals and his career. The registry info is more about the teamwork involved (or a few hundred people) in putting together the film, rather than just being of Niven. On that basis , it looks a little too trivial to add. - SchroCat (talk) 20:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC) In the listings of characters that Niven played some are "linkable" and therefore should be linked (A. J. Raffles, Aaron Burr, Charles Edward Stewart, Phileas Fogg, Robert Lewis Stevenson, etc.). Yep, good spot: now linked - SchroCat (talk) 20:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC) In the "Notes and References" section there is a sub-section called "Notes" but there's nothing in it! Jimknut (talk) 01:50, 13 July 2013 (UTC) Now removed. Thanks again for all your comments. - SchroCat (talk) 20:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Support — Looks good. Jimknut (talk) 01:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks Jimknut - your time and effort here are very welcome and the page looks much stronger now for your work. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:15, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

*Comments from Crisco 1492 was re-commissioned - When was he commissioned? Now added the first occasion - SchroCat (talk) 17:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Standardise images: either all upright or not. You have two different sizes here. None use "upright": the Casino Royale image was a smaller size, but now replaced (see below) - SchroCat (talk) 17:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC) File:David niven in casino royal.jpg Where's the poster? Not sure: the image was uploaded in 2008 and a very quick look shows no posters that I can see using that image. For safety's sake I've swapped it out. - SchroCat (talk) 17:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC) That's it from me. Quite nice — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Many thanks Crisco. Much appreciated, as always. - SchroCat (talk) 17:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support on prose and images. Solid work, as usual. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from CassiantoTalk

Comments Comments from Cass "he made his screen debut as an uncredited extra in the film There Goes the Bride" – The sentence suggests that he played the part of an uncredited extra (which I doubt). Yep: now tweaked - SchroCat (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC) "he went on to appear in nearly a hundred films, the last of which being Curse of the Pink Panther." – when? Or will you be using the " Niven's career spanned from 1932 until 1983" in the previous para? No: now clarified - SchroCat (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Golden Globe will need to be linked on first mention just above. Good spot! - SchroCat (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Bearing in mind we are talking about an actor, the line "...as well as acting as producer on some editions" makes it appear that he was doing just that but on radio. Suggest: "In the latter medium he appeared frequently in the Four Star Playhouse series, as well as producing some editions." Yes, much better: your wording now used - SchroCat (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC) "virulent form of motor neurone disease." – I would have thought motor neurones disease was virulent as it is. I am led to believe that there are some forms which take longer to develop: Niv's was very quick - he was diagnosed in '82 and died in '83. - SchroCat (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC) I have checked the tables, but see no issues. Usual solid stuff! -- CassiantoTalk 18:17, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Many thanks indeed for your comments: all absolutely spot on - SchroCat (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support – Informative stuff as usual! -- Cassianto^Talk 23:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

• Many thanks to both Crisco and Cassianto for their time and effort: as usual it is very much appreciated and the page is much stronger for your inputs. - SchroCat (talk) 08:44, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 10:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC) [4].

---

List of sunken battlecruisers

Nominator(s): Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:54, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

This is a list of all of the battlecruisers that were either sunk by enemy action or scuttled by their own side for various reasons. It includes all those ships originally begun or built as battlecruisers, but were converted into aircraft carriers during the 1920s. Where known surviving relics have been listed, but a surprising number of ship have no relics. The tables are all sortable, alt text has been provided for the images and I believe that it meets the FLC criteria. And, if nothing else, it ought to be a refreshing change from all the sports and pop culture lists that reviewers usually see here.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:54, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Underneath-it-All

;Comments: Add alt text (|alt=) to all images Already present. Much of the introduction is unreferenced. Most of the information isn't discussed in the rest of the article and therefore needs to be sourced. Only part of the first para needs referencing and that's now been done. Everything else is ref'd in the main body. Ref 21: wikilink Imperial War Museum Done. Ref 33: Capitalize Yetdark (is it possible to find the author's real name?) Also flickr.com → Flickr. Yahoo! Inc. Done. Ref 39: British Listed Buildings. http://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk → BritishListedBuildings.co.uk Done. In "References" section: explorers.org → Explorers.org For all PDFs → |format=pdf Done. – Underneath-it-All (talk) 21:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:00, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support – Underneath-it-All (talk) 20:47, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support – Magus732 (talk) 17:05, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support per my comments in the previous review. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

• Comments - mostly nitpicks:
  • Specify what kind of ship Bismarck is.
  • Why is Repulse described as "relatively old" and Hood isn't?
  • Maybe add a topic sentence to the 2nd para in the Losses section?
  • Same for the next para.
  • Specify who owned Akagi
• General disclaimer: I have done some work on this article in the past, including setting up the table format (as seen here). Parsecboy (talk) 13:38, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
  • All done except the topic sentences. None of the following paragraphs have them because they seemed rather redundant when I drafted them earlier. If you have ideas on phrasing or whatever, feel free to add them, but I couldn't come up with anything that sounded intelligent.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:18, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
    • I added one to the scuttling paragraph - how does that read? Also made a few miscellaneous fixes in that section. Please check those. Parsecboy (talk) 13:45, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
      • Looks good; inspired, I added one to the converted paragraph as well and made a few tweaks. See how they read.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:01, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
        • Looks good to me. Moving to Support. Parsecboy (talk) 15:04, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment - I fixed an inline citation someone missed. Magus732 (talk) 17:35, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments –

• In tables with Casualties columns, they are sorting by the first number only, not the entire number. The same is true for the Date sunk columns, though the last table is the only one that really has a problem in this regard. This should be fixed before the list is promoted.
  • I'm not real familiar with sortable tables, but the code for the casualties column matches exactly the example used in WP:SORT, but doesn't do what's it's supposed to. And adding data-sort-type="date" to the date column does nothing, unlike the example in WP:SORT.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
    • Use the sort templates (examples of which can be seen in many statistical FLs) and that should solve your problem. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:15, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
      • Seems kind of stupid that I can't sort numbers or dates without using special tempaltes, but this _is_ Wiki.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:27, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
• Note 1: "Since neither their operators nor a significant number of naval historians did not/do not classify them as such". The "did not/do not" is affecting the meaning in a way that I don't think is intended. Leaving it out indicates that they didn't classify them that way, which I believe is the intention here.
  • Agreed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
• A Flickr photo (ref 34) is not a reliable source for much of anything. Surely something better can be found for this claim? Giants2008 (Talk) 20:32, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Given that the ship's name is on the bell and it's part of an identifiable sequence taken in the memorial, it seems good enough. I can't find any other mention of the bell in a more conventional RS. Thanks for looking this over.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
    • I think that you're being unduly harsh on this cite, but whatever.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:27, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

• Comment The map contains an inaccuracy: Hood was sunk of the South-West of Iceland, not the North coast as shown. I suspect that Australia should also be a few pixels to the north, but it's hardly a big deal. Nick-D (talk) 08:50, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 30 July 2013 (UTC) [5].

---

List of Square Enix mobile games

Nominator(s): PresN 21:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

FLC, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, "I want to see PresN bring more lists of obscure Japanese video games to FLC". Well, I'll meet you halfway, with this List of Square Enix mobile games, the brother article to the more stationary List of Square Enix video games featured list I wrote a while back. Here we can see, in addition to a bunch of obscure Japanese feature-phone games, the point in 2010 where Square Enix realized that they could have hundreds of people work for five years on a massive game, or just have tiny teams churn out title after title for iPhones, release them worldwide, and see what stuck. The lead is based off of the brother FL, the sorts all work, and the references will get archived soon. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 21:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

• Note: A handful of the refs are broken ("not used in prior text"). czar · · 07:39, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

• Whoops, fixed. --PresN 16:18, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support - It passes the featured list criteria; it is seemingly complete, has the game logo, lots of references, and appears comprehensive and well written. I do have a side question, which is how do we know for sure that these are all the games square released on mobile; is there a official list? Or did you just find them all through references in articles? Excellent work as always! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 14:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

• The official list is at here, linked to from the bottom of the page (at least for Japan), though the fun bit is that if you click the links at the top of that page to show only one platform, and the links at the bottom-right of the page, you get somewhat different results. On top of that, there were some games referenced in their old "what's new" blog/list (i.e. [6]) that didn't have listings on the main lists (read: tiny, silly shovelware cell phone games), and of course the actual information given for the games on their websites beyond the name is all over the map, which is why there are so many non-square-enix websites cited in the list. All NA/EU games prior to the iPhone/Android games had press releases that they keep on their NA/EU sites, and there aren't many of them besides, and since then the games are all listed on the official sites in a fairly consistent manner- after all, they charge $5-15 for those, rather than the <$1 for the shovelware ports of 80s PC games. Tl;dr, there's many official lists, and google translate/webarchive is my friend. --PresN 20:50, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

• Comment. I can clearly see how long List of Square Enix video games is, but I'm a bit worried about the fact that both that article and this share almost the exact same lead, and are of a similar topic. Can you convince me why two lists are necessary?  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:11, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

• Besides the fact that both are of ever-increasing length? Well, for one, I think it's a logical breaking point to make a distinction between the $60 AAA games that they spend years making, and the tiny mobile games they spit out- they're different sizes, different price points, different gameplay methodologies, and have different audiences. List of Square Enix video games is at ~350 rows and is constantly increasing, and this list is at ~125 and growing as well. It needs to be split somewhere, and I'd rather do it by game type than by an arbitrary time point. If you feel that the leads are too similar, what would you like to see in the lead for this article instead? --PresN 17:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

SoapFan12 commented here (and then removed the comment) that the links weren't archived; my script that I use for that was broken, but I've gone and fixed it and the links are now all archived. --PresN 19:56, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support: Good job on meeting every single criteria for an FL! SoapFan12 20:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Underneath-it-All

;Comments: Ref 1 + 29: add format=PDF Add CBS Interactive as a publisher to all GamSpot refs Add [[Ziff David|Ziff Davis Inc.]] as publisher to all IGN and 1UP.com refs Refs 20 + 128 → archive section needs to be fixed Ref 145 → add Gamer Network Ltd. as publisher Add [[UBM plc|UBM TechWeb]] as publisher for all Gamasutra refs Refs 147 + 148 need publisher info – Underneath-it-All (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC) All done. --PresN 21:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support – Underneath-it-All (talk) 22:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:25, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments I guess it's initially sorted by release date? In which case it's initially incorrectly sorted because sorting by release date makes a few small changes to the initial ordering. " For those games, see List of Square Enix video games. This list does not include games published by Taito, but does include games published by Square Enix Europe. For games released before the merger, see List of Square video games and List of Enix games. For games released by Taito, both before and after the acquisition, see List of Taito games, and for games published by Eidos prior to acquisition see List of Eidos games." - this is all "See also" territory. Perhaps just state the inclusion criteria of this list and leave the other links to the See also section. When you say "mobile phones" does this mean cross-platform, i.e. including iOS and Android etc? It's not clear. What does PAL region have to do with mobile devices? Particularly when there's no explanation as to what that means. You wikilink System every time, but you don't wikilink Developer(s) every time, why? Ref 120 looks like a missing letter in the title. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:18, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Fixed the couple of sorting errors. Moved those to "For" templates. Specified in the lead that I mean non-smartphone cell phones, as seperate from smartphone OSs like iOS or Android. Japan has/had a big culture of crazy-complicated cell phones that you could buy/download games for, which never caught on outside of the country, though iPhones/Android seems to be slowly wiping that out. Added a sentence to explain it- there may be no television format causing difference between US/EU sales like there is for console games, but there's still a lot of games that just aren't available for sale in in all regions for non-technical reasons. Note that since the PS4/XBone will not be region-locked, going forward PAL will increasingly be a publishing region demarcation like it is for this list, rather than an indicator of technical standards. I didn't redlink developers without an article- I can do it if you'd like. Some developers are linked but only once. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:05, 25 July 2013 (UTC) Looks like it was just Armor Project, fixed. --PresN 04:41, 26 July 2013 (UTC) Fixed. --PresN 17:55, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments by JDC808

• Support - comment addressed. --JDC808 ♫ 17:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
• I was reading through the list and I noticed that some games were listed twice, their only difference being the system. For example, Final Fantasy III, instead of having two rows, since all info is the same except system, couldn't you combine the rows and just put Android/iOS (or Android and iOS) for the system? The only ones I could see being left as two separate rows (or in the case of Chrono Trigger, three), are for example, Chrono Trigger as it has a different release date for the systems. --JDC808 ♫ 15:25, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

• Well, I can't do that, as it messes things up when you sort by system, but what I can do (and just did) is merge two rows together if they're next to each other with the same name with rowspans, which means they break back apart when you sort by something. Is that any better? --PresN 17:02, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

• What you did is actually better than what I was thinking. --JDC808 ♫ 17:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 30 July 2013 (UTC) [7].

---

List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out four batters in one inning

Nominator(s): Bloom6132 (talk) 15:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it has been improved significantly and now meets all 6 FL criteria. Bloom6132 (talk) 15:18, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

*Comments from Crisco 1492 Images are fine (no action required) Under 6.05 and 6.09 of the Official Rules of Major League Baseball, - Missing a part of your subject noun phrase here ("sections 6.05 and 6.09" or whatever) Added "Rules" as per the official rules PDF. Unfortunately, this does sound a bit redundant ("Under Rules...of the Official Rules…). —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:43, 21 June 2013 (UTC) Capital R or miniscule r? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC) The rulebook lists it as capitalized, but it's standalone there (i.e. not in a sentence). So I'm not sure. —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:58, 21 June 2013 (UTC) Page 6 has capital Rs, so good. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC) That's... it. Wow. Very good! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the review! :) —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:43, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support on prose and images. Solid article, good job. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 21:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments – What is meant to be sourcing "Eighteen of these players (including nine active pitchers) have played for only one major league team."? I don't see that in the reference for the sentence after this one. That's strange – that sentence never had to be sourced in the past (per List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out three batters on nine pitches, List of Major League Baseball pitchers with 18 strikeouts in one game, 30–30 club, etc.). It was always implied that their individual BR profiles would suffice as sources. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:31, 27 June 2013 (UTC) But without using the profiles as sources here, we have no way of proving that the statistic is accurate. It's also something that can quickly become outdated as players change teams. I'd recommend adding references to those player pages, or at a minimum a note saying that the statistic comes from Baseball-Reference profiles. I've seen a couple of soccer lists use such notes, and have considered them sufficient. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:06, 27 June 2013 (UTC) Added footnote, but utilized Baseball Almanac instead of BR, since the former is the general ref at the bottom. —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC) Players: In the Innings column, the "in one inning" is quite redundant since it says "The inning in" at the start of the note. Removed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:31, 27 June 2013 (UTC) In the table: Wilson Alvarez isn't sorting properly because of the diacritics in his name. You'll need a sort template to get him sorting in the right order (he should be first). Giants2008 (Talk) 00:22, 27 June 2013 (UTC) Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:37, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support - great list, great prose, my only qualm would be that the picture of A.J. Burnett has a shadow over his face, and consequently it is kind of hard to see, but looking at Commons, it is clearly the best option. Great job! Go Phightins! 21:44, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the review. Yeah, I too would've preferred getting another pic of Burnett, preferably in a Yankees or Marlins uniform (the two teams he was on when he accomplished the feat). —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:03, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:50, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments " no player has ever struck out more than four batters in an inning." is this referenced? It's in the Baseball Almanac general reference at the bottom. This was accepted in recently-promoted FL List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out three batters on nine pitches – no inline ref, just the general one. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Perhaps I missed it that time round. I see no issue with directly citing this, especially now I've done that "challenge the unreferenced claim" thing (albeit inadvertently). The Rambling Man (talk) 20:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC) The reason why I never use direct citations my previous FLs is because there actually isn't any source (not even the Baseball Almanac general ref) that specifically states facts like this one. The absence of a fifth batter (or third grand slam, 21st strikeout, fourth batter on twelfth pitch, etc.) implicitly supports the statement. Also, given that this is the lead, I don't think an inline source is necessary or relevant here, as this sentence is supported by the table's boxscores and refs. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:23, 9 July 2013 (UTC) "Of the 26 players eligible for the Baseball Hall of Fame who have struck out four batters in an inning, four have been elected and two were elected" WP:MOSNUM - for comparable items, use either all numbers or all words. Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:23, 9 July 2013 (UTC) "leave 22 players ineligible who are active, 4 who are living" -> "make 22 active players ineligible, four of whom are alive and..." Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC) "who did not play in ten major league seasons" a couple of sentences back you said "10 major league seasons"... Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Box is actually a Reference to the box isn't it? This is confusing for non-expert readers. No, it's the actual box. That's why I left n/a where the game's box is unavailable, but still provided a ref elsewhere in the row. See Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out three batters on nine pitches/archive1 for the discussion I had with Bagumba about this. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Where are "active" players referenced? In the Baseball Almanac general refs. I had a through discussion in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out three batters on nine pitches/archive1 with Bagumba about this. If you disagree with the referencing he suggested, maybe you two should discuss it. I don't want to keep changing back and forth (like I did last time) because of conflicting recommendations by reviewers. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC) I have no real interest in discussing this with another reviewer, I'm just saying I can't see where the active players are referenced. Perhaps a note to the effect that the active players are referenced by a general ref would be of service to our readers. After all, it's them we should be concerned with. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Ah yes. The active players note does have precedent in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Tip O'Neill Award/archive1. Added. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:23, 9 July 2013 (UTC) Publisher of ref 12 appears to be "National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum". Added. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Why do you need Category:Baseball-related lists if you have the much more refined Category:Major League Baseball lists? Removed category and added another one. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 16:45, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

• Comment The Dagger (†) is probably a bad choice to mark hall of fame members. It's traditionally used to indicate deceased, due to its resemblance to a cross. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 20:25, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• I know it's not that ideal – it was once discussed here. What it boils down to is consistency – daggers have been utilized in almost all baseball FLs. The reason for it is that the asterisk (which is only utilized in older, non-updated FLs) carries an especially negative connotation in the baseball world. It was first popularized during the M&M Boys quest to break Ruth's single-season HR record, and now it's been used for the stats of players suspected of taking performance-enhancing drugs. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

• It may also be worth noting that in cricket, wicketkeepers are denoted with a † (see [http://www.espncricinfo.com/west-indies-v-pakistan-2013/engine/match/645635.html this scorecard for example). It's certainly used in Europe to denote the deceased (I think German Wikipedia use it routinely instead of "died" in biographies), but it's fine here. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Couldn't, say, the Pilcrow ({{Pilcrow}}) be used? or maybe an asterism (⁂)? It'd be much less ambiguous. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 21:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but a dagger is still the most preferable. An asterism might not be accessible to some screen readers. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

That's a good point. I've made an accessible asterism template, Template:Asterism, to match Template:Dagger et al. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 13:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

On a related subject, should the ring (°) have an accessible template, or is that handled by screen readers? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 13:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think either the degree (º) or section (§) symbols are cover by screen readers (basically any symbol that's not in image form). But that's an unfortunate limitation of not having enough symbols in graphics rather than text. That's why I'm still not keen on eliminating the dagger. It is (in my opinion at least) more aesthetically compatible, especially given that the active players symbol (double-dagger) compliment the HOF'ers symbol. Even TRM said the dagger is "fine here" and my thought is to leave well enough alone. But if you insist on an asterism, I'll discuss this with the baseball community first before making any changes. We've been using daggers for HOF players in all lists (even ones without the mustard colour), so this change will have to be discussed and approved of first. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

One other issue. The last sentence of the paragraph of the lead is uncited. Shouldn't it be? Or is all that information in the article? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 21:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

All covered in the general ref at the bottom. Readers can skim through each of the Baseball Almanac bios if they wanted to in order to confirm the statement. This has been done for all my previous 9 baseball FLs (all less than a year old) and has been accepted every time. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Alright. if we sort out the ° accessibility, I'll support. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 13:50, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

And no, it doesn't look like º or § will be sorted out (unless someone can find a way to turn them into graphics). However, this issue has been overlooked in the past, since reviewers understood the limited number of symbols in graphics, and that I did correct the ones that I could (i.e. † and ‡). —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I can do that, if you want. It's not too hard. What should they be called? Ring and Section sign?

Also, would it be worth changing the alt on the symbols, e.g. {{Asterism|alt=Hall of Famer}}, which gives ⁂?Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 16:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Degree symbol and section sign. And thanks for your help! —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

As for my opinion on the asterism, read the long paragraph (a.k.a. "rant") above. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:23, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support - all looks good. Orval Overall, that's a quality name :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 10:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC) [8].

---

1987 Major League Baseball Draft

Nominator(s): Albacore (talk) 15:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

My first article here in quite a while. In this draft, the first overall selection, Ken Griffey, Jr., was a 13-time All-Star, while the second overall selection, Mark Merchant, never played in a Major League Baseball game. Quite the contrast to show the unpredictability of the draft. Albacore (talk) 15:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:17, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments "The 1987 MLB Draft occurred as" -> "took place as". "Chicago White Sox first" -> "Chicago White Sox's first" " In total, 27 All-Stars were drafted, " perhaps reinforce " In total, 27 All-Stars were drafted in 1987, "? Especially as you say "no players from the draft have " in the next sentence. You've already abbreviated National and American League in the lead so no need to do it all over again, just use the abbreviations. "set for June 2–4, and would occur as a conference call to" a 72-hour conference call? Really? " in the June draft; in years past, teams would draft junior college players in a separate draft" draft three times in one sentence. " The 1986 World Series champion New York Mets drafted third-to-last, with the runner-up Boston Red Sox selecting last." ref? I think you should mention in the lead that 1,263 players were drafted in this draft! "Compensation x" shouldn't be in bold, maybe italics? " to 13 All-Star games, won seven" would keep the same number format for comparable items per MOSNUM, so "thirteen ... seven". The suc-box has overcapitalised "1st Overall Picks". The Rambling Man (talk) 17:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC) Fixed all but the hours problem, no refs go into detail about that, but I assume it wasn't a 72 hour draft. I'll see what I can find on the manner. Also, the bold Compensation can't be fixed without changing templates, but I don't feel like this is too big of a problem. Albacore (talk) 14:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 21:03, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments – "Griffey would become a 13-time All-Star...". Wouldn't this be Griffey, Jr. instead? Background: "In the NL, the Pirates finished with league's worst record for the second year in a row...". Needs "the" before "league's". Aftermath: Here we have Griffey Jr, without the period and comma that should probably be there. Note 1: "the" needed after "received". Note 5: "Angles" is used twice in place of the correct Angels. Apostrophes would be useful in notes 1 to 5 for the end of the recipient teams names of the teams that lost the picks. Which newspapers are you getting the articles from in refs 3, 7, and 13? That information should be included in the citations. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC) Fixed all concerns. Albacore (talk) 16:58, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

Comments from Crisco 1492 Major League Baseball Draft - No link? Really? First two sentences have conflicting tenses. MLB draft or MLB Draft? MLB Draft. Albacore (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC) Griffey would become a 13-time All-Star and would help Seattle make its first postseason appearance in franchise history. - Why not "Griffey became a 13-time All-Star and helped Seattle make its first postseason appearance in franchise history. Chicago White Sox's or Chicago White Sox'? Also, don't we usually use "The" in front of team names? Chicago White Sox'. Albacore (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC) The last paragraph of the lead seems to require some citing two years after they drafted him, Merchant no longer played for the organization. - awkward construction. If he was released, just say it. The Pirates made the playoffs for three consecutive seasons from 1990–1992 but lost in the National League Championship Series all three years. - relevance to the topic at hand? It shows how they performed after the 1987 Draft, implying that their picks had some relevance on the three playoff seasons. Albacore (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC) would draft higher. - is this the common term? It makes sense, and I'm not sure there is a "common term". Albacore (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC) If a "type-A" player became a free agent, the team that lost the type-A player would receive the first-round draft pick from the team that signed the player, as well as a "sandwich pick" between the first and second rounds. If the player is a "type-B", the team that lost him would receive a second-round pick from the team that signed the player. - You're mixing tenses again, should all be simple past. Link Winning percentage somewhere The Mariners never had a winning record since the franchise's creation in 1977, -> The Mariners had never had a winning record in the twelve years since the franchise's creation Images look fine, no action required. Otherwise looks fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:04, 7 June 2013 (UTC) I addressed the rest of the comments that I didn't individually respond to. Albacore (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support on prose and images. Good job! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:57, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 14:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments – Replace reflist template with {{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}. This allows the browser to automatically choose the number of columns based on the width of the web browser, thus making it all-encompassing and flexible to all readers. For "General" refs, place {{refbegin}} at the top and {{refend}} at the bottom (see recently-promoted FL List of Major League Baseball pitchers who have struck out three batters on nine pitches for more info on both comments) Everything else looks good —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:37, 18 June 2013 (UTC) Added. Thanks for the review. Albacore (talk) 13:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support – Meets all 6 criteria. Great work, and a fine addition to our baseball community's FLs! —Bloom6132 (talk) 14:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
• Support. Everything looks fine and dandy to me! Great work!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 10:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC) [9].

---

2009 Mediterranean Games medal table

Nominator(s): — Bill william compton^Talk 00:32, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I believe this is a sustainable candidate for featured list. Wikipedia (of any language) has no featured/good article related to Mediterranean Games (please correct me if I'm wrong), the quadrennial games, in which athletes from nations bordering Mediterranean Sea compete in a variety of sports. The 2013 Mediterranean Games are scheduled to be held in Mersin, Turkey from 20 to 30 June 2013. And, I hope it appears on the main page's TFL. Any comments that will help improve the list are welcome. Thanks for your time and efforts! — Bill william compton^Talk 00:32, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 13:36, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments Stick with one lead image. Done Image captions should only have a full stop if the caption is a full sentence. Done Wikilink athlete names in captions. Done "greatest in Mediterranean Games history (equivalent to Tunis 2005)" so it was the same as Tunis? Yes! So sam "the same as", or "equal to", not "equivalent", that's not normal English. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:48, 10 June 2013 (UTC) Done " The total number of female athletes was at an all-time high" ref? Done "three non-Olympic, bocce" -> non-Olympic "events/sports/something". Done "leaving two countries" specify since there are only two. Done "Athens Olympics" could link this. Done "of Italy made a new world " -> "broke the world record"? Done " for the record eleventh" for a record... Done " with 64 gold medals" perhaps just "golds" as you've already said "medal" in this sentence. Done "Host nation" key needs an asterisk. Done — Bill william comptonTalk 03:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC) Sorting by Gold in reverse order completely fritzes the Rank (which should be in reverse order as well, but instead goes 19, 20, 20, 17, 18, 13, 14....) Sorting by Total, Cyprus should be above Bosnia as Cyprus had three golds, Bosnia none, despite have eight medals each. Why the discrepancy in total number of golds, silvers and bronzes? Normally boxing for bronzes, but golds/silvers are typically the same. Done — Bill william comptonTalk 04:46, 7 June 2013 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 16:39, 30 May 2013 (UTC) What's the status of the comments I've made you haven't responded to please? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:48, 10 June 2013 (UTC) I haven't found any viable solution so far. Any ideas? — Bill william comptonTalk 16:31, 13 June 2013 (UTC) I think the solution would be to set a sortkey manually for all tiebreakers. See {{ntsh}}, it is hidden, so for example for the golds set Bosnia to 0.1 and it will sort properly I think. Just do something like that for all ties in each column and it should fix it. CRwikiCA talk 21:32, 14 June 2013 (UTC) Thanks CRwikiCA. Now it's working fine for reverse gold sorting. But for Cyprus and Bosnia, it's working as it's supposed to be. If any two nations are tied, they are listed alphabetically by IOC country code. — Bill william comptonTalk 05:57, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 22:04, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments – Why is Tunis 2005 linking to the 2001 Games? Done Why are there four sports listed after "including three non-Olympic sports"? Due to the special case of golf. I've tried to explain it. Looks better, but the space after the em dash there needs removal. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:09, 15 June 2013 (UTC) Done We have 23 National Olympic Committees, 21 countries with medals, and three countries with no medals. The math isn't adding up here. Done. I messed it up after TRM's comment. Ahh, silly me! "leaving three countries, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Malta and Monaco, without a medal". According to the table they did win medals, just not a gold. This may explain the issue from the previous comment. Done "the" is needed before "100 metres backstroke." Done Images could use alt text. Done — Bill william comptonTalk 16:28, 13 June 2013 (UTC) Medal table: Another "the" needed before "women's 50 m freestyle event of swimming". Done I was a little confused by "in between the swimmers of Italy". Is this supposed to mean "between two swimmers from Italy" or similar? Giants2008 (Talk) 21:22, 9 June 2013 (UTC) Done — Bill william comptonTalk 23:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from CRwikiCA talk 13:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Comments Would you have a reference for the smallest and largest delegation numbers? Done In the Pellegrini photo caption "made a new" --> "broke the" Done The table caption might not be needed. Done — Bill william comptonTalk 05:24, 15 June 2013 (UTC) CRwikiCA talk 22:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Support The point below is no reason for me not to support this candidate. CRwikiCA talk 13:40, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

• One more thing, I see you used a sortkey for the gold row, which works fine now. The silver, bronze and total columns do not always sort properly, you want them to follow the proper tie-breakers as well. CRwikiCA talk 13:50, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Done — Bill william compton^Talk 15:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

That is better, I have some remarks with regards to the tie-breakers you used. For the total column, should the first tie-breaker be number of golds? In that case BIH should be switched with CYP and LBA with MNE. For the bronze column, same issue for the countries with 13 or 6 bronzes, what is the tiebreaker there? And for the silver column for the 9, 4 and 3 counts of silver. Probably the best tie breaker is gold-->silver-->bronze for each column, but alternatives could work too. CRwikiCA talk 16:27, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I've used IOC country code as a tiebreaker: if two countries are tied, they are listed alphabetically, according to their respective IOC code. Do you prefer gold→silver→bronze? — Bill william compton^Talk 19:25, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I think an argument can be made for both, lets see whether anyone else comments on this, otherwise let it be this way. CRwikiCA talk 19:58, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I've never seen those issues raised before because I've never heard anyone expect the sorting to work that way (retaining ranking despite choosing not to sort by rank). If this is desirable then I think would should do a feature request to include the {{ntsh}} template within the {{RankedMedalRow}} template. I think the current solution done here is fine anyhow. By the way, what is the advantage of the current wikitable style over the pre-made {{RankedMedalTable|class=wikitable sortable}}? One disadvantage I can see (on my screen at least) is that your gold/silver/bronze headers don't appear to be sortable at first glance. SFB 19:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

There were some WP:ACCESS issues with the RankMedalTable template during the 2010 Asian Para Games medal table FLC. — Bill william compton^Talk 20:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

These issues were resolved at the time and the template is now suitable for use as it matches the scoping of the current text. Also note that the row scoping on the Asian Para FL has been missing since January 2012. SFB 06:37, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

This doesn't fix the row scoping issue. A visually impaired editor on Hindi Wikipedia says it does help him. If you insist, I'll remove it, but personally I'd weigh accessibility over aesthetics. — Bill william compton^Talk 13:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I will raise this at the template pages as an ongoing issue. If we can take the accessibility lessons learnt in this discussion and bring them to a template with over 5000 transclusions then it will make a big difference. I'm not arguing that you should compromise accessibility - rather the opposite! I also expected you to revert the changes to Asian Para list. (BTW you already have my support anyway). SFB 20:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

• I think all medal table articles should have an image-map showing the participants' best medal. Nergaal (talk) 18:24, 2 July 2013 (UTC)::Image-map like this? — Bill william compton^Talk 14:05, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Nergaal (talk) 18:02, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done — Bill william compton^Talk 18:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

BIH is not colored correctly. Also, since there are so few participants I almost feel like the two 0-0-0 participating countries should be put at the bottom of the table. Nergaal (talk) 08:01, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Also, I don't want to be a party pooper, but most of the intro isn't really about the medal count leaving most of the list with borderline-3.b issues. I would strongly suggest converting this list into something like "medal table and medallists at the 2009 games". Nergaal (talk) 08:10, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the first part of this but not the second. I think the first paragraph could be more generally summarised to tighten the focus. Less relevant information for a medal table is:

1. Pescara being the third Italian city to host
2. Olympic status of sports
3. Introduction of sports (also are the water skiing medals even listed as a demonstration event? If not this should be stated.)

I would also move the medals total sentence into the lead and note that four sports (athletics, swimming, weightlifting, wrestling) accounted for almost half of the total medals awarded. SFB 20:04, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done — Bill william compton^Talk 08:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from SFB 19:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments: Comments from User:Sillyfolkboy I think there should be some discussion about the athletes who won a significant number of medals. It might also be reasonable to state who Malta and Monaco's sole medallists were. Done — Bill william comptonTalk 05:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC) Not essential for the nomination, but there are quite a few missing articles on Template:Events at 2009 Mediterranean Games where medals could be documented. These will be worth working on in future. SFB 21:09, 8 July 2013 (UTC) I think this is a matter of choice, but I'd like others opinions as well: should we be linking to the medal articles (e.g. bronze medal), seeing as medals are the focus of the list? I've seen these types of link removed as overlink on many occasions, but most times I've failed to work out what articles other editors would put the link on. SFB 06:55, 10 July 2013 (UTC) Personally, I'm in favour of this. If no one objects, then, I'll add the links. — Bill william comptonTalk 20:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC) I've gone through the medallists on the website and two other multiple medallists of note were Youna Dufournet (4 golds, 1 silver in gymnastics) and Aschwin Wildeboer Faber (4 golds in swimming). I would add Dufournet to the athlete paragraph and add the four golds to the sentence about Faber. Given the article topic, I think there should be more emphasis on athlete medals than times. You should also state that Mellouli won the most gold medals of any athlete at the games (this is relatively easy to include because the opportunity to win that many golds only existed in five sports - swimming, athletics, gymnastics, bocce and shooting). I would just use the link to the main results page; you have a link to a broader swimming page with links as it is anyway. SFB 18:42, 10 July 2013 (UTC) I was planning to add about other athletes as well (that's why I haven't written Done after your comment). Thanks for your research on medallists. I agree that the article should talk about the top medal winners but Nergaal thinks otherwise, I guess. What do you think of his/her suggestion? — Bill william comptonTalk 20:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC) I do not think it logical to exclude talk of the people who had the greatest impact on the statistics presented. That would be like not discussing Mount Everest on List of countries by highest point. A medal table is a summary of medals that people have won. On the other hand, it would be reasonable to remove discussion of world records set; this is interesting but is only indirectly associated with the medal table. SFB 19:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)  Done — Bill william comptonTalk 05:29, 15 July 2013 (UTC) I've made two minor tweaks (popping the athlete information into its own paragraph and changing one wording from "the nation" to "his nation" for clarity. All done now. SFB 19:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support All my issues resolved. This is ready in my opinion. SFB 19:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Parutakupiu (talk) 22:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments: "from representing 23 National Olympic Committees (NOCs)" Done "NOC", "country" and "nation" are used throughout the page. Try to use as few variants as possible. Done. Removed every usage of "country". "The total number of female athletes was at an all-time high." — Was not the number of male athletes also the highest ever? Hence the same with total number of athletes? No, Bari 1997 had 3,803 athletes but only 804 women participants. Hence, Pescara had something special. Are you sure? Because it's not what is shown here or here. Parutakupiu (talk) 09:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC) I am. 3,803 (2,999 + 804) > 3,368 (2,183 + 1,185), isn't it? — Bill william comptonTalk 17:33, 10 July 2013 (UTC) They've got their figures mixed up - the totals for Bari should be 2195 men, 804 women, 2999 total, otherwise they make no sense. I've emailed them. SFB 17:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC) You're right, I didn't add the figures. "... with 452 athletes for Italy and 391 for Greece athletes, respectively." Done "Andorra sent the smallest delegation ofwith 13 members." Also, I'd merge this sentence with the previous one (using "while" as linker). Done I suggest the following change: "...24 different sports, including three non-Olympic sports (bocce, karate and water skiing) and golf, which has been added to the 2016 Summer Olympics programme." (Notice the parentheses and the programme→program change). Done, but why the "programme" change? I use the British variant. Because you have "program" at the beginning of that same sentence. Choose only one variant. Parutakupiu (talk) 09:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC) Merge the last two sentences of the first lead paragraph. Done "Athletes from 21 countries every participating NOC, except Andorra and Lebanon, won medals, leaving two countries, Andorra and Lebanon, without a medal." Done '"Among the medalling countries NOCs, 18 of them won at least one gold medal." Done I find no need to enumerate the events won by Oussama Mellouli; the important is that he won 5 gold medals. Similarly, remove the reference to the event in which Pellegrini won the silver medal at the 2004 Olympics. Just state what she is: an Olympic silver medalist. Done "Yann Siccardi won the only medal for Monaco at the 2009 Mediterranean Games, a silver in the men's 60 kg event of judo, for Monaco at the 2009 Mediterranean Games." Done In the third paragraph, unlink Tunisia (already linked before). Done "Competitors from France led the silver medal count with 53. France also won, and with 48 golds medals, 39 bronzes medals and a total of 140 medals, finishing finished second on the medal table." Done "... a tie for the second position in between two swimmers from Italy..." Done Image captions should end with a period. Done The map image should be modified: the yellow (or gold) is too aggressive and one can hardly see the country borders with it. Plus, I'd suggest changing the colors of non-participating countries into more neutral non-gray color that can be distinguished from silver. The red circle could also be bigger, or at least increase the map size. Done — Bill william comptonTalk 05:54, 10 July 2013 (UTC) Odd choice of colors, but it does the job. :) Parutakupiu (talk) 09:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC) I didn't find any other suitable combination. Do you have a suggestion? — Bill william comptonTalk 17:33, 10 July 2013 (UTC) The ideal should be to have each medal color, but that previous "gold" looked more like a "bright yellow". Actually, the non-participating countries looked better in gray, but in a lighter shade. Parutakupiu (talk) 19:52, 10 July 2013 (UTC) Done — Bill william comptonTalk 21:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC) The flag of Lybia should reflect the pre-2011 revolution design. Done A navbox showing links to other Mediterranean Games medal table pages would be nice. There's already one for the more recent Games, it's a matter of time until the others are created. Good idea! I'll create and add one when I got the time! Done — Bill william comptonTalk 06:28, 10 July 2013 (UTC) — Parutakupiu (talk) 23:27, 9 July 2013 (UTC) Thank you Parutakupiu for your thorough review. — Bill william comptonTalk 05:36, 10 July 2013 (UTC) I was looking again at the lead and it appears way too long. I then scanned for prose that could be dispensable and I believe that the text going from "The total number of female athletes..." to the end of the first paragraph could be removed without damaging the lead. I mean, this is mostly information that should appear in the 2009 Mediterranean Games. Parutakupiu (talk) 19:52, 10 July 2013 (UTC) Done — Bill william comptonTalk 21:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Support. My issues have been addressed. Parutakupiu (talk) 22:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

• So why are not the three non-medal winners listed at the bottom of the table? Nergaal (talk) 10:02, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

It is not a convention followed by Wikipedia. Other than that, I've no problem in listing those three NOCs. — Bill william compton^Talk 10:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

• The "Medal table" section has one too many images. Other than that, I'm happy to support.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Now there are three, which I hope is ok. — Bill william compton^Talk 10:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 10:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC) [10].

---

List of Detroit Red Wings draft picks

Nominator(s): Rejectwater (talk) 20:35, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it is a super awesome list. It has crawled through the peer review process and come out clean on the other side, as far as I can tell, so this is the next step. I look forward to hearing your input and acting on your recommendations. Thank you. Rejectwater (talk) 20:35, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

• Comment - what does the "year" column relate to? It's not in the key, and as a non-ice hockey fan I can't for the life of me figure out what it means......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:13, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• I think it should be "Round": relating to which round of that year's draft the player was selected in. But I'll let the nominator confirm that. Either way, it should be mentioned in the Key for non-experts. Harrias ^talk 19:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• Ha ha- yes, it should have been "Round". I agree "Year" in that column made no sense whatsover. Thanks. Rejectwater (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• You want "Round" explained in the key? "Draft" and "Pick" as well I presume? I had thought they were self-explanatory, but, as you say, I am intimately familiar with the subject matter. Rejectwater (talk) 11:52, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

• I went ahead and added all three to the key to prevent any possible confusion. Rejectwater (talk) 12:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 21:04, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments – I'm not sure if it's even possible to do this, but it would be better if GAA was sorting by the lowest average, since that is how the statistic is supposed to work. Agreed on both counts. I don't know of any way to reverse sort. Rejectwater (talk) 01:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC) I have found a way to reverse sort the GAA as previously requested. Using the sort template, the sort value is the inverse of the players GAA, ie one divided by the GAA (1/GAA). So 2.01 is sorted as 0.4975, 3.01 is sorted as 0.3322, and so on. Rejectwater (talk) 13:32, 5 June 2013 (UTC) Don't think the link to the main Sports Illustrated site is needed in ref 7. Also, the publisher should be italicized since the article came from a printed publication. Done. Rejectwater (talk) 01:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC) Formatting of Internet Hockey Database refs is inconsistent. Since it's ref 9 that is different than the others, I'd just adjust that one. Good catch, thank you. Done. Rejectwater (talk) 01:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC) Also, should it be National Hockey League or The National Hockey League in the citations? I'd be inclined to go with the former, and the latter is again used just once anyway. Again, thank you. Done. Rejectwater (talk) 01:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC) What makes Eliteprospects.com (ref 11) a reliable source? Giants2008 (Talk) 22:23, 2 June 2013 (UTC) I am not aware of any reason to think that it isn't a reliable source. The three uses of eliteprospects.com are to verify the player's positions. I have not found any other source which lists the position played by the three players in question. Rejectwater (talk) 01:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC) I'll leave this one out for other reviewers to consider. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:04, 4 June 2013 (UTC) It is listed at the Ice Hockey project homepage under the Sources of information section. I imagine it must have been vetted in some manner to be included in that list; at the very least others involved in the maintenance of ice hockey articles consider it a reliable source. Rejectwater (talk) 23:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC) Even professional hockey teams such as Leksands IF uses the site as a reference. See here for an example. Given that example I would say that it most likely is a reliable source.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:25, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Reckless182 (talk) 19:44, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Reckless 182 comments Consider replacing *, ^, † and ‡ with templates that allows for alt text. What I mean is a templates like {{dagger}}, {{double-dagger}}, {{Hash-tag}}, {{Up-arrow}} and {{Down-arrow}}. Alt text can be added to these templates to explain their meaning, like this: {{dagger|alt=Spent entire NHL career with the Red Wings}}. That is a great idea, I am going to do this. Thank you. Rejectwater (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2013 (UTC) Done. I like this as an accessibility upgrade.Rejectwater (talk) 13:03, 5 June 2013 (UTC) I'm not really sure about the usage of flags and wikilinks for player nationality. I would simply write out the name of the country and remove all flags and links. I see what you're saying, however this is how every page in the series "List of NHL draft picks" does it. Some only use flags but that's a little too easter eggish for my taste. Where the player is from has been and continues to be a big deal in the NHL. Rejectwater (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2013 (UTC) I see. I just think it looks a bit like overlinking. In an ordinary article nations are never linked since it is understood that most readers don't need the link to understand the context of the article. Also, linking Canada and USA over a 100 times doesn't really serves any purpose. I would at least considering removing all multiple links and just keeping the first instances.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:18, 5 June 2013 (UTC) It's a sortable table, so if one is linked they all have to be linked. Certainly I can understand not linking them at all, but I will leave this for other reviewers to provide input on if they so choose. For now I am going to stick with the project standard as I understand it. Rejectwater (talk) 13:03, 5 June 2013 (UTC) Having looked at this again, I agree it is overlinking. The overlinking page lists this exact sort of thing as something that should not be linked: "the names of major geographic features and locations". I cannot think of a good reason why these links should be left as they are. Rejectwater (talk) 17:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC) Glad that we are in agreement. I'll mark these comments as resolved after you've made the changes. Good work! --Reckless182 (talk) 19:16, 6 June 2013 (UTC) Done. Rejectwater (talk) 19:40, 6 June 2013 (UTC) I don't see any other problems! Really nice work! --Reckless182 (talk) 09:31, 5 June 2013 (UTC) Thank you. Rejectwater (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments

• "are a ... team" followed by "The team is..." reads a little odd to me.

• Yes, interesting. Is the Detroit Red Wings plural? Or are the team singular? I went with "are". Rejectwater (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Link NHL Entry Draft first time round.

• Done. Rejectwater (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• I don't know what a "penalty minute" is.

• In the lead I have changed "penalty minutes" to "penalties in minutes" to match it's usage in the key and have added links for goals, assists, points, and penalties in minutes. Rejectwater (talk) 15:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

• Please ensure all tables, including key tables, comply with MOS:DTT.

• I have rewritten the key tables and modified the main table to comply with MOS:DTT, as far as my current understanding of it. Rejectwater (talk) 15:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

• You had commas in the "thousands" in the lead, e.g. 1,227 but not in the table, any reason for the inconsistency?

• No, there was no reason. Went with no comma. Rejectwater (talk) 15:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

• Ref should be Ref(s).

• Done. Rejectwater (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Where are the players that have nothing in the Ref column referenced?

• Reference 8 covers Draft, Round, Pick, Player, Nationality, and Position. Reference 9 covers Draft, Round, Pick, Player, Postion, Games Played, Goals, Assists, Points, and Penalties in Minutes. Each of these column headers has a link or links to these references as appropriate. References in the "Refs" column cover Wins, Losses, Ties, Overtime Losses, Goals Against Average, Played at least one game with the Red Wings, Spent entire NHL career with the Red Wings, Inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame, and/or Number retired by the Red Wings specifically for each player as necessary. Rejectwater (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Refs 4, 5, 8, 11, 128, 131.... etc need to use en-dash in the titles.

• Done. Rejectwater (talk) 15:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:13, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support. Exhaustive list, well researched & organized. Seems to make improvements on other team draft pick FLs in WP:Hockey. My only minor complaint is no pictures, but I guess due to width that had to be sacrificed. Anthony (talk) 13:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, there used to be quite a few pictures, but they made the page clunky due to the width of the table. Thank you for your kind words and support. Regards, Rejectwater (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support: Good job on meeting every single criteria for an FL! SoapFan12 20:24, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you for your support. Rejectwater (talk) 00:40, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support - all looks OK. Humblest apologies for forgetting to return after commenting earlier -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• No worries, thank you for your input and your support. Rejectwater (talk) 00:40, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 10:01, 25 July 2013 (UTC) [11].

---

Latin Grammy Award for Best Rock Solo Vocal Album

Nominator(s): — ΛΧΣ²¹ 19:36, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

The Latin Grammy Award for Best Rock Solo Vocal Album is an honor presented annually at the Latin Grammy Awards, a ceremony conducted by the Latin Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences to "recognize excellence and create a wider awareness of the cultural diversity" and contributions of Latin recording artists in the United States and internationally. After some time working on it, I think it's ready to be nominated. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 19:36, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from DivaKnockouts 14:11, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments by DivaKnockouts I'm using Firefox, and the two bottom pictures overlap into the reference section of the table. "The award was first presented at the 2nd Latin Grammy Awards, since the previous year in the rock field the categories were separated by gender, ensembles and an additional award for Best Rock Album." — This sound way too confusing. Reword? Shouldn't it be noted in the lead that 2009 was the last year it was given? FN6 — Need publisher (Freedom Communications) FN7 — No italics to About.com per WP:CITEHOW Be consistent if you link Latin Grammy Awards or not. (Compare FN1 and FN9, FN13, FN16) All the references check out OK. — DivaKnockouts 17:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support — DivaKnockouts 14:11, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

  Thank you! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 16:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

Comments from Crisco 1492 In 2009, the award was given to Draco Rosa for the album Teatro. - Why is this worth mentioning in the lead? Because he was the last person to be awarded (as of 2013). Citation needed tag added. Removed the text and added it to Rosa's line. It doesn't need a cn tag, since we are in 2013 and the award was replaced by two others (iirc). No indication that File:Juanes-live-02 edit.jpg is free. Suggest changing. Removed. I've copyedited. Be sure to check. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:51, 2 June 2013 (UTC) Thanks! — ΛΧΣ21 02:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support on prose and images. Good job guys! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

  Thank you! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 16:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 11:54, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments "is an honor presented" surely "was" as it's no longer presented. "The award is given to the" similarly. As an outsider, I don't know how to compare "the 2nd Latin Grammy Awards" with "the Latin Grammy Awards of 2010". I would expand the "Alejandra Guzmán" caption to be mildly interesting. Okay, given my first two comments, this list really needs some information as to why the award hasn't been presented since 2009, it's really odd. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:37, 15 June 2013 (UTC) Fixed all. No idea why they decided to withdraw the category. It was replaced by two new rock awards, but the academy didn't send any official note about this one. It just didn't appear anymore. — ΛΧΣ21 20:00, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support. Everything looks A-OK to me!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 07:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment: Archive all online sources with webcitation.org. You can use this page (step-by-step instructions there) to manually archive all online references which will guarantee they remain accessible even if the site goes down. After this has been resolved, I would be happy to support! SoapFan12 11:21, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I know how to archive, thanks :) And I don't think that it's needed given that these references (the unarchived ones, as you may notice some are indeed archived) will not become dead links anytime soon. Anyways, I may archive them in the future. Cheers. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 16:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok. It's a sugestion you do not needed to archive them. Therfore I am giving my Support! Good job on meeting every single criteria! SoapFan12 16:46, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I know it's not a requirement, but thank you for the suggestion! and for the support :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 18:52, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 10:01, 25 July 2013 (UTC) [12].

---

Timeline of the 2012 Atlantic hurricane season

Nominator(s): TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 21:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

The 2012 Atlantic hurricane season was the third most active season in recorded history, for the third year in a row. While impact during the season was widespread...from Isaac hitting the Yucatan, Nadine playing tango with the Azores, and Leslie affecting Newfoundland...the two storms that will be remembered the most are hurricanes Isaac and Sandy. Collectively, the two storms resulted in over 300 deaths and nearly $80 billion in damage; over three-fourths of both of these totals was a result of Hurricane (or Superstorm) Sandy, the second-costliest hurricane in recorded history. Having been through this process before, I feel this timeline now satisfies the requirements of a featured list. Thanks in advance for any comments! TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 21:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from --12george1 (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments "Though the season officially began on June 1 and ended on November 30, dates which conventionally delimit the period of each year when most tropical cyclones develop in the Atlantic basin,[2] two storms – Alberto and Beryl – developed before the official start, on May 19 and May 26, respectively; this was the first such occurrence since 1908." - That is a rather long sentence. It starts with the season dates, talks about how they delimited when most TC develop, mentions Alberto and Beryl, as well as their dates of formation, and then indicates that it was a record. Maybe split the two sentences like this: "The season officially began on June 1 and ended on November 30, dates which conventionally delimit the period of each year when most tropical cyclones develop in the Atlantic basin.[2] However, two storms – Alberto and Beryl – developed before the official start, on May 19 and May 26, respectively; this was the first such occurrence since 1908." ✗ Not done - The semicolon was meant to show a pause similar to a period/new sentence. No reason to change IMO. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC) "in late October, causing over $75 billion (2012 USD) in damage and 285 fatalities" - Wikilink USD to United States dollar  Done. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC) I noticed that you use nmi (nautical miles) throughout the article. Not sure if there was a discussion about this or it is just a rule of thumb, but WPTC articles apparently shouldn't use units like nautical miles or knots. I've not seen any objection to this in other articles I wrote. If you find the discussion, link me please. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC) "0600 UTC (2:00 a.m. AST) – Tropical Storm Florence weakens to a tropical depression." - [Citation needed]  Done. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC) "Hurricane Sandy intensifies into a Category 3 hurricane and simultaneously its second landfall roughly" - I believe you are missing a word here.  Done - Was missing "makes". Thanks for noticing. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC) I see you are using middle initials for the author names. Robbie Berg's middle initial is "J." according to Hurricane Sandy's Tropical Cyclone Report. Added. Thanks for finding that for me. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC) If these issues are fixed or addressed adequately, I will support this nomination.--12george1 (talk) 04:34, 12 May 2013 (UTC) That should be it. Thanks for the review. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 16:24, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments Lead image could be larger, and should be so we can make out the details of the various tracks. It's at 250px, which is the normal for those images. Will a slight increase to 300px work? TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 15:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC) 300px is allowable for a lead image, particularly when it's as unclear as this image. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC) "third-most number of" not sure "number of" is actually necessary here. Removed. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) "this was the first such occurrence " this being that two storms formed before or should it be "these being the first such occurences.."? The former. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 15:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC) "since 1908." I would prefer "since the 1908 season" to avoid the Easter egg-linked year. Fixed. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 15:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC) "but only two" why "but only"? The average is 3, and the two that intensified major hurricanes collectively remained at that intensity for less than a day. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 15:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC) "Though storm impact during the season was widespread and ruinous, the most significant ..." this "Though..." start doesn't make much sense to me. You could have the sentence as "Storm impact during the season was widespread and ruinous, with the most significant ..." Changed. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 15:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC) "the Bahamas" -> "The Bahamas". I'm referring to the island chain and not a country within, so if I'm not it shouldn't be capitalized. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 15:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 16:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support good job TAWX14. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane}

TropicalAnalystwx13, any chance you could gather some more reviewers from the various hurricane or storm projects to review this further, to prevent it from stalling? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:52, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

FTR, we are a bit short on editors at the moment. Two of are most active contributors these past few months, one is busy, and the other is on vacation. This FLC is not the one one being stalled, the FLC quite a bit below this has been around even longer not to mention that we recntly had a FAC fail due to lack of comments, 3 GTC's (2 of which have been open for quite some time, thanks for your support on two of them, BTW), I also have many unreviewd GAN's. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 15:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw the backlog at GAN, 400-odd articles waiting, goodness me. Ok, well sorry, I'm sure you understand the situation, we'll just have to sit on this nom for a while and hope more people come by and express comments or support. Not much more we can than that I suppose...? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

• I think the list is fine, but perhaps putting it in a table would make such articles less dry? Nergaal (talk) 04:45, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

• Comment Since I mainly deal with imagery within the Wikiproject, there are a few things that I'd like to point out. Firstly, the trackmap of the article could be a little larger to suit readers' needs. At this scale, it is quite blurry and thus difficult to pinpoint out storms. Secondly, the images on the right hand are almost a identical copy from the season and storm articles, which is a little redundant and not quite suitable to a timeline article. I can get some images better suited to the timeline and work out complementary captions similar to Timeline of the 2013 Pacific hurricane season. In addition, it would be nice to have more links in the "see also" section, which it is currently lacking. Overall, this article is in great shape and I believe it could easily become a featured list. - HurricaneSpin (Talk) 18:57, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Sure. We can work to get it sorted out elsewhere. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 02:03, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
    • It has been a while and I would still like to see these points taken into consideration. It shouldn't take too much time to get some more links in the see also section. - HurricaneSpin (Talk) 18:34, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
      • With all the supports this is getting, this might be the last issue that needs to get sorted out prior to promotion. Try to work towards it when you've got time. - HurricaneSpin (Talk) 15:56, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments Comments "A Category 1 on the Saffir–Simpson hurricane wind scale, Isaac was a large system that moved ashore the coast of Louisiana on August 12, resulting in 41 deaths." – the wording here is misleading. It leads the reader to believe that it caused 41 fatalities in Louisiana, which is not the case. "The system slammed into the southern coast of New Jersey as an extratropical cyclone in late October, causing over $75 billion (2012 USD) in damage and 285 fatalities throughout the East Coast." – again, misleading statements. Roughly half of the stated fatalities are not in the United States. Personally I'm not a fan of using "slammed" in an encyclopedic context, but that might just be me. Details on the impact of the storms needs sourcing "Tropical Depression One develops from an area of low pressure offshore the North Carolina–South Carolina border." – "Tropical Depression One" never existed in 2012. Alberto was initiated as a tropical storm. "Tropical Depression One intensifies into Tropical Storm Alberto." – reword to reflect changes to previous line "Tropical Storm Alberto degenerates into a non-convective remnant area of low pressure a few hundred miles north of Bermuda" – direction is wrong and please provide a more definitive distance "Subtropical Storm Beryl completes its transition into a tropical storm." – Text never indicated it started a transition to begin with, so the wording isn't proper here. "Tropical Depression Beryl regains tropical storm intensity." – A location would be useful here "Subtropical Storm Chris develops from an area of low pressure roughly 450 mi (720 km) north-northeast of Bermuda." – "Subtropical Storm Chris" never existed in 2012. Chris was initiated as a tropical storm. Please correct subsequent lines to match changes here "Tropical Storm Debby attains its peak intensity with winds of 65 mph (100 km/h)." and "Tropical Storm Debby attains its peak intensity with a minimum barometric pressure of 990 mbar (hPa; 29.23 inHg)." – Don't use peak intensity twice for this. Just state one as maximum winds and the other as minimum pressure. Add a line for when Tropical Storm Ernesto crossed the Windward Islands and entered the Caribbean Sea "Hurricane Ernesto makes its first landfall on Cayo Norte in Banco Chinchorro, with winds of 90 mph (150 km/h)." – Add the country Add when Ernesto emerged into the Gulf of Mexico Add when Tropical Storm Isaac crossed the Windward Islands and entered the Caribbean Sea Add when Tropical Storm Isaac emerged into the Gulf of Mexico "Tropical Storm Michael degenerates into a non-convective remnant area of low pressure." – Since there are so few reference points of where Michael actually is, add one for when it degenerates Add when Tropical Storm Rafael moved through the Leeward Islands and moved over the Atlantic Ocean Add when Sandy finishes crossing Cuba Bunch of minor changes and additions. Should be relatively easy to patch up. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:01, 9 July 2013 (UTC) Fixed the issues with the wording and sourced all the information. As for the locations you requested, none at those particular times were listed in the National Hurricane Center's TCR. Also, is it really necessary to add when the storms entered particular regions of the basin? Seems unnecessary to me. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 02:03, 11 July 2013 (UTC) For distances, you can use something like Google Earth for a simple calculation. It's a tool that everyone can access and verify the information with. As for the region requests, it helps the reader keep track of where a particular storm is, especially if they move back over water. To get times for these, you can simply provide a range (the points before and after it emerged back over water) if the NHC does not provide a specific time. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 12:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC) Everything should be good now. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 18:56, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

• All good from my view now. Happy to support this. Nice work TA. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment: Archive all online sources with webcitation.org. You can use this page (step-by-step instructions there) to manually archive all online references which will guarantee they remain accessible even if the site goes down. After this has been resolved, I would be happy to support! SoapFan12 11:13, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to note that NOAA sources are always stable so there's no real need to webcite them. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 11:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I disagree, I do understand where you are coming from but you never know if NOAA goes down, the source won't be available anymore. Therefore, I think it is very needed to webcite them. SoapFan12 11:48, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Trust me, NOAA is not going down anytime soon. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 15:47, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Well guess I will have support! *Support: Good job on meeting every single FL criteria. SoapFan12 16:04, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Sucks that this has been at FLC for so long. Here's another support for ya; I hope it helps. Great job on the article!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 03:54, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [13].

---

List of international cricket centuries by Mark Waugh

Nominator(s): —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 14:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

One more cricket list, this time related to the "Junior". Look forward to your comments and suggestions. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 14:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 06:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments "Described by John ... his captaincy of his brother" --> "Described by John Pollack as "one of the world's most elegant and gifted strokemakers",[1] he played most of his career under his the captaincy of his elder twin-brother Steve Waugh." My bad, fixed —Vensatry (Ping me) 14:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC) The Gabba Brisbane --> The Gabba, Brisbane Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 14:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC) "Waugh was primarily ... onto number four in Tests." - Ref needed. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 14:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC) The spelling of Polack is incorrect in the lead. Fixed —Vensatry (Ping me) 14:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC) Are you sure John Pollack is the same person? De-linked as am not sure —Vensatry (Ping me) 14:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC) The flag of South Africa was different before 27 April 1994. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 07:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC) Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 14:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 06:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments –

• For those of us who don't know all the major cricket events by heart, a link to Frank Worrel Trophy would be helpful. I notice that that article doesn't have the hyphen in the middle; that might be worth checking.
• I don't think the comma after "Waugh's highest score of 153 not out" is needed.
• Note 3: In British English, is it okay to have "over all" be two words? Giants2008 (Talk) 21:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
  • All done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 05:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:10, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments I would prefer to see you say he was a former Australian international cricketer, not link to cricket in Australia but to Cricket Australia. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) "by John Polack as" who he? i.e. why is what he said worth listening to? Replaced with ESPNcricinfo writer John Polack —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) "Waugh represented Australia" re-iterate Mark here, the last Waugh you mentioned was Steve. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) "He was primarily a batsman who played as an opening batsman in ODIs while switching onto number four in" - repetitive use of "batsman" and he didn't "switch onto", he just played at four. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) "to perform the feat" unclear what the feat is as you've got an easter egg link to the centuries on Test debut article. Consider re-wording to make it clear. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) " was instrumental in" says who? It's well explained in the source. Added another source. —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC) "Waugh was instrumental in Australia's victory in the 1995 Frank Worrell Trophy against West Indies when he made 126.[1] Waugh's " Waugh.. Waugh... mix it up a little. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) "victory in the 1995 Frank Worrell Trophy against West Indies" to an outsider, it's unclear, is this a one-off match? A final of a tournament? Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) "it was only after four years he scored his first century. " -> "he did not score his first century until four years later, scoring blah against blah at blah"? Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) You haven't explained what "133*" means to a non-expert in the lead, stick with prose if I were you. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) "Despite having a slow start" no need for "having". Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) "against West Indies at the Melbourne in " I assume you mean at the MCG? Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) Lead caption, shouldn't that be "third-highest"? Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) Considering he scored four of the Test centuries not batting a number four, you may wish to make that lead comment more ambiguous, i.e. normally batting at number four. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) Test century 15, "3 /3" remove the space. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) Normally we see the balls received in ODI century tables, don't we? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:34, 26 May 2013 (UTC) I don't see that in most lists. Is that a requirement? —Vensatry (Ping me) 09:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) No, it's not a requirement. I had a quick random sample of four FLs, 1 did have balls, 3 didn't. It's not so important as you've got strike rate in any case. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:56, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments

• Not a big deal and you can even ignore this : "Following his performances, Wisden Cricketers' Almanack named him as one of their five Cricketers of the Year the same year" - From http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/154431.html , the WCY was given for his batting in the 1990 English season and the article was written before he made his Test debut. Tintin 12:18, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
  • You're right. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 06:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
• MoMs include - 113* in SA 1993-4, 116 in SA, 1996-7 - I haven't checked everything, sampled only a few familiar ones. Tintin 12:18, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 06:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Zia Khan 23:26, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments — Test matches and One Day International (ODI) matches organised by the International Cricket Council (ICC). Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 11:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC) Waugh made his Test cricket debut against England.... Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 11:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC) Link West Indies at 1st instance Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 11:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC) As of May → As of July Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 11:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC) Still to be done in the 2nd para! Zia Khan 21:54, 7 July 2013 (UTC) Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 13:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Score for the Test centuries # 5 and 10 should sort in the reverse order i.e he scored century # 5 earlier so it should be placed earlier when sorting in ascending order. I guess that's not mandatory. It would be meaningful if we sort that column based on the "strike rate". In this case we don't have that column. —Vensatry (Ping me) 11:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC) No SR than it should be sorted secondarily to "Date" column!? Zia Khan 21:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC) Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 13:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Same for the centuries # 11 and 12 in the ODI list. Sorts based on strike rate. —Vensatry (Ping me) 11:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC) Agreed. Zia Khan 21:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC) Would be bettter to enlarge the ground's image. Done —Vensatry (Ping me) 11:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC) Zia Khan 20:06, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support — Meets FL standard! Zia Khan 23:26, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [14].

---

List of awards and nominations received by Romeo Santos

Nominator(s): Erick (talk) 04:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC), DivaKnockouts (talk · contribs)

I am nominating this for featured list because this is my first FL nomination and this was done as a collaboration between me and DivaKnockouts. Erick (talk) 04:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments

• I believe it is critical to link Dominican bachata to Music of Dominican Republic and other music genres such as hip-hop and R&B
• For the sale figure for Aventura, is that as of now?
• Billboard needs to be italicized
• There is overlinking found in the article body (e.g; "You" is linked twice; once in Billboard Latin Music Award and the ASCAP Awards)

That is all for now. Best, jona^{talk to me} 14:03, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

All done! Thanks for the comments AJona! — DivaKnockouts 15:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Still seeing overlinking ("Promise"). Best, jona^{talk to me} 16:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. — DivaKnockouts 16:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Now supporting. Great job you guys! Best, jona^{talk to me} 17:23, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:35, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments "and as of 2011" we're nearly half-way through 2013, is there an update for this? Not that I could find :( "United States. Romeo Santos has " -> no need for Romeo. "Santos has received two awards from twenty-one nominations" infobox says 3 from 21, and you may wish to note that some are pending and provide info as to when that will be resolved. "Santos has received one award from thirteen nominations" infobox says 1 from 10, table here says 1 from 10... Ref 8, last title needs en-dashes, not hyphens. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 May 2013 (UTC) Done, see anything else? — DivaKnockouts 01:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Support. Great job as always. Javier Espinoza (talk) 18:35, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:30, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [15].

---

List of international cricket centuries by Hashim Amla

Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk), Zia Khan 21:46, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

One of the finest batsman in the recent cricket, Hashim Amla has played some memorable innings during his career. I worked on his centurys' list and now I think the list is ready to enter the FL status. Pleasure having a co-nominator like The Rambling Man. Looking forward to comments and suggeations Zia Khan 21:46, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments –

• In the first sentence there should be a "the" before South Africa.
• In the lead photo's alt text, should "beard man" be "bearded man"? Giants2008 (Talk) 21:15, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Fixed both, thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:20, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from —Vensatry (Ping me) 05:00, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments "Hashim Amla has scored 28 centuries for South Africa" -> 30 centuries Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Consider including he inside quotes as it's found in the source. Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC) His score of 311 not out, against England at The Oval, London in 2012, is the highest total and the only triple century by a South African batsman in Test cricket -> Use either "highest total" or "only triple century", not both. Don't understand, you want the whole sentence removed? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Nothing, looks fine. —Vensatry (Ping me) Successive sentences in the second para start with "Amla". Rephrase them Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC) making five against them Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Too many he/his in the last para Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 6 May 2013 (UTC) all formats of the game combined.[21][n 1] -> Remove ref #21 as the FN contains the same ref. Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Ref #5 needs author Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Check the ref titles for each and every ref; the title for ref #14 reads "Records – Test matches – Most hundreds in a career for England", it should be SAF isn't it? and also the title for ref #37 says "Sri Lanka in England Test Series – 2nd Test". Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Century #11 is 118* Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC) (Pos, Inn) for his 18th hundred is (2,2) Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC) He did not win MoM award for his 140 against India. Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Not done —Vensatry (Ping me) 16:50, 7 May 2013 (UTC) Fixed! Zia Khan 23:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC) Balls for his fifth ODI ton is 103 Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Date for his third ODI ton is 30 May 2010 Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Matches for which the result was determined using "Duckworth–Lewis method" must be noted Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:46, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Secondary sort needed for Runs in the ODI table Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Not done. For same scores the ones with better strike rates should appear first while sorting by descending order. —Vensatry (Ping me) 16:50, 7 May 2013 (UTC) Fixed now! Zia Khan 23:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC) —Vensatry (Ping me) 17:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC) Unless noted, all comments addressed, thanks for your time Vensatry, please let us know if there's anything else (or anything here we haven't dealt with). The Rambling Man (talk) 19:28, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 05:00, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Crisco 1492

• Images look fine (no action required).
• Former England captain Geoffrey Boycott - Three blue links together? You may confuse the readers. I suggest delinking "captain".
• I've copyedited. Be sure to check. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Done, thank you. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support on prose and images. Good job, both of you. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:24, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• "As of April 2013, Amla is thirtieth in the list of century-makers in international cricket, all formats of the game combined" - Stats like this will go out of date very quickly.Tintin 13:46, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• Hence the {{as of}} template. Such statements are standard for lists of centuries and the editors seem to keep the articles fairly up to date. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:48, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• Ok, if people keep it up to date, fine. Otherwise, little point in still saying in Jan 2015 that Amla was No.30 in April 2013. Tintin 13:51, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, it'll be kept up to date. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• RM, on looking around some other similar articles, this one seems to be more volatile than everything else. For eg, KP's article lists only the runs and number of Tests; Kallis' has his rank among South Africans. They won't change as quickly as this one. Amla is on 30 with Clarke, Cook and de Villiers. Until Amla reach 40+ centuries, this rank is probably going to change every month. Can you please consider a more stable variation. Tintin 02:35, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

• Well I'm not fussed. If you wish to remove "April" then please feel free to do so. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments from The-Pope

• I know it's "the standard" style on most of these sporting lists, but I still think that the giant Key table shouldn't be as big, or before the table of actual data. Surely we can find a variation so that you don't need to scroll down so far to see the actual list? The-Pope (talk) 14:41, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• Happy to consider suggestions, but as you say, it's "standard" across most, if not all of these featured lists. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

• Standard doesn't mean best. How about moving it below the tables, not before it, (above the notes/refs) and making it 2 column (4 column) like this:

Key

Symbol	Meaning	Symbol	Meaning
*	Remained not out	H/A/N	Venue was at home (South Africa), away or neutral
†	Man of the match	Date	Date the match was held, or the starting date of match for Test matches
Balls	Balls faced	Lost	The match was lost by South Africa.
Pos.	Position in the batting order	Won	The match was won by South Africa.
Inn.	The innings of the match	Drawn	The match was drawn.
Test	The number of the Test match played in that series	(D/L)	The match was decided using the Duckworth–Lewis method.
S/R	Strike rate during the innings

Sorry I don't understand how scope= works, so I've converted it to standard tables, but sure this or smaller is better? The-Pope (talk) 08:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Not bad, but really don't like the blank cell at the bottom right of the table. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:22, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

By which I mean it's not an improvement (in my opinion) on what we already have. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:33, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:30, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [16].

---

List of North Carolina Tar Heels in the NBA Draft

Nominator(s): Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 20:10, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that I have done enough for this article to get it to be featured. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 20:10, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments –

• In the first paragraph, I see a lot of repetitions of "draft" and such. "A Tar Heel has been drafted first overall in the draft two times in the history of the draft" is the most glaring example, but there are others.
• "the American Basketball Association held it own draft." "it" → "its". Giants2008 (Talk) 16:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

• I believe I have addressed all the issues you outlined. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 20:24, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from —Bagumba (talk) 07:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

*Statement in the lead can become WP:DATED, e.g. "most recent", the draft stats quoted. Use {{As of}} of equivalent text. The table should be made sortable. The ref to the North Carolina media guide should list the relevant page numbers. —Bagumba (talk) 19:53, 19 May 2013 (UTC) Fixed all the issues here. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 21:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC) Instead of "As of 28 June 2012", it would be more relevant to date the stats by which draft year was included, e.g. "though the 2012 draft".—Bagumba (talk) 09:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC) There are other stats listed before the "as of" that dont mention when the numbers were taken, e.g. the "first overall" picks, teams that have never picked a Tar Hell, etc.—Bagumba (talk) 09:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC) Now I believe I have fixed these issues. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 15:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC) Is the ABA Draft included in the list? It's not clear.—Bagumba (talk) 09:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC) How can I make it clearer? Because the article's title says NBA draft, as does the table title with the player selections? If I had the ABA draftees in there, then I would have the title of the table be ".. in the ABA/NBA Drafts". Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 15:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC) For 1948, the list includes players from the 1948 BAA Draft, before BAA was NBA. Note that the article name doesnt rule out that leagues that merged into the NBA are not included. WP:LISTNAME says, "The title is not expected to contain a complete description of the list's subject ... Instead, the detailed criteria for inclusion should be described in the lead, and a reasonably concise title should be chosen for the list." I'm not saying ABA has to be included, but it's unclear from the lead and the fact that BAA is included.—Bagumba (talk) 08:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC) Now I see what you're saying. I can add the ABA draftees just to make everything squared away. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 15:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC) All right, well I've added the ABA draftees. So is everything looking good now?Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 16:07, 6 June 2013 (UTC) Aesthetically, putting "BAA" and "ABA" in the years column doesn't look elegant, and many of the ABA players are repeated from the NBA draft. Perhaps the page should have a second list for other drafts like the BAA/ABA, and this second list can have a new column next to year that lists the league i.e. BAA or ABA.—Bagumba (talk) 06:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC) That to your satisfaction? Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 04:05, 22 June 2013 (UTC) OK. I only eyeballed the overall article, so I dont have an inclination either way on the FL. I'll cap my comments.—Bagumba (talk) 07:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments quick run through... Lead seems a little muddled, your second sentence talks about a guy who was drafted twice, but we have to wait until para 2 before you even explain what the draft is... Link franchise the first time. "the Basketball Association of America (BAA). The Basketball Association of America " if you abbreviate, use the abbreviation. "which has happened on two occasions" -> "which has happened twice". " is five, in 1980. Five Tar Heels have" reads really poorly... "was drafted 1st overall" first. "Marvin Williams was drafted 2nd overall " second. For these prose descriptions, where below 20th or so, i.e. one word, write it in prose. Ref titles with year ranges should comply with WP:DASH. I fixed everything I think. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 21:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Disc Wheel, this nomination appears to have stalled. Have you thought of asking for more reviews from some of the related Wikiprojects, like NBA project or the North Carolina project? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I'll post on the talk page for the NBA project one and see if anything happens. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 18:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Cheetah (talk)

Comments Through the 2012 NBA Draft → Through the 2013 NBA Draft Done Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 01:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC) Doug Moe was drafted twice. A note explaining why it happened would help. Done Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 01:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC) 'G, F' and 'F, G' means the same, so use either one only, not both at the same time. Done Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 01:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC) NBA Coach of the Year award is irrelevant in this list. How so? Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 01:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC) This list about draftees (i.e. players), so the only accomplishments needed are the ones they received as players.--Cheetah (talk) 01:57, 4 July 2013 (UTC) Doneski. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 15:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC) Something's wrong with the sorting for the notes column. 'NBA All-Rookie First Team' sorts first, then the dashes, then the rest of the notes. 'NBA All-Rookie First Team' shouldn't be singled out like that. Good catch. Done. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 01:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC) It should be noted that '"2012–13 Men's Basketball Media Guide" ' is in the pdf format. Done Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 01:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC) Cheetah (talk) 05:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support on one condition, please remove the years each player became a NBA champion as a non-player (Larry Brown, Cunningham, McAdoo, Kupchack).--Cheetah (talk) 21:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 23:44, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support on one condition, that you fix where it says "Larese was a junior at North Carolina when he was selected in the with the...." in note 2 -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:03, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

• Good catch, fixed. Disc Wheel (Malk + Montributions) 17:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [17].

---

Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Drama Series

Nominator(s): — Arre and SoapFan12 15:52, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

We are nominating this for featured list because we believe that it meets the every single criteria. Also, we believe it to be well sourced and clear. After much tweaking and further adjustments we feel that it is worthy of being a Featured List. If you oppose, please address your issues here so they can be resolved. We believe this list is worthy, considering we worked on it with the Featured lists, Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Younger Actress in a Drama Series and Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Younger Actor in a Drama Series, in mind. It is very similar to the standard of those, therefore, we hope it is worthy of reaching that status. SoapFan12 15:52, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)

*Comments from Crisco 1492 File:Arianne zucker.PNG needs categories. How do you add categories, when you are not able to edit? Nvm. Done File:JuliePinson.jpg - If this is PD I'll eat my hat. Tiny resolution, uploaded by an editor with multiple copyvios...  Done. I remove the image File:Gina Tognoni 2007.jpg - Almost certainly a copyvio  Done. I remove the image File:Robin Christopher.jpg - Likely copyvio  Done. I remove the image File:Leannhunley01.jpg - I'm somewhat uncertain of this one's freeness, but not certain it's a copyvio either.  Done. Remove the image Elizabeth Lawrence is a dab link.  Done. Several of your tables are not closed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:01, 2 July 2013 (UTC) What do you mean, "tables are not closed"? Look very carefully at bottom of each table, first column. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:23, 2 July 2013 (UTC)  Done. SoapFan12 13:15, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Not done yet. Check your rowspan parameter and make sure it is the same digit as the number of rows you are actually spanning. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Can you please be more clear? Which ones are needed to be fix? SoapFan12 16:51, 2 July 2013 (UTC) The table wasn't closed. Someone got the first one, and I just fixed the last one. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:27, 3 July 2013 (UTC) Okay. Thanks, I am very sorry that you had to do that, It was my responsibilty. I was the only that was doing the changes, so I guess I got the first one. Yay! ahah...Are you ready, the resolved you're comments and you're support or is there more? Thanks again! This means a lot! SoapFan12 00:35, 3 July 2013 (UTC) Confusion arose that year when the winner of Outstanding Supporting Actress, Beth Maitland, played a character of similar age to that played by Tracey E. Bregman, the winner of Outstanding Younger Actress. - How old, roughly? General Hospital, is the most recent recipient of this award. General Hospital -- avoid repetition somehow I've merged these sentences, is it okay now? Or a bit too long of a sentence? reached five nominations, making her the most-nominated in this category. - feels unnecessarily verbose. Any other wording? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:35, 3 July 2013 (UTC) Reworded.

• Support on prose and images. Good job! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, this means a lot! SoapFan12 02:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Underneath-it-All

* The table in the "Total awards won" section needs to be fixed. What exactly needs to be fix? Can you please clarify? The table wasn't closed, but it has since been fixed. – Underneath-it-All (talk) 19:24, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Great! Thanks for the support! :) Oh, is it possible if you can resolved you're comments or is there more? SoapFan12 19:44, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Ref 1 → add Guard Publishing Co. as publisher  Done Refs 4 + 13 → add Cox Enterprises as the publisher. Also add John N. Goudas as the author.  Done Ref 5 → add South Florida Media Company as publisher  Done Ref 10 → add E. W. Scripps Company as publisher  Done Ref 15 → add Postmedia Network as publisher  Done – Underneath-it-All (talk) 17:19, 2 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks! SoapFan12 17:42, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support – Underneath-it-All (talk) 16:44, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, this means a lot! SoapFan12 02:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments – prose has somewhat been dealt with, so I'll have a quick look at refs...

• Tables ideally should meet MOS:DTT and include rowscopes and colscopes

 Done

• Given you have provided weblinks to newspaper sources, are page numbers suffice? I would probably remove them, but it's up to you.
  • Comment: As most of the newspapers are at Google News Archive (and thus possibly on their way offline) I'd suggest keeping the page numbers. If GNews archive goes offline, we can still have the paper newspapers as a reliable source. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I've got to agree with Crisco 1492. SoapFan12 17:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

• Publication sources need locations if they are not given in the title. (ie: USA Today, Variety, The Gazette, The Register-Guard, Deseret News, The Union Democrat)

Can you please be more clear? What do I need to add? SoapFan12 17:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

• The city where the work was published. So Variety would be location=Los Angeles, The Gazette would be Sonora, California, etc. This suggestion is per WP:CITEHOW. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done. SoapFan12 19:37, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

• Not necessary to have retrieve dates for external links – Lemonade51 (talk) 15:14, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done SoapFan12 17:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

• Comment – It seems that the main table has the required rowscopes and colscopes. However, the smaller tables still appear to be lacking them. That's the one issue that stood out to me when I looked at the list. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:14, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done SoapFan12 09:54, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support - Superb job on organization and prose!

-Birdienest81 (talk) 23:48, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, this means a lot! SoapFan12 02:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support All major issues have been addressed and I see nothing further. Great job!Caringtype1 (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, this means a lot! SoapFan12 02:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments "that originated at the" you mean "that was first awarded at..."?  Done SoapFan12 20:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC) You use abbreviations in the info box but don't have them in the article, so add (NATAS) etc after the expanded version.  Done SoapFan12 20:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC) "the criteria for this category " you only mention one criterion, were others changed? If not then it should be "one criterion for this.."  Done SoapFan12 20:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC) " is the most recent recipient" maybe to prevent it becoming inadvertently inaccurate, "is the 2013 recipient.."?  Done SoapFan12 20:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC) "After twenty-six years " -> 26.  Done SoapFan12 20:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC) "Total awards won" should be more like "Series with most awards" or something.  Done SoapFan12 20:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC) Not convinced you need "New York, New York" as the location. Simple New York would suffice.  Done SoapFan12 20:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:27, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support, meticulously sourced and well formatted. — Cirt (talk) 22:41, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [18].

---

List of works by Amir Hamzah

Nominator(s):  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:05, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it is ready. Taking a break from film, I give you the bibliography of one of the most celebrated Indonesian poets (and one of few to be considered a National Hero of Indonesia, although that was likely more for his being martyred than his poetry). Amir Hamzah was only active for a short period but proved quite productive (as you can see in the list). This is based on SchroCat's List of works by H. C. McNeile, recently featured. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:05, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 04:36, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments – "at several cities in" – changed to "in several cities on Sumatra and Java" (since the latter two are islands) Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC) "he wrote his first poems in this period" – replaced "in"; sounds better with "during" Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC) "Forced to return to Langkat and marry in 1937, after the proclamation of Indonesian independence in 1945, Hamzah became a representative of the nascent government in Langkat." – switch the last two parts of the sentence around. It flows better with less commas – "Forced to return to Langkat and marry in 1937, Hamzah became a representative of the nascent government in Langkat after the proclamation of Indonesian independence in 1945." This also links directly to the next sentence of "The following year…" Done, with one more change. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC) "Later works departed from the traditional structure" – replace "the" with "this" Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC) "88Years" – what? I'm guessing that's suppose to be "Years". Right, typo. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC) —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support – meets all 6 FL criteria. Great work! —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:36, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:49, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Lemonade51 (talk) 12:07, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments "4 short stories, 3 poetry collections, and 1 original book." shouldn't numbers before 10 be spelt out? So four short stories, three poetry collections... Per NUMERAL: "Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all figures: we may write either 5 cats and 32 dogs or five cats and thirty-two dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs.". See almost any discography article for other examples. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC) Ref 6 should be p.214 Lemonade51 (talk) 16:58, 25 June 2013 (UTC) Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC) Anything else, Lemonade51? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:35, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support List meets the criteria. Lemonade51 (talk) 12:07, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:15, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from SchroCat (talk) 07:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments from SchroCat All very good here, so I'm going into ultra-pedantic mode on a couple of these... "His translated poems were anthologized in Setanggi Timoer (1939), and in 1962 documentarian HB Jassin compiled all of Hamzah's remaining works – save the book Sastera Melajoe Lama dan Radja-Radja'nja – as Amir Hamzah: Radja Penjair Pudjangga Baru.[1]" I had to read this a couple of times to get the sense of it, so a slight re-wording may be useful. Additionally, "save the book" sounds like a campaign (anti-Kindle perhaps?) so I'd suggest using "except"; LOL. Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC) "The articles of Amir Hamzah". I think the sort is a bit off here (or it is if the sort is by the title): "De Islamietische Vrouw en Haar Recht" and "Inleiding Tot de Studie van den Heiligen Qoer-an" switch places. Fixed. The HS template had "de" in it, which is a big no-no.00:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC) "Original poems". A switch on this one as well: "Tjempaka Moelia" and "Tjempaka..." switch on the sort. Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC) One entry tables ("Books", "Translated books" and "Translated lyrical prose"): Is there a need for these to be sortable? Removed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Another great addition to Wiki's ever-growing "Indonesian culture" section! - SchroCat (talk) 21:28, 30 June 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the review (and the template to build on!) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:01, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Support. All good here. Actually, much better than good: excellent! It's nice to see a broader world view of matters coming up both generally and at the levels of very high-quality work too. - SchroCat (talk) 07:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

• Glad to be promoting this kind of stuff (BTW, list of works by Chairil Anwar is going to be even better illustrated; I have two PD-Simple covers in the pipeline) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments WP:YEAR applies to "1911–1946" Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC) Not convinced we need to link book. For the sake of keeping it standardised (it would seem odd if book were the only one not linked). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC) " in Poedjangga Baroe." maybe context here, i.e. "in the Indonesian literary magazine Poedjangga Baroe."? Added to the first mention (minus Indonesian). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC) "majority of Hamzah's writings. He wrote the majority of" bit repetitive. Reworked. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC) Perhaps make the infobox the same order as the sections. There are no "poetry collections" in the inofobox, just "Collections". Similarly, there's "original poems" in the article, but "Poems" in the infobox. Reworked the infobox code, rearranged the article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC) "Hamzah translated a poem by Du Fu." would be nice for context to know who Du Fu was. Similarly "Fukuda Chiyo-ni." Etc. Done both. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC) Foulcher ref: "High Literature and Nationalism in Indonesia 1933-142" perhaps that should be 1942, and also should use an en-dash. Dur. Fixed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC) No available Indonesian categories that might suit here? SatuSuro added Category:Indonesian poets and Category:Indonesian translators, but I removed them as those are for people and not bibliographies. I'll create an Amir Hamzah category. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:53, 5 July 2013 (UTC) Any further issues, The Rambling Man? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:00, 11 July 2013 (UTC) Nah, all good for me. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [19].

---

1888–1889 New Zealand Native football team matches

Nominator(s): Shudde ^talk 09:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

This least list has previously been a Featured List (see discussion here), but lost it after review (see here). The list details the playing matches of the 1888–1889 New Zealand Native football team that played mainly rugby union. The tour was the longest in rugby history, and must be one of the longest in sporting history. Playing up to three games a week of a physically brutal sport. I think the list has been improved significantly, and meets the criteria. Shudde ^talk 09:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments –

• "and their first matche a 5–0 victory over Hawke's Bay." "matche" → "match"?
• Victorian Rules in Australia: The For and Against columns need sort templates as the numbers aren't sorting properly.
• Note 16 should have the page range be given as pp. instead of p.
• Hyphen in the second general reference should be an en dash instead per the Manual of Style. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Done; thanks for the comments - Shudde ^talk 11:30, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:12, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Oppose quick flick over the lead... Per WP:YEAR shouldn't this be 1888–89? Image caption doesn't need a full stop. It's rugby union, say it, don't just say "rugby". I've done that; some editors argue that it shoudn't be called rugby union until after 1895 when rugby league was formed—I'm not really one of them. So happy to change. "privately organised" what does that really mean? Not organised by any governing body - one of the provincial/national Unions. I've added a footnote. "to comprise of " many people would say "comprise of" is incorrect... changed to "contained" "non-New Zealand born" probably need another hyphen here. "The team played internationals against England, Ireland, and Wales—resulting in a victory against Ireland, and narrow loss to Wales.[4]" no, the preceding sentence didn't "result" in a victory etc. Needs rephrase. Tried something. See what you think. "The initial leg of their journey" -> need to reiterate who "their" is because the previous para has finished up talking about several different teams. " and their first match a 5–0 victory over Hawke's Bay." first match ended or resulted in or something? You link Auckland but not Melbourne, any reason? "a heavy defeat to Auckland"—this refers to the rugby team, and is linked to the team's article. "After stopping in Melbourne on" - this refers to the city, so I didn't link it, but am happy to do so if you wish. "matches on the British Isles leg of their trip, and averaged nearly three games a week during the opening three months of that leg" weak sentence, matches, games, three, leg etc etc... " Despite the injury toll, their last 20 matches in the British Isles were played over only 37 days, but during these matches they did achieve 14 wins and a draw" again, too much run-on and weak prose, suggest you ask for a copyedit. " the team travelled to Melbourne, Australia.[14] In Melbourne " poor prose. If these are sorted out, I'll take a more detailed look at the lead, then the main list. In all honesty, this list is borderline quick fail I'm afraid, I'd send to to peer review. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC) Yes I was not really sure about the naming of the article, it had been moved by someone else during a period in which I was editing little. I'll move it. I think I've addressed all your other comments, and think it reads better now. Hopefully it's salvageable regarding prose, especially as it is only a few hundred words. - Shudde talk 05:35, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:02, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments getting there... Consistency now needed with the year range (WP:YEAR). Image captions say "The New Zealand Natives' football team" but article is "New Zealand Native football team"... Ref 1 & ref 3 are footnotes, not refs. In fact, ref 1 is a link to a Wikipedia article, that shouldn't be used to reference anything here I'm afraid. I'm a bit confused by these two comments. I have listed all citations and footnotes under a notes section, and all references under the references section. The relevant references are then linked to using a Harvard style citation template. Hopefully this is not confusing, but I think it works pretty well – especially as all the citations except one are to books. Ok, no worries, I get it now. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC) "to contain of only" no need for "of". "Of their 107 rugby matches" no need to repeat rugby. "The team played 74 matches in the British Isles, and 36 games " perhaps replace ", and" with a semi-colon, or rephrase to make it clear that the 36 games is included within the 74 matches. "There was only one match in Scotland," - > "Only one match was played in Scotland"... "drop goal" or "drop-goal"? "complete.[19][16]" numerical order for refs please. "At least one club, Manningham F.C., has since converted to association football." ref? This is based on the information on the en-wiki article! Actually changed names to Bradford City A.F.C., and that page does provide a citation to back this up. I could steal their one if need be? - Shudde talk 07:25, 1 June 2013 (UTC) Yes, the citations for this list shouldn't rely on other articles. Can you provide a citation here please? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC) Refs 20 and 21 are footnotes, not refs. See comment above. "Association Football matches" -> Association football matches. You may wish to consider colour coding/symbolising wins/draws/losses? I generally find these look quite ugly, but if you can suggest an example somewhere that looks good, I'd be happy to do this. Consider a totals row for each table. You link Surrey in the table but not in the lead... Ref 22 is a footnote, not a ref. See comment above. Notes on scoring for Victorian Rules probably needs to go at the top of the results section since you summarise the overall results before telling the reader what the scores mean. 70 (11/14) - shouldn't that be 80? Ref 23 is a footnote, not a ref. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:12, 30 May 2013 (UTC) Thanks. Unless I've stated otherwise I should have addressed those comments. Only thing is the totals for the scoring. I'l probably go through and do this (the main reason I never did is because my sources didn't). I'll try and get it done relatively promptly. - Shudde talk 07:25, 1 June 2013 (UTC) No worries, couple of resps above. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC) However, refs 20, 21 and 23 are still just notes, I know there's a confusion over footnotes, notes, refs etc, but it looks like 20, 21 and 23 aren't actually cited. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:41, 2 June 2013 (UTC) I think we're on the same page. I've added references for the notes that need it. I didn't reference the Ireland thing, or the Northern Union later becoming Rugby League, as I don't believe either can be reasonably challenged. I've updated the totals column in the tables. Should have addressed everything now. - Shudde talk 12:11, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Shudde, this nomination looks like it's stalled, have you sent a message out to the regulars at the rugby and Aussie rules projects? Even some football editors (e.g. PeeJay2k3) may be interested in reviewing this? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:50, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

I posted messages letting both the rugby union and New Zealand projects know about the nomination back in April. I haven't asked for comments from any editors directly, especially as I didn't want to be seen as canvassing. If you're happy for me to contact a couple of NZ or RU editors that have experience commenting on Good or Featured content then I will, but I'm not comfortable doing that unless you're happy with it. - Shudde ^talk 08:51, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I've gone posted something at the WP:RU talk page, just saying that the nom. has stalled and extra eyes would be appreciated. Hopefully this gets a response. - Shudde ^talk 12:57, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

• I've slightly changed the alt statements on the image to reflect what can be seen, rather than the subject matter. But the article looks good to me. The rugby union teams named appear to be correct and the British Isles dates and results reflect what I know of this tour. FruitMonkey (talk) 13:36, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments

• Not really important to FL status, but I noticed <includeonly>__NOTOC__</includeonly> in the source code. Is this serving a purpose? Adabow (talk) 10:56, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
• File:1888-1889 Natives Tour.jpg should have a US copyright status tag
• "For the rugby matches in the British Isles, New Zealand, and Victoria tries scored one point..." - a bit WP:SEAOFBLUE and hard to distinguish that 'Victoria' and 'tries' are separate links
• For the sake of clarity, I would suggest separating explanatory notes (eg "Includes Ireland") and citations into separate sections, or at least into separate lists.
• Can the source for the British Isles table be shortened and linked to the main reference (ie shortened to Ryan 1993, p. 143.)?

Adabow (talk) 10:56, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Should have dealt with those comments. US copyright tag done, split notes and references. Let me know if it all looks good. - Shudde ^talk 11:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Support Excellent. Meets criteria. Adabow (talk) 01:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support - looks good -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:55, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support I'm happy now my various niff-naff questions have been resolved. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [20].

---

List of NK Maribor players

Nominator(s): Ratipok (talk) 13:32, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... I believe I have addressed all the issues and concerns that have been expressed by reviewers during this article's first FLC nomination, nearly a month ago. If there is anything else that needs to be resolved, feel free to write a comment, and I will be happy to fix the problem. Lep pozdrav, Ratipok (talk) 13:32, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments. I promised the nominator I'd review this by Wednesday lunchtime or else they could feel free to shout at me, so here's a quick mention of stuff still outstanding from the first nomination. Not quite a full review, but I will return (honest)...

Resolved comments from Struway2 (talk) 19:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

*Colour symbols. I think the symbol templates are supposed to be written out in words, as {{section-sign|alt=InternationalClub}} rather than {{§|alt=InternationalClub}}, so that users of screen readers can cope both in reading and editing mode. Comment R: I am not sure exactly on what needs to be done here. Can you gave me a clue? I was actually instructed to use the colour symbols the way they are used in this list, by other reviewers on articles that I have [successfully] nominated for FL in the past (e.g. Slovenian football champions, NK Maribor seasons). Sorry, my lack of clarity as usual. As I understand it (perhaps I'm wrong:... We use these templates for those symbols that screen-readers can't read. The templates are named things like {{Section-sign}} or {{Dagger}}, but have redirects that just consist of the relevant symbol, e.g. {{§}} or {{†}}. If we write the template call using the symbol redirect, as e.g. {{§|alt=International Club}}, a screen-reader user reading the article will correctly hear the alt-text words "International Club". However, a screen-reader user trying to edit that source in the edit-window, where they're working with the un-rendered code, won't hear anything useful when the machine comes to the § symbol. If instead of writing the symbol redirect, we write the proper name of the template, as e.g. {{section-sign|alt=InternationalClub}}, the result looks the same to the sighted user reading the article and sounds the same to the screen-reader user reading the article, but it also works for the screen-reader user in edit mode, because they'll hear the word "section-sign" rather than whatever their software does with things it can't read. Struway2 (talk) Comment R: Ok, then I will try to resolve the problem. Though, I was always under the impression that the colour symbols and marks are for those readers that are colour blind or cant see the colour on their screens:) Ratipok (talk) 00:25, 9 May 2013 (UTC) The symbols are for the benefit of anyone who can't use colours for any reason, whether technological or disability-related; they're used in combination with alt text for the benefit of users who can't use images for any reason, again, whether technological or disability-related. Struway2 (talk) The words above the table say that the table is accurate a at the 11/12 season, yet Marcos Tavares' stats (for example) are considerably more up to date than that... Comment R: A minor problem and I will fix it:) Also, the "last" column sorts the dashes for the current squad below the lowest real "last" date. Suggest you force them to sort high. Comment R: No problem. List is ordered by number of appearances... then what, if more than one player have the same number of apps? C:I have made the list to order by the number of appearances. In the case that two or more players have the same number of apps the player who has made the debut for the club first is listed on top. Think it's fairly standard for these lists to mention which competitions are included in the stats. C:Will add something in the key section. Not a problem. In Marcos Tavares' image caption, does "active" mean "currently playing for Maribor" or just "currently playing"? C:Changed. Redlinks. About a third of the players listed are redlinks, which IMO is rather more than "a minimal proportion" as per FL criterion 5a. Are all the players listed "notable" in a WP:NFOOTBALL sense? any who are not should be de-linked, which would reduce the number and proportion of redlinks. Comment R: Yeah, I know thats a problem. I can solve it, for at least a few players, by creating new articles (like I have done with Tomislav Prosen and Branko Horjak). The problem is with diacritics in some of the players first or last names. If I dont use; example Milan Šober, I get a problem with sorting. The {{sortname}} template has a |nolink=1 parameter for names that shouldn't be linked. Struway2 (talk) I see you've de-linked all the previously redlinked players. How it should work is, if a player is notable as per WP:NFOOTBALL, i.e. has played in a fully professional league, their name should be linked. For instance, Tomaž Murko is still playing in the Slovenian PrvaLiga, which is listed as a fully-pro league at WP:FPL, so is clearly notable and should have his name linked. Only if the player has never played at a notable level should their name be unlinked. Not sure what the case is for the former Yugoslav First League, when football was in theory amateur but the top division contained major clubs and players played full-time: the football notability criteria don't address the matter. Don't suppose anyone who only played in the Yugoslav lower divisions would count as having played at a notable level, but maybe those who played in the top division should? Struway2 (talk) Comment R:I will take a look at the players that dont have articles, during this weekend, and will create couple of new ones. Ratipok (talk) 22:34, 16 May 2013 (UTC) Hope some of this stuff helps. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:02, 12 April 2013 (UTC) Hello again. Thanks for your comments, I will try to resolve the issues addressed by tomorrow evening. Lep pozdrav, Ratipok (talk) 13:09, 8 May 2013 (UTC) Comment R: I believe I have properly addressed all issues mentioned above. I added the as off for the active players and updated their stats. Will keep updating them until the end of the season (only five league and one cup match left). Lep pozdrav, Ratipok (talk) 00:00, 10 May 2013 (UTC) Where a player has appeared at senior international level for more than one country, as Rocky Siberie, I'd include both/all C:If I list both (I did at the beginning), then we have a sorting problem. With Rocky's case we would have the Netherlands Antilles (first) and Curacao (second) listed in one paragraph. Similar thing with Milko Djurovski (Yugoslavia/Macedonia). How would we then fix the sorting problem? As it is now, I simply mentioned one NT in the players list (the one player was eligible to play for, while a member of Maribor) and added a footnote mentioning the full story. Not sure why choosing to display one country and sort by that one, is a better solution than displaying both and choosing one to sort by. The footnote can still explain why there are two. The List of Birmingham City F.C. players family display the highest international level played for each country, so there are several with two and Neil Kilkenny with three; the comparable case would be Owen Madden in the <25 apps list, who played for both Ireland teams in the 1930s (see Key for explanation), and his cell displays both countries and sorts on the first one played for. C:For me personally its not a problem if there are both countries listed in one paragraph. The only thing is that in that case Curacao will be sorted second under the Netherlands Antilles and Macedonia under Yugoslavia. As I said, at the beginning I listed both countries and changed that due to minor sorting problems as I felt that this could be perceived as a problem by FLC reviewers. If its not, then I can easily list both countries;) Ratipok (talk) 16:45, 28 May 2013 (UTC) What makes national-football-teams.com and foradejogo.com a reliable source? C:Another problem. It seems FIFA official website doesnt have each individual cap for every player. For exapmle, there isnt a problem finding a reliable Bosnian references for example Samir Duro who has represented Bosnia and Herzegovina, because I understand the language (even though FIFA websited doesnt have him in their database). But, what am I to do with Hungarian Stzipanovics or Capo Verdean Nilton:)? Ratipok (talk) 16:31, 27 May 2013 (UTC) RSSSF for Sztipanovics. Haven't yet found one for Nilton, but still looking... If there are any more you're struggling with, let me know at my talk page. Struway2 (talk) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

• Surprised to see playing positions disappeared since the last nomination. Are they really unsourceable?

Comment R: Actually they are, for the most part. I cant find sources for about half of the players on the list (mostly those from the Yugoslav period). I know for most of the players, on which position they played, but cant back that up with sources. Unfortunatley, NK Maribor official website only has pure stats about the players and not their positions or at least minor presentations.

• Support, I think. The redlinks have come down to an approaching-minimal proportion, and are still coming down, so I don't have a problem with that. Unreliable sources have gone, I think, and one internationally-capped player for whom we can't find a reliable source has been removed until and unless. Nominator has been unbelievably co-operative dealing with the matters raised at the first FLC and with the pickiness of this review. I'm not thrilled with the absence of playing positions, but the club website archives lists every goal scored by any given player and every match he played in but not his playing position, and the PrvaLiga website does likewise. Without a Slovenian equivalent of Neil Brown's site, I'd rather not have the positions at all than have them individually ref'd to random bits of newsprint. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 19:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 23:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments – "has most appearances and has scored most goals." Needs two "the"s, one before each of the "most"s. Players: "The table that follows is accurate As of 8 May 2013." "As" shouldn't be capitalized. Dimitar Makriev photo caption needs "the" before 2006–07. "Director" doesn't need capitalization in the Zlatko Zahovic photo. Another "the" is needed before 1993–94 in footnote A. Ref 35 needs an en dash in the title to replace the hyphen. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:28, 12 May 2013 (UTC) Comment R: Hello again. I have done everything of the above, except the As of capitalization. The problem is that I have used the Wikipedia:As of method and it seems that the "As" capitalization is automatic!? I have written a msg on the Wikipedia talk:As of section and I a hope someone will be able to help. Lep pozdrav, Ratipok (talk) 13:24, 13 May 2013 (UTC) Done: The as off capitalization was fixed, thanks to User:Matej1234. Lep pozdrav, Ratipok (talk) 14:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Quick comment - last two general references are dead. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:25, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

It seems that something is wrong with the website I have used (dont know if its permanent or just temporary). Luckily the glitch affected only nine players/stats (six Bosnian and three Yugoslav internationals) and this will be an easy fix. I will use individual references for those players. Lep pozdrav, Ratipok (talk) 21:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Added individual references for each player. Ratipok (talk) 22:14, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

• Comment - The inclusion of a column to indicate the number of seasons each player spent at the club is interesting. Not sure if it's necessary, especially given the fact that the player who has spent the most seasons at a club will, most often, be conspicuous as the player who has made the most appearances. This may not be the case with all clubs, nor will it also be the case with Maribor, but in this case it is, which makes me question the worth of this column. Furthermore, I'm not sure I like the inclusion of Rene Krhin or Zlatko Zahovic, since they never played for the club. In fact, both of them had at least one more club before getting anywhere near the pitch for a first-team match. Otherwise, the prose is clearly good, the article lead is certainly comprehensive when it comes to introducing the topic and the list is comprehensive to boot. I didn't understand the inclusion criteria to begin with, but I think I've got it now. The rest of the FL criteria seem to have been met as well, so by my reckoning, as long as you delete Krhin and Zahovic from the list, you can have my support. The seasons column matters little to me, but I must insist about Krhin and Zahovic. – PeeJay 21:42, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for your comments. I have removed Krhin and Zahovic from the list (their pics as well). I would have preferred to left the seasons column as it is, but I don't have any problems deleting it, if required. Lep pozdrav, Ratipok (talk) 00:05, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for dealing with that so quickly. I really don't mind if the seasons column stays or goes, but at least you got rid of Krhin and Zahovic. You have my support now. – PeeJay 00:15, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support I like how the scope of the list if defined. I would prefer though if the intro would also state how many players played at least 100 games, how many players were capped while at the club, and perhaps even how many players scored at least 10 or 50 goals. Nergaal (talk) 04:44, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 17:00, 11 July, 2013 [21].

81st Academy Awards

Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk) 21:09, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating the 2009 Oscars for featured list because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I read the requirements and criteria. I also followed how the 1st Academy Awards, 82nd Academy Awards, and 84th Academy Awards were written. Birdienest81 (talk) 21:09, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Underneath-it-All

;Comments: "nominations were The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. with thirteen" → removed the period after the film title "Slumdog Millionaire with ten" → add period at the end of the sentence Ref 4 → write dates in a similar style To keep everything uniform add (AMPAS) to all Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences refs. Also, format them in a similar manner. Ex: Ref 1 = Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS)...while...ref. 18 = Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. AMPAS. Add Amazon.com as publisher for Box Office Mojo. Box Office Mojo is listed twice in ref. 42 Same with refs 6 + 51 (TVbytheNumbers or TV by the Numbers) Ref 58 links to an E! article, not The Philippine Star – Underneath-it-All (talk) 21:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC) Fixed: I have fixed everything you requested. -Birdienest81 (talk) 23:11, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support – Underneath-it-All (talk) 18:43, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

*The second paragraph (On February 7, 2009,...) is too short (at least in my computer I see a line and two words). It should be expanded or merged. "The telecast attracted nearly 37 million viewers (in North America)." -> The paragraphs are not needed. "followed by Slumdog Millionaire with ten. [12]" -> " ten.[12]" "curiosity the the awards," -> typo "Gabriel still attended the ceremony. John Legend performed the song in place of Gabriel, backed by the Soweto Gospel Choir" -> Not necessary but I'd reword it as "Gabriel still attended the ceremony but John Legend, backed by the Soweto Gospel Choir, performed the song in place of Gabriel." "previous year's ceremony" -> Link it Ref 49 "The Los Angeles Time" -> Los Angeles Time, per consistency. Box Office Mojo should not be in italics Spotcheck not done, but refs look good. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:58, 8 June 2013 (UTC) Fixed: I have fixed everything you requested. -Birdienest81 (talk) 22:12, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support Also, I forgot it. The poster should look like this or this with its rationale and license. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Done: I changed the rationale and license to your request.

-Birdienest81 (talk) 05:49, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:41, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments Once you abbreviate AMPAS, use it. No need to make Oscars bold. "The ceremony was televised in the United States by ABC. Actor Hugh Jackman hosted the ceremony for the first time" consider merging to avoid repetition and short sentences. "and WALL-E with one" full stop required. Is the Jess Cagle in the infobox (who isn't linked) the same as Jess Cagle? All the nominees were announced in a single minute (at 5:38 a.m?) Do we really need such precision? I would imagine the day would suffice, the nearest minute seems irrelevant to me. nominations[13]), -> nominations),[13] Normally don't use WP:BOLD to depict something, it may be hard for accessibility. We often use a symbol to denote winners (as well as colour or some other more visual cue), but perhaps here it's not so bad because you've said the winner is denoted first. The image captions could use a bit of expansion, e.g. what they won their awards for. Where is Jerry Lewis' award cited? "Three: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (film)|The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" format problem here. Per WP:COLLAPSE should you really be collapsing those tables automatically? "12.43 rating over a 32.61 share among the 18–49 demographic" means nothing to people outside the US, please link or explain. Chicago Sun Times is Chicago Sun-Times. Huffington Post is The Huffington Post. Consistency in references with author names, is it First name Surname or Surname, First name? Typo in ref 44. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC) Fixed: I have fixed almost everything with some notations Format is surname first, then first name. Wikilinked Nielsen ratings which has an explanations on ratings and shares. I think the bold lettering for the winners works because on my iPod touch which does not indent the winner making it seem like no winner is denoted. -Birdienest81 (talk) 05:22, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

• Why isn't there a table for multiple wins and nominations? Nergaal (talk) 05:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Done: I added a table for multiple wins and nominations.Birdienest81 (talk) 03:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support. However, I suggest archiving other online sources with webcitation.org, to manually archive all online references which will guarantee they remain accessible even if the site goes down: (this page (step-by-step instructions there). SoapFan12 02:06, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

• I'm in the process of doing so. It might take awhile though.Birdienest81 (talk) 03:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 21:26, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments – Winners and nominees: No need for two Slumdog Millionaire links in the written section. Per the Manual of Style, we aren't supposed to be highlighting table entries in bold. Perhaps it would be possible to only have the winners be italicized? That seems like the easiest possible fix that retains highlighting in some form. Multiple nominations and awards: The Dutchess should have its link piped so the parenthetical part (which isn't part of the title) doesn't show up. In Memoriam: Should the first word of "in Memoriam" be capitalized? Also, the comma after "tribute" should be removed. See also: The first link isn't needed, since the 2008 in film article is linked in the lead. Note A: Commas needed after "daughter", and before and after "actress Michelle Williams". Giants2008 (Talk) 22:41, 5 July 2013 (UTC) Fixed: I have fixed everything you requested. Winners are now denoted with a double dagger placed at the end of recipient. -Birdienest81 (talk) 23:34, 5 July 2013 (UTC) Presenters: Double word in "Presenters of the the Romance 2008 montage". This one's still in the article, I'm afraid. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:26, 6 July 2013 (UTC) -Fixed': Removed the extra 'the' -Birdienest81 (talk) 17:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [22].

---

The Verve discography

Nominator(s): I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 20:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because having extensively redeveloped the prose and tables, I believe it now meets the featured criteria. Any criticism would be welcome if it helps improve the page. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 20:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Underneath-it-All

;Comments: Label: Hut, Virgin → Labels: Hut, Virgin Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 20:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC) I would move "Video Albums" down with "Music Videos" and put it under the heading "Videography". Unnecessary in my opinion: for consistency's sake, all albums (i.e. a video album) should be kept in the "Albums" section. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 20:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC) Adjust Hung ref: cite web|url=http://www.ultratop.be/nl/showinterpret.asp?interpret=The+Verve | title=Discografie The Verve | publisher=Hung Medien | work=''ultratop.be'' | accessdate=29 May 2013 | language=Dutch > cite web|url=http://www.ultratop.be/nl/showinterpret.asp?interpret=The+Verve|title=Discografie The Verve|publisher=Belgian Charts Portal. Hung Medien (Steffen Hung)|last=Hung|first=Steffen|accessdate=29 May 2013|language=Dutch Adjust similar refs in this style. The publisher of these sites, as stated at the bottom of these pages, is Hung Medien alone: it should remain so, as "Belgian Charts Portal" doesn't appear anywhere on the page and is more a description of the source itself. Also, I don't think listing Steffen Hung as the author of the page simply because it's his site is correct: that would be like saying that every single article on Mail Online is written by Martin Clarke because he runs the site. Look for specific authors – if one's not given, then leave the space blank. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 20:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC) Add abbreviations in refs. Ex: Music Canada (MC) As the certification providers are wikilinked in the tables and in the references, I think that users can work out which abbreviation is associated with which provider in this way. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 20:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC) Perhaps add catalog numbers for albums, EPs and video albums? Not always easily available for a lot of albums, and would just mean the table gets clogged up with the additional references needed to verify them (as they don't appear in the ones already needed to verify the release dates). It's more of a personal preference, as I don't mind when editors do add them, but numerous FLs have been passed in the past without them. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 20:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC) – Underneath-it-All (talk) 04:31, 12 June 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the comments, as ever. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 20:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support: You make some fair points. Well done! – Underneath-it-All (talk) 01:26, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 13:32, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments " from the successful American jazz label " I don't see a good reason for "successful" here. Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) "subsidiary Hut Records in 1991, they released the" instead of "they", reinforce "The Verve" since you've talked about other groups/companies since. Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) "Tensions grew in The Verve during" you mean "within the band"? Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) "although it did manage to reach " ->" although it reached..." Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) Link "certified" appropriately. Linked to British Phonographic Industry#Sales certificates. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) " its three singles – "This Is Music", "On Your Own" and "History" – became The Verve's first to reach" the "three" couldn't be their "first". I know what you're saying but this isn't the best way of saying it. Done Tweaked so only "This Is Music" has the feat attributed it, as should be the case. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) "The internal conflict" perhaps "The conflicts within the band led Ashcroft..."? Something like that perhaps. Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) "up only three months" no real need for "only", let the reader make their mind up if three months afterwards is significant. Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) " except for McCabe, who was replaced by Simon Tong.[1] After McCabe rejoined the band in early 1997" reads funny to me. How about: except for McCabe, who was replaced by Simon Tong, although McCabe rejoined the band shortly afterwards". I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) "following its release a few months later," don't think you need this at all. Done Duly removed. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) "it was a huge commercial success" no need for huge. Done Ditto. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) "In 2010, Ashcroft confirmed that the band were now indefinitely inactive" -> "In 2010, Ashcroft confirmed that the band were indefinitely inactive" Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 17:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 16:25, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Holiday56 (talk) 13:22, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments I feel that the number of colons in the lead could be reduced a bit. Done Removed the more unnecessary ones. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 16:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC) "Slide Away [12" VINYL]" – I'd change "VINYL" to "Vinyl". Done I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 16:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC) Otherwise, solid list. Well done. Holiday56 (talk) 16:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support, as my comments have been addressed. Great job! Holiday56 (talk) 13:22, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
• Support I see no issues remaining after the other reviewer's comments have been addressed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:01, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [23].

---

Girls' Generation discography

Nominator(s): Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 15:44, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think I have brought it up featured list status by formatting it according to WP:DISCOGSTYLE and using several featured discographies as an example. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 15:44, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Underneath-it-All

;Comments "has released six.." → have released six... Fixed. Formats: DVD → Format: DVD Fixed. The guest appearances need to be sourced. Done. All dates in the refs. should be uniform. Some are 2011-10-16 or August 20, 2011. Use only one style. Fixed. Ref 1 → remove webpage Fixed. Ref 2 → wikilink The Guardian and add Guardian Media Group as the publisher. Also add date the article was published. Done Refs 3 + 16 → wikilink Gaon Chart Done Refs 7, 58 + 76 → wikilink Billboard and add Prometheus Global Media as the publisher. Done. 76=79, and all other billboard refs. Ref 10 → format like this: cite web|url=http://lescharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Girls%27+Generation&titel=The+Boys&cat=a|title=Girls' Generation – The Boys (Album)|publisher=French Charts Portal. Hung Medien (Steffen Hung)|last=Hung|first=Steffen|accessdate=June 12, 2013|language=French Done Refs 11 + 22 → g-music → G-Music Done. Ref 12 → add Prometheus Global Media as the publisher. Done. Ref 15 links to a fan site. Can another source be found? Ref 21 → Oricon.co.jp → Oricon Fixed. Refs 27, 28, 31, 32 + 42 → need dates retrieved Done. Ref 33 (and all similar) → RIAJ → Recording Industry Association of Japan (RIAJ) Done. Ref 47 (and all similar) → Amazon.co.jp Done. Ref 72 → AllKPop.com and add 6Theory Media, LLC as the publisher. Done. – Underneath-it-All (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC) Thank you for your comments, I've addressed all of the concerns except ref 15. I've googled and I can't find anything, should the ref be removed? Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 00:50, 13 June 2013 (UTC) It can't be found on any Korean retail website? Then again, you aren't sourcing the other formats, so you could just remove it. Other than that everything looks really good! :) – Underneath-it-All (talk) 01:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC) All right, I've removed it. Thanks! I've spent at least three days on it to make it look better. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 04:40, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support – Underneath-it-All (talk) 16:03, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
• Support. Quite high quality. Minor point: Link in cite number 51 appears to be broken. — Cirt (talk) 18:46, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing, I fixed it. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 20:31, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Looks better, thanks! — Cirt (talk) 21:08, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 13:29, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Quick comments (lead alone, will re-visit the tables and refs once these issues are resolved) "They have sold over 100,000 copies for each of their six albums," -> "Each of the band's studio albums has sold over 100,00 copies, ..." Done. "in over 6 years" 6->six. Done. "4.9 million albums and nearly 40 million digital singles." so the 4.9 million albums were all physical or a mixture? Fixed. "Members Taeyeon, Tiffany and Seohyun have also released an EP under group name Girls' Generation-TTS." ref please. Done. "They chart debuted in" argh. "Girls' Generation's chart debut came in August 2007..." Also note that it was a single. Done. "reached the number four spot. " ->" reached number four". Done. "The song broke records" what records? "The song occupied the number one position for a South Korean chart record-breaking eight weeks"? Fixed. "After six months, they..." -> "Six months later they..." Done. "They soon released their third studio" -> They then... Done. "second self-titled album" so two albums had identical names? Yes. A 2007 album and a 2011 album. "highest selling" hyphenate. Done. " K-Pop Hot 100[7][A]." notes and refs after punctuation please. Done. "is scheduled to be released on June 19, 2013." soon to be the past, make sure it's updated and correctly referenced. Added a ref. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:41, 14 June 2013 (UTC) Thank you for your constructive criticism, I've addressed all your current concerns. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 18:54, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

• Comment - my only issue is that some of the wikilinks actually point to articles on the Korean Wikipedia rather than the English one - is this usual practice.........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:47, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea. I thought it would be useful, because they don't have articles on the English wiki.Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 09:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support. However, I suggest archiving other online sources with webcitation.org, to manually archive all online references which will guarantee they remain accessible even if the site goes down: (this page (step-by-step instructions there). SoapFan12 02:17, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments –

• All caps in refs 8, 11, 28, 32, 47, 56, 58, 78, and 86 should be removed.
  • These are fixed, but I also saw all caps in ref 27, which I missed earlier. This might as well be fixed too. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:08, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

• Done.Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 14:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

• The hyphens in the titles of refs 9, 28 (2 of them), 32 (also 2), 37, 42, 43, 52, 78, and 85 should be converted into en dashes per the Manual of Style. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:07, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I've addressed all your concerns. Please let me know if there's any additional comments, thanks. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 05:51, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

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

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

The list was promoted by Hahc21 00:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [24].

---

List of songs in Glee (season 1)

Nominator(s): Robin (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it seems to meet the criteria. Regards. Robin (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

• Comments from WikiRedactor:

  We have a couple external links that need to be addressed.

I've removed the dead one. Since I can access all the 'uncategorized redirects', I'm confused as to how I need to fix those. Thoughts? Robin (talk) 15:30, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

It looks like when those links are opened, the URL has changed slightly from the original one listed in the reference. I'd just go through and copy and paste the updated URLs into the article citations. WikiRedactor (talk) 17:43, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm on it. Thanks. Robin (talk) 20:00, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Fixed all the redirects. The Amazon ones are still marked, a fault of checklinks. Robin (talk) 22:00, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

• After reading though the article, I see no additional areas of concern, and support the nomination. WikiRedactor (talk) 15:06, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Robin (talk) 15:30, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

• Comments: I believe the normal convention on mashup song titles is that there are no separating spaces in it (e.g. "Borderline" / "Open Your Heart" -> ""Borderline"/"Open Your Heart"). I also noticed that most FLs have "plainrowheaders" added to the wikitable class source code (class="wikitable sortable plainrowheaders") to omit the bold typeface. Other than that, It looks great! Chihciboy (talk) 06:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Robin (talk) 17:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I forgot to add this: aside from no separating spaces, you also have to eliminate the quotation marks (") between the slash (/) (e.g. "Borderline"/"Open Your Heart" -> "Borderline/Open Your Heart"), since it's just one title, not a double A-side single (like "Money for Nothing/Beverly Hillbillies*"). I've also added "plainrowheaders" to the wikitable to meet WP:ACCESS and WP:DTT since most FLs have it as a standard so the list won't look ugly, but you can remove it if you want to. Chihciboy (talk) 05:55, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate it. Robin (talk) 17:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Support: The list looks great. Good job! Chihciboy (talk) 07:01, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

~Thanks! Robin (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

• Comment Sources like Entertainment Weekly, Los Angeles Times and People should have their publishers in brackets, as they're magazines / newspapers. Besides that, I can't see any other faults with the article. Et3rnal 11:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm on it. Robin (talk) 17:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Done. Robin (talk) 21:43, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Great, as much as I don't like Glee, I'm obliged to support. Nice work. Et3rnal 16:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Robin (talk) 17:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments

• "available for digital download through iTunes" - should be iTunes Store, not the iTunes software
• With note one, the phrase "A further nineteen are collected on the United Kingdom compilation" is ambiguous. Are these otherwise unreleased songs? A selection from the Complete Season One album?
  • Since I have no idea, I've removed the phrase. Robin (talk) 17:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
• The table should be sortable.
  • How can I implement this? Robin (talk) 17:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
    • My mistake, it actually is sortable but there are no sort arrows visible. Not sure why... Adabow (talk) 21:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
• With references, be consistent as to whether publishers are wikilinked every time or only in the first reference.

I believe the list now follows the template of only linking in the first reference.

A very well-written list. Adabow (talk) 03:50, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

On behalf of former Glee task force members, I thank you. Robin (talk) 17:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Support Excellent work which meets FL criteria. Adabow (talk) 21:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Robin (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support It looks quite nice. HĐ (talk) 13:23, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Robin (talk) 17:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

• Support: Well referenced! Great work – Underneath-it-All (talk) 18:46, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Robin (talk) 19:57, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments nice. Maybe just for us non-Americans, you could say " airs on Fox in the" -> "airs on the Fox network in the..."? Done Robin (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC) " cover versions of songs sung on-screen" perhaps "songs performed on-screen" to avoid that quick repetition. Done Robin (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC) "which are then taught to the cast and filmed" reads awkwardly to me. It doesn't to me. Do you have a suggestion? Robin (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC) "featured Madonna performances exclusively" how many? I've included the number in the article. Robin (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC) It may be worth covering the success of any songs released from season one, like "Don't Stop Believin'"... According to our article on the original, " it is the top-selling catalog track in iTunes history with over 5 million digital copies sold"... I think including such sentences would bloat the list and disrupt the FLC process, as other reviewers who have already supported the list couldn't critique it. You would also have to find a reputable source that ties the two together, which I haven't. Robin (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC) Does "Single" in the table mean it was available as as single digitally? Or in specific regions of the world on physical media? Digitally. The lede's last sentence indicates this. Robin (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC) Don't need the season links in the See also, you've covered that with the hatnote. Done. Robin (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

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