Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/April 2023

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) 00:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Nominator(s): Davidbena (talk) 02:11, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Food and drink.Davidbena (talk) 02:11, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I haven't the time to do a full review at the moment, but I was struck by the title, and had a couple of questions. First, would it not be more usual to take this to FLC? Second, what is the precise geographical scope here? Your lead links to Land of Israel and Palestine (region), which are distinct and also not precisely defined. Is the scope a specific administrative unit? Or a biologically coherent region? Vanamonde (Talk) 02:45, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Actually, The Land of Israel (broadly construed) is the exact same geographical region known as Palestine (region). The use of one term over the other has more to do with era, or time-frame, in which the country is mentioned. The scope of the country stretches from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, that is to say, width-wise. Lengthwise, it stretches from Upper Galilee and the Golan to the Negev. We're not talking here about modern political boundaries, but rather of an ancient, geographically-known area, straddling between Syria and Lebanon in the north, to Egypt in the south. Another reason why we mention both names (Palestine / Israel) is because an author writing during Ottoman control over Palestine in the early 1900s, and who describes the edible plants of the country, does so by calling the country Palestine. Other authors of the 21st century who describe these edible plants will often refer to the country as Israel. Still, it is one and the same country.

Is there anyone here who wishes to review the page submitted to FLC?Davidbena (talk) 21:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting article. Hopefully I'll have more time to read through it in the near-future. I made a small change in one of your sources. To make the sourcing easier, I recommend you do the same thing with all your sources using this "template": ^[1]. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I have to ask. Is there a specific reason as to why the Arabic names of these edible plants are present? And alongside that, why is it Arabic and not Hebrew? I'm not implying that it should use the Hebrew names rather than the Arabic ones, but if you're going to include one, it'd make sense to also include the other. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:48, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The simple reason why we have used the Arabic names instead of the Hebrew names is because the Arabic names used for most of these plants are names that have been used for hundreds of years, in most places, whereas the Hebrew names, for the most part, are only Modern Hebrew names invented by botanists in the last 70 years or so. In fact, the Old Hebrew names used for most of these plants are no longer known, as we have no ancient recorded history for the names of the vast majority of these plants (save for the common plants named in the Hebrew Bible and in the Mishnah, such as for barley, lettuce, asparagus, wild cress, etc.). Another reason is because the Arabic names have actually been used by Israeli botanists to help identify certain plants merely described in ancient Jewish writings, since Arabic is a cognate language of Hebrew. That is to say, medieval Jewish commentators often will write the Arabic name when explaining to their readers the identification of a certain plant mentioned in 2nd-century Hebrew manuscripts, and which modern-day botanists quickly make note of. A third reason is because all the Hebrew sources cited in this article mention the Arabic names for these plants, alongside their Modern Hebrew name. A fourth reason is because the other non-Jewish sources used in this article, particularly Gustaf Dalman who investigated these plants in Palestine, only mention their Arabic names.Davidbena (talk) 02:58, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All right, that makes sense. I would make one recommendation; given the inclusion of the Arabic names, there should be a separate column just for them. Probably between the "Common name" and "Observations" columns, because the way the Arabic names are placed within a parenthesis in the "Observations" section look a bit off. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what an extra column will add to making the sense more legible, as the current format puts the Arabic name in parentheses, preceded by the word "Arabic" for its Arabic name.Davidbena (talk) 17:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened an RM because of concerns that this article, including its title, fails MOS:/. Israel / Palestine is ambiguous and most likely means Israel and Palestine. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By a consensus, the article's name has already been changed to: "Wild edible plants of Israel and Palestine." @Vanamonde93:, if you can find the time to make a complete review of the page and suggest ways to improve the article, I will do my best to comply to your suggestions.Davidbena (talk) 21:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. ! Species becomes !scope=col | Species. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.
• Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | ''[[Aizoon canariense]]'' becomes !scope=row | ''[[Aizoon canariense]]''. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 01:25, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @PresN:, Thanks. I will try and work on all these improvements at the first available opportunity. At my first try, I was unsuccessful in using that template. I must be doing something wrong, so I will just read the instructions in MOS:DTAB. If I should have any questions, I'll get back to you.Davidbena (talk) 08:54, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @PresN: I read the MOS:DTAB instructions and, while it made matters a little easier for me to understand, I am still not 100% certain that I am doing things correctly. Meanwhile, to the best of my ability, I have used the prescribed format for the first 23 entries in the list of "Herbs, grasses, fungi and shrubs." I'd appreciate it if you could just check for a moment to see that I'm doing things correctly before I should proceed further on, and if I should be doing something differently, how I should proceed. Thanks!Davidbena (talk) 10:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Made an edit to those 23, which hopefully makes sense; let me know if it doesn't. --PresN 20:40, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, it does, and I have followed your lead and completed all the rest, including those listed under the heading "Trees". If there is something else that needs to be done, please inform me.Davidbena (talk) 01:05, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• A lot of work has obviously gone into this article, but according to tehcnical Wikipedia criteria it looks a long way from being of FLC standard. 1. There are many unreferenced statements. They should all be referenced. 2. The criteria for inclusion are not stated. Presuambly a full list would not be possible, but are they the ones in a particular source or ones selected by the nominator? 3. The 'Further reading' section should be after the bibliography. 4. Ref 31 has an error message 'Cite journal requires |journal=' 5. All or almost all sources have an error message of the form 'Harv warning: There is no link pointing to this citation. The anchor is named CITEREFKrispil2000.' You can suppress this by adding a field "|ref = none". (This stops it searching for a non-existent harv ref). 6. See Template:Cite book for a list of available fields. You can use orig-year instead of putting the original publication of Zohary outside the template. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:46, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have begun to work on some of these problems, to fix them.Davidbena (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dudley Miles: With respect to your instruction to add the field "|ref= none", I was uncertain where exactly it should be added. I added the field to the "Bibliography" section, after the uppermost template {{refbegin|30em|ref= none}}, but I am still uncertain if I did the right thing. As a precaution, I also added the field after the sources named for Krispil. Should I go through all the sources and do the same? Please advise.Davidbena (talk) 13:52, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid it has to be added to each source, e.g. * {{cite book|last1=Amar|first1=Z.|author-link1=Zohar Amar|last2=Serri|first2=Yaron|year=2004|title=The Land of Israel and Syria as Described by al-Tamimi – Jerusalem Physician of the 10th Century|location=Ramat-Gan|language=he|isbn=965-226-252-8 |oclc=607157392|ref=none}}. Dudley Miles (talk) 23:56, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll do that now.Davidbena (talk) 02:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 DoneDavidbena (talk) 02:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 8 now has an error message. That is because it is the one harv ref and 'ref=none' stops it connecting to the source. I realise now that you got all the error messages because you had one harv ref and if there is one the bot looks for harv refs on all citations. If there had been no harv refs there would have been no error messages. I hope this is clear. The easiest way of dealing with the problem is probably to convert ref 8 to a non-harv ref (which would also make all the ref=none fields unnecessary). Dudley Miles (talk) 10:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just now converted ref 8 to a non-harv ref. At least I know now what it is used for, perhaps for future articles. Cheers.Davidbena (talk) 18:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination has been open for four months without any supports, and has stalled out. It also still appears to have some unreferenced text. It's a big shame, but at this point I'm going to close the nomination- feel free to renominate at a later date. --PresN 13:23, 13 April 2023 (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.

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) 00:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [2].[reply]

Nominator(s): – Ianblair23 (talk) 07:52, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, it has been a little while but I am to glad to present this list to you for review. Similar to the Australia Test and the England Test cricket records lists, the one is on the middle child of game – One Day Internationals. As always I look forward to your feedback. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 07:52, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 01:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• "ODIs consist [plural]..... and is [singular] played"
• "each of with have permanent ODI status" should be "each of which has permanent ODI status"
• "He has scored a record 82 half-centuries" => "He scored a record 82 half-centuries"
• "Overall Record" should not have a capital on the second word
• "Australia has played the second-highest number of ODI matches, behind India who have competed in 1,020" - why is Australia singular but India plural in this sentence?
• "They have yet to play against the Africa XI...." - and now Australia is/are also plural......?
• "Australia has never lost a match" - and now singular again.....?
• "The highest innings total scored in ODI cricket came in the series between England and the Netherlands in June 2022. Playing in the first ODI at VRA Cricket Ground, Amstelveen the tourists posted a total of 4/498. This broke the record of 6/481 also set by England at Trent Bridge against Australia three years prior." - why is any of this relevant to an article on specifically Australian records?
• "South Africa claims the highest successful run chase in ODI cricket when they scored 9/438 chasing a target of 435 runs." - same again, not relevant to Australian records
• "The lowest innings total scored in ODI cricket came in the third ODI of Sri Lanka's tour of Zimbabwe in April 2004. Zimbabwe in the first innings was bowled all out for 35 runs.[45] This record was equalled in February 2020 in the final match of the Nepal Tri-Nation Series where the hosts bowled out the United States." - same here
• "The greatest winning margin by runs in ODI cricket was India's victory over Sri Lanka at the Greenfield International Stadium in Thiruvananthapuram in January 2023 where the hosts won by a margin of 317 runs.[52] This eclipsed New Zealand's victory over Ireland by 290 runs during the 2008 Associates Tri-Series in Scotland." - same here
• I'm not going to keep pointing out instances like the above, but if the article is about Australian records, I don't see the need to keep detailing the overall records (and in some cases even the second best, third best or even fourth best performance!) that are held by other teams
• "the most recent being third ODI against Pakistan" => "the most recent being the third ODI against Pakistan"
• "got Australia home with three ball remaining" => "got Australia home with three balls remaining"
• "The most recent as of December 2022, was against" => "The most recent as of December 2022 was against"
• "losing by margin of 242 runs" => "losing by a margin of 242 runs"
• "Australia have lost an ODI match by a margin of 10 wickets on only one occasion [....] Australia was bowled all out" - more singular/plural disagreement
• "ODI cricket has seen sixty-six matches been decided by a margin of one wicket" => "ODI cricket has seen sixty-six matches decided by a margin of one wicket"
• "The most recent was final ODI of the five-match series against England" => "The most recent was the final ODI of the five-match series against England"
• "England run down the modest total of 206 runs" => "England ran down the modest total of 206 runs"
• "Posting 181, New Zealand ran down the total and won by the match" => "Posting 181, New Zealand ran down the total and won the match"
• "the side batting last has [singular] completed their [plural] innings"
• "As of December 2022, there have made 42 matches have ended in a tie" => "As of December 2022, 42 matches have ended in a tie"
• "In the only ODI match played against Pakistan during the 1988–89 tour, both teams finished with 229 runs in the 45-over match. Pakistan was declared winner though due to loss of one fewer wicket" => "In the only ODI match played against Pakistan during the 1988–89 tour, both teams finished with 229 runs in the 45-over match, but Pakistan was declared winner/were declared winners [depending on whether you decide that teams are actually singular/plural] due to loss of one fewer wicket"
• "A run is scored when the batsman hits the ball with his bat and with his partner" - reword this so it doesn't sound like he hits the ball with his partner
• "Ricky Ponting with 30 hundreds is in third" - this does not agree with the table, which says he has 29
• "George Bailey scored 478 runs in the ODI tour India in 2013," => "George Bailey scored 478 runs in the ODI tour of India in 2013,"
• "followed by Adam Gilchrist who failed score a run" => "followed by Adam Gilchrist who failed to score a run"
• "Glenn McGrath has taken the equal most ODI wickets (380) and return the best ODI bowling figures" => "Glenn McGrath has taken the equal most ODI wickets (380) and returned the best ODI bowling figures"
• "saw Glenn McGrath take 7/15 against in Namibia" => "saw Glenn McGrath take 7/15 against Namibia"
• "set during the semi final of 1975 Cricket World Cup" => "set during the semi final of the 1975 Cricket World Cup"
• "Fellow Australian Mitchell Starc, is currently sixth on the list," => Fellow Australian Mitchell Starc is currently sixth on the list,"
• "Australia's Brett Lee who took 9 five-wicket hauls throughout his career, is equal third with Shahid Afridi of Pakistan." - and apparently Starc is too......?
• "Australia's Mick Lewis, playing in his seventh and subsequent final match," => "Australia's Mick Lewis, playing in his seventh and final match,"
• "Three Australians have taken 14 wickets an ODI bilateral series" => "Three Australians have taken 14 wickets inan ODI bilateral series"
• "Australia's Adam Gilchrist is second only Sri Lanka's Kumar Sangakkara is taking" => "Australia's Adam Gilchrist is second only to Sri Lanka's Kumar Sangakkara in taking"
• "Adam Gilchrist has taken the most number of catches" => "Adam Gilchrist has taken the most catches"
• "He is followed former Australian captain Ricky Ponting who secured 160 catches" => "He is followed by former Australian captain Ricky Ponting who secured 160 catches"
• "Both George Bailey and Aaron Finch leads the list" => "George Bailey and Aaron Finch lead the list"
• "Simpson was called lead the national side" => "Simpson was called to lead the national side"
• "Australian batsmen current don't hold" => "Australian batsmen current do not hold"
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator abruptly stopped editing in January, with only two since then, the last a month ago, and no responses here. I'm going to close this nomination for now, and it can be renominated if they return. --PresN 13:23, 13 April 2023 (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.