Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Vegas Golden Knights general managers/archive1
- 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 archived by PresN via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC) [1].[reply]
List of Vegas Golden Knights general managers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): The Kip (contribs) 08:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another VGK FL candidacy, this one being inspired by List of Detroit Red Wings general managers. Dramatically expanded the lead's prose and added a key - the existing table seemed good to go. Won't be nominating any more until this and the players one are complete, per the consensus. The Kip (contribs) 08:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Alavense
[edit]- Edmonton Oilers,[9][10], with - There's an extra comma there.
- Is note b) really needed? I mean, that's not the case with any of the general managers on this list, so I think we could do without it.
- All in all, I don't think the key is needed at all. If we agree on note b) not being needed, you could do with {{abbr}} for No. = Number and Ref(s) = References, given that the – is not used either.
That's what I saw. Kind regards, Alavense (talk) 09:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Alavense I've opted to hide the key for now - by default, it'll be used in the future, but I see the idea that it's redundant for now. Added the templates as well. The Kip (contribs) 19:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I fixed the extra comma myself. Support. Alavense (talk) 07:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by OlifanofmrTennant
[edit]- "Las Vegas, Nevada" is linked in the lead but piped as Las Vegas. WP:NOTBROKEN says you should simply use the "Las Vegas, Nevada" redirect.
- Pacific Division is linked twice in the lead
- "Ultimately, however, McCrimmon led the Golden Knights" both Ultimately and however seems redundant
- Not doing a full source review but just noting that citations appear inconsistant in linking to publishers.
All I saw Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @OlifanofmrTennant
- The Kip (contribs) 19:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The first to are good, the third is the problem. They have to be linked every time or never. Also just spotted that in the table "Ref(s)" should just be "Ref." as there is only one reference per row. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 01:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Gotcha, I'll go ahead and link all that can be linked. The Kip (contribs) 07:23, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The first to are good, the third is the problem. They have to be linked every time or never. Also just spotted that in the table "Ref(s)" should just be "Ref." as there is only one reference per row. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 01:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Concerns about length
[edit]I'm concerned with the length of this list, as it only has two entries. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I unfortunately can't really fix that - I don't have the connections to get McCrimmon fired 😂
- In all seriousness, though - is there a minimum required length/number of entries? The Kip (contribs) 19:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the list should be fine, the list will presumably keep growing in length Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 01:19, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also concerned with the length. If it's just two entries, why make it a list article, and not just a regular article? I don't think a list with this few entries has ever been promoted before. Mattximus (talk) 15:23, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Mattximus Two points on this:
- The list is presumed to continually grow in the future; barring something unexpected (i.e. a sudden folding of the team or league), there will be more GMs. It’s not going to be stable at two forever.
- I feel like a minimum length penalizes organizational stability to a degree - for instance, by that line it’d be difficult to turn the Nashville Predators’ GM list into a FL given that David Poile was in charge for 20+ years and they’ve only had two GMs as a result, while it’d be easier to do so for the Columbus Blue Jackets, who’ve been organizationally unstable and as such have had six permanent/interim GMs in roughly the same span.
- The Kip (contribs) 17:52, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I see your points, but ultimately there's typically a minimum length needed to not violate Wikipedia:Featured list criteria criterion 3c - it's not set in stone, but it's usually 8 to 10. A list of 2 items is just too short- at that length, it could easily fit (and would fit better) at Vegas Golden Knights. It's not that it penalizes stability, it's that we don't prioritize cross-team consistency in article/list metastructure over meeting 3c in terms of something being a content fork at it's current size. Decades from now it might have enough content to justify its own list, but today it just doesn't. --PresN 11:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @PresN Am I allowed to second you? If so, I do. XR228 (talk) 15:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @PresN
I suppose my main concern at this point is impacting the eventual good topic I plan to do on VGK - unless I'm able to leave this list out (am I?), it effectively makes said GT impossible for another few decades.
- Otherwise, unless there's something else I can do with this list (and the head coaches list), it may be time to withdraw this nom. The Kip (contribs) 21:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Turns out that's not a concern, as noted at Wikipedia:Featured and good topic criteria § 3c. If this won't pass review at this point, I think's it's probably good to close. The Kip (contribs) 22:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yep, this kind of situation is part of why that rule exists. I do think that this list should be merged into the team article, but I'm not going to wade into non-FLC content concerns. --PresN 01:02, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Turns out that's not a concern, as noted at Wikipedia:Featured and good topic criteria § 3c. If this won't pass review at this point, I think's it's probably good to close. The Kip (contribs) 22:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Otherwise, unless there's something else I can do with this list (and the head coaches list), it may be time to withdraw this nom. The Kip (contribs) 21:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I see your points, but ultimately there's typically a minimum length needed to not violate Wikipedia:Featured list criteria criterion 3c - it's not set in stone, but it's usually 8 to 10. A list of 2 items is just too short- at that length, it could easily fit (and would fit better) at Vegas Golden Knights. It's not that it penalizes stability, it's that we don't prioritize cross-team consistency in article/list metastructure over meeting 3c in terms of something being a content fork at it's current size. Decades from now it might have enough content to justify its own list, but today it just doesn't. --PresN 11:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comment
[edit]I'd just like to point out that now that that edit has been made about Las Vegas and Nevada, it doesn't comply with MOS:GEOLINK, so that should be sorted. Alavense (talk) 07:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Since its a minor MOS change I fixed myself Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Closing. --PresN 01:02, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.