Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of alumni of Jesus College, Oxford: Clergy/archive2
- 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 Matthewedwards 01:43, 10 May 2009 [1].
- Nominator(s): BencherliteTalk
Toolbox |
---|
Most issues at the last FLC were resolved during the course of the FLC; however, it was agreed that it would be better for the list to include all the clergy alumni of the college, not just those who became a bishop or archbishop; so I took it away and added in the names of other members of the clergy from the main list of alumni, and here we are again. As for comprehensiveness, I've trawled the usual sources (Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Dictionary of Welsh Biography etc) and written so many articles about minor Welsh clergymen of the last 400 years that my wife thinks I'm slightly nuts. The list follows a similar format to the other Featured Lists in the series, such as the law and government list and the maths and science list. Comments welcome, and appreciated. BencherliteTalk 08:39, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.westminster-abbey.org/press/news/16454 deadlinks. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed, thanks. BencherliteTalk 00:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
*Comments from that same old derisible meddling fool....
|
- Support, good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Niiiice. Please prepare more nomination like this. One point: where space is short, why not do the MoS suggestion and make the closing years in a range two digits (provided the century is the same): "1892–97". Could fix in five mins. Tony (talk) 13:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- In the list of Principals and Fellows I sort by years of tenure, and 1890–1904 would (incorrectly) sort before 1890–99 but (correctly) after 1890–1899; so I've used the long form there, and for consistency in the other lists as well. The MOS says that both are permissible, even if the short form is the more usual. Do you mind if I keep it as it is? Thanks for your time. BencherliteTalk 06:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) Very well done.
"but later went back to Anglicanism" Maybe "returned" rather than "went back"?No links to Methodists and Baptists (in the lead)?"his 'Blue' for rugby" Double quotes, I think.Dabomb87 (talk) 23:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]- Done. Thanks for your review. BencherliteTalk 06:34, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.