Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/December 2019

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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 22:15:10 15 December 2019 (UTC) [1].

Nominator(s): ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 18:17, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Undertale is an indie video game created by Toby Fox. The game was crowdfunded via Kickstarter. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 18:17, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Support Comments from Alexandra

• I will be posting comments here soon.--Alexandra IDV^talk 06:55, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• As Harrias already mentioned below, this is currently a content fork of the parent article's Accolades section. I do think that it can be justified as a spin-out article, but the parent article should then not contain the accolades table, and should link to and summarize the list page.
• WP:VG/REC says to not use GameRankings other than in cases where a Metacritic score is unavailable (ie older games from before MC was created and became the industry standard).
• I believe there is a lot of extraneous information in the lead. It is good to introduce the topic to the reader and give context, but do we need to know details like how and when the development was funded, and how much the crowdfunding campaign made?
• Steam Spy makes estimates of sales based on checking how often it is included in public Steam user profiles - I think it should be clear that these are estimates, and not official numbers. As they are estimates, I also think a specific number like 530,343 is inappropriate - round to "over 530,000".
• "Nitendo" should be "Nintendo", and is here a publisher rather than a work
• The same year at Steam Awards the received the nomination - you are missing a word here
• The last paragraph in the lead is quite tedious to read, and is essentially just a list written out in sentence form. I would recommend summarizing what kinds of awards it won (story, game of the year, etc.), and mentioning any particularly major awards directly.
• I cannot support this just yet - ping me when the above has been addressed, and I will take a second look.--Alexandra IDV^talk 17:48, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexandra IDV: I have made changes to the list as you suggested. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 06:13, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay in returning to you on this. I am happy with the changes you implemented, and support the FLC.--Alexandra IDV^talk 02:46, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but after having seen Dissident's breakdown/removal of the invalid entries, I can no longer support this. I Oppose and recommend merging it back with the main article until (if) the game wins/is nominated for a significant amount of awards that would make for valid entries.--Alexandra^IDV 09:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Harrias

• Oppose Currently, I have little choice but to oppose this as a content fork of the parent article: Undertale#Accolades. Harrias ^talk 16:39, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Harrias CAPTAIN MEDUSA I think an easy solution to this would be to get rid of everything under accolades on the Undertale page and list the main article as this page. Pretty easy solution that's definitely not worth an oppose (to me at least). – zmbro _(talk) 22:00, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• zmbro: I have done as you suggested. Pinging Harrias. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 05:57, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Currently I have to Oppose until some parts of the article are fixed. I have not fully checked all the references on the table but here are my comments so far:

• Gaming publications/magazines need to be in italics. This includes IGN, Destructoid and GameSpot.
• Currently the Undertale logo is too large and takes up too much space. I suggest you reduce the size significantly.
• Currently the lede paragraph could do with improvement. Currently it is "Undertale is a role-playing video game created by American indie developer Toby Fox. Players in the game can freely roam the underground world filled with towns and caves. The underground is the home of monsters, many of whom challenge the player in combat. Players control a human child and choose whether to kill, befriend or flee the monsters. In 2013 the game was crowdfunded through the website Kickstarter." Currently the first sentence is generally fine. The others could be less redundant and the paragraph would look something like (changes in bold): "Undertale is a role-playing video game created by American developer Toby Fox. Players control a human child who can freely roam the underground world filled with towns and caves. The underground is the home of monsters, many of whom challenge the player in combat. Players can choose whether to kill, befriend or flee the monsters. In 2013, the game was crowdfunded through the website Kickstarter."
• References should wiki-link their respective Gaming publication.
• I could not find anything in the first Rock, Paper, Shotgun reference to state is was crowdfunded by Kickstarter
• I am going to need more references to state that the game was critical acclaimed and is a cult video game per WP:PEACOCK.
• The Ars Technica reference should cite the fourth page. Here is a URL citing the fourth page [2]
• Not sure how reliable the GamingOnLinux source is I would suggest swapping it out for a different one.
• Swap out the Eurogamer article and Japanese reference about PS4/Vita/Switch release since it is was about its upcoming release date. Citaitons of Release dates have to be after the game is out per WP:VG/DATE.
• "In 2016, at the 2016 Independent Games Festival the game..." One of those 2016's is redundant.

Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 18:31, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I have done as you requested Spy-cicle. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 12:43, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CAPTAIN MEDUSA Thanks for the speedy reply and changes. Currently, the introduction to the list has significantly improved. These are the additional comments I have upon further inspection of the list.

• "Funniest Game on PC from Rock, Paper, Shotgun" I could not find that within the cited soured.
• The archived source for IGN PC Game of the Year brings up a 404 error.
• "Game of the Year from ... IGN." I think it should state PC Game of the Year since IGN could have a different game for the overall game of the year regardless of platforms.
• "In 2016, at the Independent Games Festival the game won Audience Award, and garnered three nominated for Excellence in Audio, Excellence in Narrative, and Seumas McNally Grand Prize" The cited claim does not support the nominations and only the won award.
• The D.I.C.E Awards should have the . s in between and should be linked to its dedicated page D.I.C.E. Awards
• Currently the table is ordered by date. I suggest ordering it alphabetically by Award as seen on List of accolades received by Red Dead Redemption 2 since the left hand column is the award column. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 22:20, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Spy-cicle I have completed the further comments. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 19:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Superb work CAPTAIN MEDUSA, I happily Support this nomination for FL.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 20:23, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 20:24, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Whilst the quality of the List is high I am going to have currently strike my previous !vote due to the current uncertainity of whether this meets FLC#3c due to the relatively small number of entries on the list, especially since Dissident93 has removed further entries. However, I am not sure if all of those were justified. For example: British Academy Games Awards makes sense to be included although I do not think the same can be said for The Jimquisition. Although, others like IGN and GameSpot do somewhat make sense and have been featured on previous FLs like List of accolades received by Red Dead Redemption 2.

Regardless I am going to vote Merge back into Undertale for the time being. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 17:42, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• "freely roam the underground world" - I would suggest an underground world
• "and PlayStation Vita later on 15 September 2018 for Nintendo Switch" - this doesn't make sense. For which platform was it released on that date? If it was both, why does it not just say Vita and Switch together?
• "Review aggregator Metacritic, assigned" - no reason for that comma there
• "assigned the game a normalised score" - as it is a US topic, normalized should be spelt with a Z
• "receiving Game of the Month, and Funniest Game on PC" - again, no need for a comma there
• I would put "and" before "Game of the Year for PC", as it is the last item in a list
• "Matthew Crump Cultural Innovation Award" => "the Matthew Crump Cultural Innovation Award"
• Remove the comma after that award
• "from SXSW Gaming Awards" => "from the SXSW Gaming Awards"
• "from National Academy of Video Game Trade Reviewers awards" => "from the National Academy of Video Game Trade Reviewers Awards"
• "Undertale was nominated for Innovation Award" => "Undertale was nominated for the Innovation Award"
• "at Game Developers Choice Awards" => "at the Game Developers Choice Awards"
• "the game won Audience Award" => "the game won the Audience Award"
• "and garnered three nominated" => "and garnered three nominations"
• " and Seumas McNally Grand Prize." => " and the Seumas McNally Grand Prize."
• "The same year at Steam Awards" => "The same year at the Steam Awards"
• Note a - "Date is linked to the article about the awards held that year, wherever possible." - is there really any point in this note given that not a single date is linked?
• Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:35, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisTheDude — Done. I have also looked at the uses of the article. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 11:48, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:44, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Oppose - hopelessly and unaddressably fails FLC#3c "In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article." Accolades lists are generally only split from a main article when they reach a certain (vaguely defined) length. This list does not meet that minimum. This list consists of a lead that is mostly copied from the parent article and the list itself which is less than a page and a half long. When it was still part of the main article, it was in a drop down list that took up even less space. There is no conceivable way for this list about a four year old game to expand to meet minimum standalone list requirements and honestly should just be merged back to the main article post haste. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:47, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Axem Titanium. As it states on WP:SIZERULE > 100 kB Almost certainly should be divided. The current size of the article is 71,498 bytes and with table 31,819 which adds to 103,317. Some parts of the article need to be copied such as plot, award, and logo. The list originally was hidden so there is no impact reader. Also per MOS:DONTHIDE Scrolling lists, and collapsible templates that toggle text display between hide and show, can interfere with readers' ability to access our content. Such mechanisms are not to be used to conceal "spoiler" information. If the information is important and the concern is article density or length, consider dividing the article into more sections, integrating unnecessarily list-formatted information into the article prose, or splitting the article. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 12:57, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, the table, before you removed it from the main article, was only 17kb out of a total article size of 89kb. Second of all, according to WP:SIZERULE, "These rules of thumb apply only to readable prose and not to wiki markup size (as found on history lists or other means)". The readable prose in Undertale is only 22.5kb. I don't have a preference between a hideable table and not; I was merely reporting its state before you removed it. This split was done unilaterally by Captain Medusa on November 19, 2019, after zero discussion and with no prior indications from any editor that a split was necessary or desirable. I will refrain from speculating about the motivations of the author to make such a split and rush it to FLC just 2 days later. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:58, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Should I rewrite the list or start a discussion. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 12:29, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would withdraw the nomination and merge the table back into the main article as a start. Ordinarily, I would revert it myself via WP:BRD but you've gone ahead and nominated it for FLC so that makes reverting more challenging. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:57, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Giants2008 PresN A user is claiming the nominator should withdrawal this nom and merge this list into the main article's page even though it currently has three supports. I think we should get at least one or both of your opinions on this matter before the nominator does so. – zmbro _(talk) 20:35, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We haven't had a lot of video game accolade lists come to FLC, but I remember seeing somewhere that movie/music accolade lists of under 25 items were prime candidates to fail 3b, as they could be merged into parent articles. This list has 27 items, so it's a very borderline case either way. More input from the community would be nice here, as it's a case where the FLC community, and not merely the leaders of FLC, should decide whether a separate article can meet 3b in this scenario, where it isn't clear-cut. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:47, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; this seems borderline to me, but I honestly am not a fan of accolade lists at all so I feel I'm not 100% in step with the community on this issue. I'd also like more comments here on this issue; additionally, I'm going to post an invitation at WT:VG for subject-area editors to chime in as well. --PresN 03:33, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge back to Undertale. Some of the entries on this list are simply editor opinions (WEBSITE's GOTY) or fan votes, and not real, jury-weighted awards. If they aren't supposed to be added in full articles, why should they be allowed here? Once you remove them, the list goes down to eight entries, which is way too few to support a split. I really don't see how or why somebody thought this list was worthy of becoming featured. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 04:11, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge There's no SIZE issue with this information in the original Undertale article, and thus the split to try to get this as FLC seems disinguine. (This is per a request from PresN at WT:VG for input). --Masem (t) 04:25, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Undertale. There is next to no reason to have this as a separate article considering how little there is in the way of actual content. This should not be a Featured List, or a Featured List candidate, whatsoever. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 04:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge the list is very small and there is no need to be separate from the original article.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^{Chat Contribs} 17:28, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge – since I've provided input on this but never a direct support or oppose I have to say I recommend merging as well sadly. – zmbro _(talk) 17:35, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FLC  Request withdrawn. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 18:34, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN and Giants2008: Nominator wishes to withdraw FLC. Cowlibob (talk) 12:26, 11 December 2019 (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. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:15, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 22:12:12 1 December 2019 (UTC) [3].

Nominator(s): Johhnyfrankie13 16:14, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because i already edit this wikipedia is about 3 months and my mission is to get the featured list. I already solved all the error, wrong sources, dead link & many more. I already changed the awards template to the latest one, and some colours on the title. The template that i've changed it look more beautiful than before. But some of the awards sources has been removed because of the wikipedia mirror but I already put this wikipedia as a Dynamic list. Johhnyfrankie13 16:14, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

• Three quick points:
  • The awards should all be in one table like List of awards and nominations received by Kylie Minogue, not lots of little tables.
  • Dozens of the entries have literally no source
  • Why have you listed yourself as the author of half of the references???!!!
• To be honest, I don't think this list is anywhere near Featured quality yet -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:03, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose: I agree with ChrisTheDude's comments. Several entries do not have sources, and the nominator should not list themselves as the author of the references. It would be best to follow the more current FL format and combine the tables into one, but the biggest issue with this list is the sourcing. This is not ready for a FLC, and I would recommend withdrawing it. Aoba47 (talk) 20:01, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm sorry i totally thought the author is the one who make the categories. I will resolve this problem as soon as possible but now I think it should to withdrawing. Johhnyfrankie13 19:15, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I would definitely recommend withdrawing, as there are many problems with the article. The quality of the written English is not very good (I would recommend having it copy edited by a native English speaker), there are many rows with unreliable sources or no source at all, and some of the information is simply wrong - you list Britney as having been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame as a performer, which I can tell you is 100% not true (I think you are misunderstanding the source which says "Britney Spears' critically acclaimed 2007 album Blackout has [been] added to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame's music library and archives". This is totally different to the performer being inducted into the Hall of Fame -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with ChrisTheDude's comments (again). I would also encourage you to look at featured lists on awards/nominations to get a better grasp on the expectations for this type of list. Good luck with the work! Aoba47 (talk) 16:59, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

100% Oppose. Where do I start? – zmbro _(talk) 02:55, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Should only be one table
• Ref cols should not be sortable
• Albums are italicized per MOS:ITALICTITLE, not stated next to it
• "The Bambi Awards is huge European Awards" Uh...what?
• "has won 1 awards" is stated multiple times
• "Honors" is spelled both "honours" and "honors" on the same page, which it should be American style
• What in the world is a "listicle"?
• The "Achievements" section is cluttered with grammar mistakes, missing references, random capitalization, etc.
• Idk what made you believe that listing yourself as the author of almost every reference is ok (because it obviously isn't)
• I click "Blandford 2002" on ref 218 and it takes me nowhere (there's no book listed)
• The majority of these refs should be archived
• Many are incomplete and only have urls and titles, if that
• Ref 59 literally has a "[non-primary source needed]" tag
• I fully doubt "Britney.com" is a reliable source
• Refs 122–129 all contain random ">"'s

All the things listed don't cover anything. This is clearly nowhere near ready to become and FL. Like Aoba said, have this copyedited by a native English speaker, as this clearly needs it. I also suggest withdrawing. – zmbro _(talk) 02:55, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Multiple issues related to sourcing and the lead needing to be rewritten. Not ready for FL. Recommend withdrawal. Cowlibob (talk) 14:23, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Just to clarify, I oppose too. I think this one could be put out of its misery...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:12, 26 November 2019 (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. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:12, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 22:06:04 1 December 2019 (UTC) [4].

Nominator(s): Nimrodbr (talk) 12:29, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets all aspects of the FL criteria, comprehensive covering all cities that host and will host the Olympic Games. I believe that the list is good and gives complete information about the topic. Nimrodbr (talk) 12:29, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose You have not been a significant contributor to this article; while drive-by nominations are allowed, your having a connection to the article lets us know it has already been reviewed and you will improve it further.

• To begin, FLs do not begin with "This is a list of...".
• "Since then, summer games have usually – but not always – celebrated a four-year period known as an Olympiad." This does not make sense. The games take place every four years but they do are not a "celebration" of that whole time period.
• There are individualized sources for the 1920 to 1936 games, but no others.
• I'm not sure why this article is needed when we have Winter_Olympic_Games#List_of_Winter_Olympic_Games and Summer_Olympic_Games#List_of_Summer_Olympic_Games; this is redundant.
• Several of the footnotes are unreferenced.

Please go through the article carefully and check for full citations, consistency, and copywriting/MOS compliance before we go further, but thanks for taking the initiative on this! Reywas92^Talk 00:28, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose mainly on inadequate sourcing - most of the table and some of the footnotes have no sources -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:49, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Lots of uncited content, lead needs significant work. Nominator has not significantly edited the article. Since nomination about a month ago, no significant work has been undertaken. Cowlibob (talk) 12:55, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Several serious issues with the article. Dey subrata (talk) 15:39, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – per reasons above. – zmbro _(talk) 04:07, 27 November 2019 (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. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:05, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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