Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of foreign-born United States Cabinet Secretaries
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Scorpion0422 23:36, 7 February 2009 [1].
Based on my experience with this FL, I believed this list fulfills the FLC criteria.—Chris! ct 00:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I made a few copyedits, and, as with the female list, you've done an excellent job! All you need to do is make the tables centered; just add
style="text-align:center;"
to the head of the tables and then remove thealign="center"
from within them. Also, in the cells listing two presidents, please add a semicolon or comma to separate the links. Reywas92Talk 21:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Wouldn't that make everything in the table centered?—Chris! ct 21:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes. Everything shouldn't be pushed over to the left. It would also be nice if the column order was the same as the Female list: Party to the right of the administration. In addition, not a single article links to this list. I recommend you add links from the people listed to the list, as well as a See Also from the Cabinet and Female articles. And if you wanted there's nothing wrong with more pictures. Reywas92Talk 21:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I am pretty busy right now and will probably get to your comment later today/tomorrow. Thanks—Chris! ct 23:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done all except centering every column. I try to do that (using preview) and I don't like how it look with everything in the column centered. I want to see what other think first.—Chris! ct 02:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I am pretty busy right now and will probably get to your comment later today/tomorrow. Thanks—Chris! ct 23:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes. Everything shouldn't be pushed over to the left. It would also be nice if the column order was the same as the Female list: Party to the right of the administration. In addition, not a single article links to this list. I recommend you add links from the people listed to the list, as well as a See Also from the Cabinet and Female articles. And if you wanted there's nothing wrong with more pictures. Reywas92Talk 21:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "who were born outside
ofthe present-day United States." Anytime you have "outside of", always delete the "of", as it is redundant. What do you mean by "present-day"?
- "Present-day" means today.—Chris! ct 05:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- i.e. anyone born in an area which was at the time outside of the union is included, provided it has since joined as a state (or commonwealth). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.231.146.140 (talk) 13:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Irish-born James McHenry, who was appointed by Washington as Secretary of War in 1801 and served the same post in John Adams's administration" Comma after here.
- "Albert Gallatin, born in Switzerland, became the third foreign-born members" "members"-->member.
- "including German-born Oscar Straus and Mexican-born George Romney, father of former Governor of Massachusetts and the 2008 Republican U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney." Needs a citation because it is WP:BLP information.
- Will get to this tomorrow.—Chris! ct 05:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "The Department of Treasury has had the most foreign-born Secretaries" Comma after here.
- "each have had two."-->have each had two.
- "while the others"-->and the others
- "Since most foreign born Cabinet members are not natural-born citizens, meaning that they were not born in the United States or born aboard to American parents," Use em dashes (—) instead of commas.
- Explain the italics. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I think note d is pretty clear at explaining that.—Chris! ct 05:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done all except those that I have responded to.—Chris! ct 05:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I Support, but the list definitely shoudl have more pages linking to it. Only one article links here. Reywas92Talk 00:54, 6 February 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.