Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/October 2024

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, 29 October 2024 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Nominator(s): 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 12:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because the list fits the FL criteria (by me fixing and sourcing all the items). This is my first FL nomination, so feel free to point out mistakes. Anyway, everything about the topic is covered and everything is sourced. Good to go. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 12:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

• 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. ! Year becomes !scope=col | Year. 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. | 1987 becomes !scope=row | 1987 (on its own line). 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. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More points

• Please fix the ref error shown at the bottom of the page.
• Remove the spacer rows between each set of olympics winners.
• Add relevant wikilinks to the lead and some references. You can reuse the ones from later in the page, if appropriate.
• Most of the references are missing archive links. Running IABOT on the page should fix most of these. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:20, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, what ref error? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Refs are missing archive links, no ref error though. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I use another script/bot? The screen says, "Permission error". 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 08:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, got the hang of it, archived the links. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 08:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, ping me here when you take care of the rest of the stuff that I mentioned. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Nothing is linked in the lead - add appropriate links
• "Ever since then, the Philippines gained multiple medals, with their first gold medal gained" => "The Philippines gained their first gold medal"
• The Philippines is treated as both singular and plural in the lead
• "competing in the Men's 100 metres" - no reason for capital M in the middle of a sentence
• "In the next Olympic Games at Amsterdam, Netherlands" => "In the next Olympic Games in Amsterdam, Netherlands"
• "finished third at the Men's 200 metre breaststroke aquatic event" => "finished third in the men's 200 metre breaststroke aquatic event"
• "until 2020 Summer Olympics." => "until the 2020 Summer Olympics."
• "The country would also win another bronze medal" => "The country also won another bronze medal"
• "gained a bronze medal in the Men's 400 metre hurdles athletic event" - no reason for capital M
• Diaz and Yidefonso image captions do not need full stops
• "was beaten at the gold medal bout" => "was beaten in the gold medal bout"
• "The next Olympic medals for the Philippines come from Boxing," => "The next Olympic medals for the Philippines came from boxing,"
• "and his brother Mansueto "Onyok" Velasco, claiming silver" - no reason for comma after his name
• "at Atlanta, United States" => "in Atlanta, United States"
• " Hidilyn Diaz finished second at the Women's" => " Hidilyn Diaz finished second in the women's"
• "at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil." => "in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil."
• "gold medal finish in the Women's 55 kg weightlifting category" => "gold medal finish in the women's 55 kg weightlifting category"
• "the other athletes finishing with medals are" => "the other athletes finishing with medals were"
• "silver medal in the Women's featherweight boxing finals" => "silver medal in the women's featherweight boxing finals"
• "also winning a silver medal in the Men's flyweight boxing finals" => "also winning a silver medal in the men's flyweight boxing finals"
• "Eumir Marcial, with a bronze medal finish in the men's middleweight boxing category semi-finals"
• "finished first at the Men's floor exercise and Men's vault artistic" => "finished first in the men's floor exercise and men's vault artistic"
• "at Paris, France." => "in Paris, France."
• "two other athletes won with medals" => "two other athletes won medals"
• "a bronze medal finish in the Women's flyweight boxing category semifinals" => "a bronze medal finish in the women's flyweight boxing category semi-finals"
• "bronze medal in the Women's featherweight boxing category semifinals" => "bronze medal in the women's featherweight boxing category semi-finals"
• In the list of medalists table, the "name" column should sort based on surname, not forename
• No reason for blank rows after every games
• "Nesthy Petecio is the first Filipino boxer to win" => "Nesthy Petecio was the first Filipino boxer to win"
• In the Youth Olympics section, there's a footnote symbol that doesn't link to anything
• "Luis Gabriel Moreno who did not officially medal for the Philippines at the 2014 Youth Summer Olympics did win" => "Luis Gabriel Moreno, who did not officially medal for the Philippines at the 2014 Youth Summer Olympics, did win". Also link his name
• "at the Mixed team event" => "in the mixed team event"
• "The following are medalists in official demonstrations sports" => "The following are medalists in official demonstration sports"
• in the Medal tally by individual table, the "person" column should sort based on surname, not forename
• Gold/siver/bronze column headers are randomly coloured in some tables but not others
• "teams that are composed of members from more than one NOCs." => "teams that are composed of members from more than one NOC."
• Also, you need to explain what NOC means in that note
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

   Done 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  One thing I didn't pick up before - why do all the tables have column headers of Gold/Silver/Bronze except for one which has 1/2/3.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• All of your images need alt text. For more information, see MOS:ALT.
• While it is redirected, Leopoldo Serantes is misspelled in the history section.
• The icons in the Summer Olympics table under List of Medals need to be marked as decorative images, per MOS:PDI.
• Your references columns should be unsortable. In addition, use {{refh}} to make the column information clearer.
• The system of marking active competitors with just bold text is difficult to read for many people (and screen readers might ignore it entirely.). I would recommend using a template for that purpose: {{active}} along with a symbol like {{double-dagger}} for the screen readers.
• In addition, why are you denoting active competitors only in the "Multiple Medalists" table?
• You have two different footnote systems going, {{refn}} with a note parameter and {{efn}}. I would pick one and stick to it, or differentiate why you have two.
• Footnote a has an unnecessary redlink.
• Why do we have a {{DEFAULTSORT}} with the article title with some additional terms capitalized? Sorts ignore case, so I believe this is unnecessary.

That's what I got. ~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 15:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For your third bullet, how to do that? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Didn't feel the need to insert the dagger, and didn't include Medal tally by individual, since they are already mentioned above. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It should be as simple as adding |alt= |link= to the images.

Whatever change you made also added empty rows to the Summer Olympics table, in the List of Medals section. ~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 14:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 09:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing the change for my third bullet, but that might be a caching issue. Support ~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 16:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The icons are assigned to a specific template, hence why I didn't do your request. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An IP is reverting my edits for the active competitors, because bold words are regularly only shown in the Multiple medalists table. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 08:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Focusing only on reference formatting, and not whether the references actually verify the information:

• Formatting in the references is inconsistent, specifically when mentioning Olympedia. Make it consistent and link to Olympedia
• Remove "Olympedia – " from the reference titles
• Ref 3 – Add link to Routledge
• Ref 5 – Dead, mark as such
• Ref 7 – It's unclear what this is supposed to be verifying, but it's an image on flickr and is not a useful / good reference
• Ref 8 – Do not include both a website and publisher. International Swimming Hall of Fame should be listed under website/work, not publisher in this case.
• Ref 10 – Do not include 3 entries for the work, go with BBC Sport
• Ref 21 – 2024 Summer Olympics is not the website. Link instead to International Olympic Committee
• Ref 25 – Link to Philippine Daily Inquirer instead of "INQUIRER.net"
• Ref 26 – A wordpress website which is currently down. Mark link as dead or replace it.
• Ref 27 – Link to Olympic Council of Ireland.
• Ref 28 – Do not include the International Olympic Committee as both the work and publisher, remove them as publisher and add link in work parameter
• Ref 29 – International Olympic Committee added to both work and publisher fields again
• Ref 30 – Add link to The Philippine Star
• Ref 31 – Add link to GMA News Online
• Ref 32 – Add link to ABS-CBN
• Ref 33 – Add publish date and change website to The Philippine Star
• Ref 34 – Add publish date and change website to The Philippine Star

Other comments:

• The tables lack row and column scopes
• "Mixed team" should not be capitalized mid sentence
• Do not add empty rows into tables to split them up further, it messes with accessibility (I don't have the link off the top of my head right now)
• None of the pictogram images hve alt text
• Is there a reason home regions are not linked?
• Lead needs work, it's choppy as can be.
• There's a multiple medalist table under the medalist table which already pretty clearly shows who won multiple medals
• Reference columns should be unsortable

There's a lot, and I could have actually said more, but this is what I have for now. Ping me when it's been addressed and I'll look through again. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the ref errors. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 08:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The multiple medalist table is shown in other Olympic medalists lists. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 08:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, an IP is reverting my edits removing the empty rows referencing other articles. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 08:22, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not receive a ping and had not come back to this yet @TheNuggeteer. Are you aware of whether your restrictions from ANI apply to existing nominations? Hey man im josh (talk) 14:11, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per the nominator's topic ban from content assessment processes, including FLC, this nomination should not have been opened, and will be archived. --PresN 16:43, 28 October 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.

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, 28 October 2024 (UTC) [2].[reply]

Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 05:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC), Johnboddie 17:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This should be good to go. The "See also" section includes two featured tree lists; I'm following the same format, mostly. As always, I've got tallies of the image licenses on the talk page. Enjoy. - Dank (push to talk) 15:30, 30 August 2024 (UTC) Simplified 13:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Skipping the template: the table needs rowscopes! --PresN 21:56, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Done. - Dank (push to talk) 22:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added Johnboddie as a co-nom, for the work he did on this list (and on all of them). - Dank (push to talk) 17:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Adding this to remind me to finally look at this one like I promised I would -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Link terpenes. I for one have no idea what this word means.
• That's all I got - amazing work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:33, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A solution just occurred to me ... "sap products" ... does that work for you? - Dank (push to talk) 14:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Does indeed work for me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Done. - Dank (push to talk) 14:17, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ChrisTheDude: let me know if this doesn't work for you ... I changed "sap products" to "sap resins" (resins is linked in the lead), to avoid confusion with food products from sap. - Dank (push to talk) 05:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sounds reasonable -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:44, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Dank:, @Johnboddie:. The sources look good here and check out, and while they are consistently formatted, I question the ease of use to repeat the same string Silvics of North America, Volume 2. Hardwoods. Washington, DC: US Forest Service, Department of Agriculture (US Government Printing Office). pp. 211–214, 333–338. ISBN 978-0-16-029260-6. ad nauseum – it makes it difficult to find specific sources while scanning through it. Something I do when I cite multiple chapters of the same book is using template:Wikicite with indented chapter cites; see an example in Bonn–Oberkassel_dog#Bibliography. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 18:08, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure, no objection, if you want to make the change. I'm laid up with health issues at the moment. - Dank (push to talk) 20:59, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Oh no! I'm sorry to hear that. Yeah, I'll be happy to do that. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:24, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FLC director and delegates: Could someone archive this nomination? I'm away for a while. Please and thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 13:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you feel better soon. Archiving. --PresN 13:57, 27 October 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.

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, 27 October 2024 (UTC) [3].[reply]

Nominator(s): Yilku1 (talk) 19:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because Salamone is one of the most unique architects in Argentina, with a Metropolis-inspired style. I went to the library of the architecture school in my city to read the books to make this article. Yilku1 (talk) 19:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• What's the initial sorting order of the tables? It's not the name of the building or the date. In fact it just seems completely random..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:21, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I sorted by partidos, what would be an accepted order?.--Yilku1 (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • If that is the case, why is "General San Martín" near the bottom......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      Would it be better to sort by building name? Yilku1 (talk) 01:28, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

      I would say that either building name or date would be the most logical things by which to sort -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:53, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

       Done I sorted by building name. I didn't see your comment before. Yilku1 (talk) 05:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I would also add that the sorting by coordinate is not working and that the "Notes" column should not be sortable. Broc (talk) 21:07, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That is because addresses are before coordinates. Yilku1 (talk) 01:57, 10 August 2024 (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. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 19:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

   Done Yilku1 (talk) 17:21, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "The majority of his work consisted mainly of" - no need to say both "the majority of" and "mainly" so get rid of one
• "he only built 2 private homes" => "he only built two private homes"
• "only projected 2 buildings" - the number should be written as a word. Also, I have no idea what you mean when you say he "projected" two buildings. This verb does not make sense in this context in English.
• Capitalisation of most of the headings is wrong. Only the first word should be capitalised.
• One address and a few dates are missing. Are these not known?
• Almost all of the notes are not full sentences so they don't need full stops. The one word note "Extension" certainly doesn't need one.
• "For the following works it can not be fully confirmed the authorship of Salamone." => "For the following works the authorship of Salamone cannot be fully confirmed." -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:27, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

   Done The missing dates are not listed in my sources. Yilku1 (talk) 20:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• more than 60 monumental buildings in Buenos Aires Province - Maybe in the Buenos Aires Province?
• After several problems - What kinds of problems?
• the task of building different public buildings - Erecting? Constructing? Find something to avoid the repetition.
• giving him full powers for his projects, encouraging the growth of small towns and cities - Those two gerunds in a row sound a bit odd. Maybe something along the lines of giving him full powers for his projects, which were expected to encourage the growth of small towns and cities?
• You can say something more about Salamone in the caption of the image. In any case, it shouldn't have a full stop, as it's not a complete sentence.
• municipalities - Maybe you mean city hall?
• cemeteries portals - cemetery portals
• In Argentina the territorial divisions of second order are called Partidos in the Buenos Aires and Departamentos in the other provinces - No need for the uppercase in Partidos or Departamentos.
• The town of Vicente López covers the whole Partido of the same name - Same with Partido.
• Consider using {{ill}} to link cities and towns which don't have an article on this Wikipedia.
• Consider splitting the references into two columns.
• Many of the issues raised above by ChrisTheDude have not been addressed yet, I'm afraid.

I still have to take a look at the table, but I'd rather wait until you take previous comments into consideration. Kind regards, Alavense (talk) 14:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Yilku1 (talk) 23:27, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think many of the suggestions haven't been taken into account yet. As ChrisTheDude pointed out, there are many notes which probably could do without the full stops. The caption could have a bit more than just the name of the architect. I notice now, as well, that this list is probably a translation of the Spanish one? In that case, the translation would need an attribution, and that's a requirement. You can read more about that here. Alavense (talk) 05:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What counts as full sentences and what doesn't? Does "Work by César Fernández" needs a full stop or not? Does it need attribution if I am the author of both articles? Yilku1 (talk) 18:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that is definitely not a full sentence. I reckon that's pretty obvious. You can find more information regarding those issues in WP:CAPTION. And I don't think the fact that you are the "author" (whatever that means) of the other article matters. I already provided a link with further information. Kind regards, Alavense (talk) 18:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed more full stops. Yilku1 (talk) 02:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just following up with @Alavense to see if all of their concerns have been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still concerned about lack of attribution for the translation, for example. Kind regards, Alavense (talk) 06:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done It's in the talk page. Yilku1 (talk) 04:09, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The image in the infobox is of the architect and has an appropriate public domain license.
• The remaining images are also all relevant, being of the structures listed.
• All the images have ALT tags, although these seem to be titles rather than descriptions.
• The majority of the images have been uploaded to Wikimedia by their creators and have an appropriate Creative Commons license tags, including:
  • Palacio Municipal de Carhué.JPG*Municipalidad Gonzalez Chávez.jpg
  • Centro Cultural de González Chavez.JPG
  • Delegacion municipal alberdi bsas.jpg
  • Matadero de Alberdi, provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Obra del arquitecto Francesco Salamone.jpg
  • Municipalidad de Alberti 2019.jpg
  • Ex Club Social de Alberti bis.jpg
  • Antigua delegación municipal de Alem, provincia de Buenos Aires.jpg
  • Matadero de Alem, provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Obra del arquitecto Francesco Salamone.jpg
  • Salamone en Ayacucho y Alvear.jpg
  • AzulCementerio.jpg
  • Ex-Matadero Municipal de Azul.JPG
  • Cementerio Municipal de Balcarce, Obra del Arq. Salamone.jpg
  • Matadero Municipal.jpg
  • DelegacionMunicipal LagunaAlsina.jpg
  • Delegación Municipal Cacharí.JPG
  • MataderoMunicipalCacharí.jpg
  • Casa de Carlos Calegari.jpg
  • DelegacionMunicipal Casbas.jpg
  • Delegación Municipal Chillar.JPG
  • Matadero chillar.jpg
  • Delegación Coronel Mom.jpg
  • Municipalidad de Pringles (3).JPG
  • Matadero Municipal de Coronel Pringles (2).JPG
  • Casa Daneri-DSCN0142.jpg
  • Casa mdp.jpg
  • Hospital Municipal General Eustoquio Díaz Vélez.jpg
  • DelegacionMunicipal Garre.jpg
  • Palacio Municipal Guaminí 1x1.jpg
  • Matadero Guamini 2x3.jpg
  • Corralón Municipal Laprida.jpg
  • Laprida Cemetery Facade 04.JPG
  • Palacio Municipal de Laprida, fachada.JPG
  • Delegación Municipal de Los Pinos 15092013.jpg
  • DelegacionMunicipal Miranda.jpg
  • MataderoMunicipal Pellegrini.jpg
  • Palacio Municipal de Rauch.JPG
  • Escuela Secundaria Nº 1.jpg
  • Saldungaray Portal Cementerio.jpg
  • Delegación Municipal de Saldungaray 2.JPG
  • Mercado Saldungaray.jpg
  • Matadero Saldungaray 1.jpg
  • Cementerio Salliqueló.jpg
  • MataderoMunicipal Salliqueló.jpg
  • Delegación Municipal de San Agustín.jpg
  • DelegacionMunicipal TresLomas.jpg
  • MataderoMunicipal TresLomas.jpg
  • Delegación Municipal Tres Picos.jpg
  • Matadero de Vedia, provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Obra del arquitecto Francesco Salamone.jpg
  • Matadero Municipal de Villa Epecuén 1x1.jpg
  • Matadero Modelo Villa María.JPG
  • Municipalidad de Pringles (4).JPG
  • FuenteOrnamental Guaminí.jpg
  • Cruz del Cementerio de Carhué.JPG
  • Cruz del Cementerio.JPG
  • Cruz5.jpg
  • ViaCrucis Azul.jpg
  • Cruz Guamini.jpg
  • Portada Parque Municipal de Azul D.F.Sarmiento.JPG
  • Plaza General Arias.jpg
  • Palacio Municipal de Pellegrini, Equipamientos..JPG
  • Portal del Parque Municipal General San Martín.jpg
  • PlazaIndependencia Saldungaray.jpg
  • Plaza Juan Pascual Pringles 03.JPG
  • PlazaLeandroNAlem TresLomas.jpg
  • PlazoletaMunicipalidad Rauch.jpg
  • Plaza San Martin de Azul.jpg
• Valle Hermoso Cine Valle de la Castellana.jpg is released by its author with a GNU license as well as a CC license.
• The following have appropriate public domain licenses in Argentina as the images are more than 25 years old and were first published over 20 years ago:
  • Matadero de Laprida.png Municipalidad de Las Varillas.jpg
  • Municipalidad de Vedia 1940.jpg
  • Cementerio de Pilar.jpg
  • Palacio Municipal de Tornquist 1940.jpg
  • Plaza Centenario.png
  • Villa María, Boulevard España.jpg
  • Plaza Libertad Balcarce 1937.jpg
  • Plaza Pedro Pereyra 2.jpg
  • Plaza Rivadavia Vedia.jpg
  • Portal del parque Venado Tuerto.png
  • Portal del parque Garay

• The following images are from Flicr and have been reviewed:
  • Municipalidad de Chascomús.jpg
  • Municipalidad de Pellegrini.jpg

• The following has been released by the author into the public domain:
  • Tornquist1.jpg

In summary, the images seem relevant and have appropriate license tags. simongraham (talk) 21:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added these new images: File:Chascomús, Buenos Aires Province, Argentina - panoramio (27).jpg, File:Cementerio de laprida salamone.jpg, File:Plaza General San Martín (Azul, Buenos Aires).jpg. Yilku1 (talk) 04:33, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination has been open for over 2 months without any support for promotion. If this does not change soon the nomination will be closed. I would recommend reaching out to likely reviewers to try to get it some more attention. @Alavense: do you plan on returning to support or oppose this nomination? --PresN 18:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this list still needs quite a lot of work, as it has been pointed out by other reviewers. Alavense (talk) 07:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging @ChrisTheDude: Yilku1 (talk) 00:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious a great deal of effort has gone into compiling this list, and the main editor has done a good job of presenting the information well. That being said, there are a few issues, one major, which would prevent me supporting promotion at present.

Criterion 1: Prose - "it features professional standards of writing"

• "60 monumental buildings" - In what way are the buildings "monumental"? Are slaughterhouses, sidewalks car parks and street furniture generally monumental? More importantly, who says that they are?
• "a new mayor was elected that started solving the municipal deficit by ending public works and accusing the former mayor of embezzlement" - this doesn't quite work. I think it is saying that a new mayor attempted to solve a municipal deficit by ending public works, and by an anti-corruption drive. This led to Salamone leaving Villa Maria due to his work drying up. But I'm not sure, as the prose is unclear.
• "the conservative Manuel Fresco of the National Democratic Party" - a social conservative, a political conservative? Does it matter?
• What are "cemetery portals"? Gates?
• "of corruption in a paving work" - what is a paving work? A project to undertake the paving of streets?
• "on two buildings of rationalist style" - link, Rationalism (architecture)?

Criterion 3: Comprehensiveness - "it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items"

• For me, the major concern is the absence of any notes for most of the entries. This is particularly important as none of the entries in the list have standalone articles. Therefore, without any annotation, the reader is left with next to no information on the buildings themselves. Who built them/paid for them? In what style were they constructed? What functions did they serve? Do they still exist/have they been demolished/repurposed? For example, what were the "Alberdi/Alem/Bonifacio... Municipal Delegations"? Are they town halls? What happened at the "Municipal Ranch"? What was the "Spain House"? This last does have a one-word note, "Extension". But to what original structure? In this regard, the absence of a "Type/Function" column seems to me to be a weakness. There clearly are themes - lots of municipal offices/slaughterhouses/car parks/cemeteries etc. It would be helpful to be able to sort by function. Looking at some, random, current Architecture FLs, [4], I'm not immediately seeing any that have almost entirely empty Notes columns. This is the case even if many/most of the entries have standalone articles. I feel that, currently, the reader is left wanting in this regard. I'm unsure whether the main editor would be able to address this issue within the FLC, but will see what they say. At present, I would Oppose promotion. KJP1 (talk) 06:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Working in it. Yilku1 (talk) 04:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Fixed your points, fortunately I found a book by the National Monuments Commission listing protected buildings built by Salamone. Yilku1 (talk) 04:29, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PresN - Apologies, RL has been busy. I am afraid I am still of the Oppose view. The editor has done a grand job of responding to my concerns about the lack of Notes: but there are still gaps, e.g. "Las Varillas City Hall"; some read like quotes, but aren't attributed, "Stands out a precast Art Deco bow-shaped parasol resembling the grille of a car"; some are very brief, e.g. "Alberdi Slaughterhouse"; I don't think the repeated use of "Currently" works as it doesn't future-proof the article; and some I don't understand, what is "Oral source" and what is it sourced to? There is also a sentence in the lead that I was concerned by which hasn't been addressed. Admiring as I am of the author's efforts, I think there is more work required to bring it to FL standard than can/should take place within an active FLC. KJP1 (talk) 01:24, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination has been open well past the time it would normally be closed, so in order to move it past the finish line, pinging everyone involved who has not formally closed their review or where the nominator responded to their oppose: Alavense ChrisTheDude KJP1. Please support/oppose/recuse as appropriate. --PresN 14:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN: - I'll recuse from this one, sorry -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, with no prose supports and several opposes after multiple months, I'm going to have to close this nomination. Additionally, I have concerns that the notes added are copyright violations, given the phrasing. Feel free to renominate in the future. --PresN 16:08, 26 October 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.

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, 27 October 2024 (UTC) [5].[reply]

Nominator(s): Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 21:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it meets the criteria and I was indirectly encouraged by someone on the Discord to do this (aka QoH). Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 21:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose This is just a basic bullet-pointed list and lacks visual appeal and usefulness of a sortable table typically preferred for featured lists. I don't find this particularly informative to read either because it only has a title, year, and artist for each work – the Capitol complex is very large, where are these pieces? What type of artwork are they? Which are part of the Statuary Hall or other collections? https://www.aoc.gov/explore-capitol-campus/art lets me filter by location, medium, and other criteria, but this page does nothing but wikilink to those with articles. Reywas92^Talk 03:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Reywas92: I have remade the list table with everything you mentioned included. :) Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 16:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Very nice and fast work! I will continue the review soon. One note is that a substantial portion of the list is the Statuary Hall collection, and there's already Statues of the National Statuary Hall Collection as a FL. I'm thinking it may make sense to remove those from this list to de-clutter a bit and treat that as a subarticle. Reywas92^Talk 22:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would make sense, but if I was just a passerby looking for "Artwork at the Capitol" I'd rather have it on one page then "Statues are located on another page". The list also covers artwork at the Capitol in general, it's not just paintings or statues. The statues list would still be needed though, because it goes into more detail about the statues themselves. (Also, I'll add a see also to the Statue article). Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 13:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reywas92: Are you still going to do the review? It's fine if not. :) SirMemeGod  13:37, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry! A few more comments:
  • The lead should be reworked a bit, ideally expanded. There's not much of a general overview, just a highlight of two artists. In particular, the first sentence doesn't need to call out Brumidi, start with a topical introduction, then get to him. Then it's weird that 2 of 8 sentences are a fun fact about the Kamehemeha statue. With hundreds of items here, there should be more summarization. There's already an article on Statuary Hall Collection, so this should have more focus on other areas as well.
  • No quotation marks on Cox Corridors
  • Sortability of the Location column doesn't work because some start with "above" or other words. Maybe reorder some words or use hidden sort keys.
  • Several locations are just United States Capitol, can these be more specific?

Thanks, Reywas92^Talk 14:35, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reywas92: All issues have been addressed. :) SirMemeGod  15:15, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Drive-by comment: the artist column should sort based on surname, not forename -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:24, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: Fixed. SirMemeGod  18:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Another driveby: Most of the ones beginning with C are missing row headers for whatever reason. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 19:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Two more things:

  • Steven Weitzman (Frederick Douglass Statue) and Thomas Crawford (House Bronze Doors, Justice and History Sculpture, Progress of Civilization Pediment, Senate Bronze Doors, and Statue of Freedom) are links to disambiguation pages.
  • The way "Antonio Capellano and Enrico Causici" is linked is unconsistent, René Robert Cavelier Sieur de La Salle Relief Sculpture redlinks just Capellano, but Christopher Columbus Relief Sculpture and John Cabot Relief Sculpture redlink the duo.

  (still not a full review, although I may well end up doing one) Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 22:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Will get to it shortly, I admittedlty can't figure out how to make the "C" section have shaded headers and have spent way too much time trying to find out how. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 22:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Done for you since you're a first time nom (welcome!) Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 22:55, 8 September 2024 (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. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 15:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. SirMemeGod  13:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I see above that this is your first nomination. Welcome! Just a few notes for you:

• All of the images need alt text, per MOS:ALT. Alt text should describe a bit about the images for users that use a screen reader.
• There is some inconsistency in the table for when you link - sometimes if an article doesn't exist it's a redlink but other times it's unlinked. The same with your artists. I would recommend making your linking consistent, either link all artwork and artists or only link ones with articles.
• I've noticed that most of this article is sourced to the US Government. While that is fine, I'm wondering if maybe you could find some third-party sources for the introduction?
• Are there an overall category at Commons for the artwork? If so, it should be linked in an "External Links" section using {{Commons category-inline}}. That being said, I was unable to find a category so feel free to ignore if you can't find one either. See also: MOS:ELLAYOUT

Feel free to ping me if you have any questions or need help. ~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 19:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir MemeGod: Following up on the above. Do you need any help with this? ~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 18:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for not responding, I guess I just forgot about the discussion. I'll get to it shortly. :) SirMemeGod  19:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir MemeGod: Following up again. ~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 21:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've been procrastinating it just because of the sheer amount of work that will need done. I'm currently working on it, I'll have it done by next Thursday. :) SirMemeGod  22:02, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Matthewrb: I have addressed all issues mentioned (obviously besides the alt texts, I'm still working on that). I checked and was unable to locate a Commons category, so I ignored that one. :) SirMemeGod  14:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir MemeGod, would c:CAT:Items on display inside the United States Capitol work? slightly different scope, but seems to pretty much have the same things as this list. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 01:38, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... it might, I'll add it. SirMemeGod  12:46, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Matthewrb: Apologies for the nonstop pings, but I have (painstakingly) added all 300-or-so alt texts. I'm just glad to have got that done in time, and now I can finally say that all of the issues you pointed out have been addressed and corrected. (I guess I can also say that I spent 3 days adding 300 alt texts to one singular article). :) SirMemeGod  16:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I don't mind the pings, thank you for keeping me in the loop! Well done, the changes look good. ~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 21:45, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Here via the WikiProject notices. I'm not regular at FLC and I see no mention in the criteria but I found it curious that the entire list is sourced to the same affiliated https://www.aoc.gov/explore-capitol-campus/art Architect of the Capitol directory. Shouldn't lists cite independent, secondary sources both for purposes of notability and reader lookup? czar 12:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe with lists, it's fine. I'm also new to the process as well, so I'm not exactly sure. SirMemeGod  12:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I am unsure how many of the artworks with "unknown" dates are truly unknown - For instance, the Architect of the Capitol's Flickr (A fascinating source, I'm sure theres a better one out there) says the JFK Room Plaque was placed on June 30, 1964; and the Smithsonian database puts the John Cabot relief sculpture at 1828. You also have two sculptures with empty dates - Sir Walter Raleigh Relief Sculpture and Tobacco Column Capitals. I think all of unknowns and empties can be resolved with a little bit of digging - if a work has a truly unknown date, you'll be able to find a cite for that.
• Since a reader can rearrange the order of the list dynamically from the default order, you needn't only cite only the first mention of things. The SEAOFBLUE fades when it comes to lists.
• If a name is a description of an object rather than its actual given name, don't italicize it. The Doric Columns are not an art piece called Doric Columns , they are doric columns.
• I feel some of those unknown artists can also be resolved with digging - especially through newspapers, remember that the Library of Congress has a searchable index with especially good coverage of DC papers - although I will concede this might not be possible in all cases. If not, I would leave it blank rather than say unknown, if you don't have a source for it - it'd technically be OR to say it's unknown if you just don't have any sources that say something.

That's all from me - sorry for the paragraph, @Sir MemeGod:. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 18:24, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to it shortly. I've fixed all the dates and names I could find (around 30), the only ones missing information are plaques, which I can't find anything else on. I'll let you know when I'm done with the other stuff. :) SirMemeGod  18:35, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Generalissima: How does it look now? I've linked all locations with articles and have added all the dates and such that I could (some I seriously couldn't find anything on, so I just blanked the box instead of keeping it as "unknown"). I also de-italicized the names of the columns and other non-titled things. :) SirMemeGod  20:57, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks a lot better now - though I noticed some glitches like a missing ref (and possibly merged ref column?) on the Charles Carroll Statue Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:09, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, for some reason that specific box was missing (not sure how that happened). :) SirMemeGod  21:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! Support. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 22:02, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've only seen this today; the talk page was only given a WikiProject Visual arts banner on 17 October and it's taken until now for me to spot it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts § Article alerts. I'm currently opposing this, mostly because I'm concerned about what's been left out. Category:Paintings in the United States Capitol has seven portraits not covered here: Abraham Lincoln (Bittinger); Corinne Claiborne (Lindy) Boggs; First Reading of the Emancipation Proclamation of President Lincoln; Lansdowne portrait (apparently there's a copy of that one in the U.S. Capitol); Portrait of Charles Sumner; Portrait of Frederick Muhlenberg (again, the Capitol has a copy of this one); and Portrait of John C. Calhoun. Portraits of individual sitters in oils on canvas are absent from this list, and I can't believe that a largely 19th-century building the size of the Capitol wouldn't have a large number of those – those seven paintings can't be the only ones missing. More research is needed before this can fulfil the Comprehensiveness criterion at Wikipedia:Featured list criteria. Ham II (talk) 08:47, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this up, in one of the citations was a website with a bunch of things I missed, I'll get back to you when I've added it all, I can probably get it done by Monday. SirMemeGod  12:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn, there's no way I would be able to add 2,000 entries to this list in a timely manner. Instead, I'll work on a list specifically for Capitol portraits and nominate that one, since this list may very well never be complete. :) SirMemeGod  19:47, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FLC director and delegates: nom withdrawn. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 19:47, 26 October 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.

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, 27 October 2024 (UTC) [6].[reply]

Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because all of the information has been properly sourced and tables have been formatted to comply with Wikipedia's MOS. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• All images are relevant to article
• All images appropriately captioned
• All images have appropriate licensing, AGF on self-published works
• Images need alt text - see MOS:ALT for more information
• Images need to be resized using scaling instead of specifying px. See WP:SCALE for more information

Thanks for your work @Bgsu98. Staraction (talk | contribs) 13:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These should all be addressed. Thank you so much for your input! Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Support on images. Staraction (talk | contribs) 01:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• How come you used so many external links for sources for some of these tables? The international tables, except for the cancelled international competitions, are all pointing to external sources instead of following the format (references in that row instead) used by the rest of the article
• Date formats are inconsistent in references, consider adding {{Use mdy dates|July 2024}} to the top of the article under the short description
• Inconsistent linking of works in references, an example of this is
• Access dates missing for a number of sources
• Links should be archived once the bot is back up
• A number of references use "ISU results" as the website and "International Skating Union" as the publisher. It makes more sense to use just "International Skating Union"
• Some refs need to be downcased, such as 74, 76, and 77, so the names are not entirely capitalized
• A lot of these references to social media posts are dead with no archive link available, such as refs 7, 10, 16, and 24

I think there's a fair bit of work that still needs to be done on this article. Please ping me when you reply. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh, with regards to your first question, I don't know. That is how these season articles have always been set up. Is there any benefit to providing a link versus an imbedded source? If not, I will convert them all over to sources. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delayed response @Bgsu98, I missed yours when catching up on my pings yesterday. See WP:CS:EMBED, which is about avoiding embedded links. Additionally, I think it makes sense to be consistent throughout the list and for the tables to not have different reference styles. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:10, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. I have begun replacing the links with proper sources. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:17, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh, thank you for improving the source formats. I will finish converting the dance links over this weekend; I had new teacher orientation all this week and haven't had much time for Wikipedia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh, I have finished converting the links to proper sources for the ice dance section, which should complete everything. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to address. Bgsu98 (Talk) 05:21, 18 August 2024 (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. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 15:36, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  PresN, those captions should all be included now. Thank you for catching those for me! Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination has been open well past the time it would normally be closed, so in order to move it past the finish line, pinging everyone involved who has not formally closed their review: @Hey man im josh:. Please support/oppose/recuse as appropriate. --PresN 14:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regretfully, at this point in time I think there are too many inconsistencies for me to support. Some of the issues include

• Dates in some of these tables not sorting properly (alphabetically instead)
• Inconsistency between tables (many sortable while others are not)
• A lack of sort names in so
• Inconsistency in reference formatting

It's a good list, and I believe it to be accurate, but I don't believe it meets our expectations for featured lists at this point in time. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:19, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, with no prose supports after multiple months, I'm going to have to close this nomination. Feel free to renominate in the future. --PresN 16:09, 26 October 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.

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 withdrawn by Hey man im josh via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 24 October 2024 (UTC) [7].[reply]

Nominator(s): « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was tough. Over 1,800 entries for the Packers all-time roster. For this list, I will note that I weighed two variables higher than I usually do: article size and reliability. I created this roster in the simplest form I could to facilitate ease of updating. No need for 50+ entries to be updated with their tenure, games played, positions, etc. If they played one, game then they get added. As somewhat of a precedent, Outline of lichens provides a good example of a massive list that is primarily just bulleted data, allowing for proper organization/sorting but not providing any additional details on the entries. As always, happy to address any concerns (one note, I have a 2024 holding area on the talk page, if this is a concern and there is a desire for the list to be up-to-date per the most recent game, let me know and I will do it). « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:19, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• What's actually sourcing the list? Is it ref 4? If so, I would make it a "general" ref above the numbered reflist -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • ChrisTheDude, done! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not an official 'review', since I'm not familiar with FLC, but I came up with two points from looking at the list: (i) did 'Earl Smith' (the lone redlink) really play for the Packers? I can't find him at PFR nor PFA; (ii) is it correct to say that Roster sizes have evolved since the early days of the NFL, growing from 18 roster spots in 1921 to the upper 40s by the 2020s.? The gameday roster is 47/48 active players but overall the 'active roster' can contain 53 if I remember correctly (see Template:Green Bay Packers roster which has 53 active). BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:14, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BeanieFan11, great comments. I will admit that Earl Smith (American football) frustrated me. I did some more investigation and realized that he and Mike Merriweather never recorded a game played but are still included in the Packers' all-time roster. If you search on the Packers all-time roster for games played less than 1, those two come up. I will address this with a note and remove them from the main list. I will fix it to say the low 50s and add a note. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd keep Merriweather, as the list says it is for those who have played at least one regular season or postseason game – and per PFR he appeared for them in the playoffs. Likewise you could add Keshawn Banks, who appeared in one playoff game last year. I don't see why they have Smith in the all-time roster, though. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added both BeanieFan11. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:45, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you added Merriweather and Banks to the list, you should probably remove Merriweather from note one (Packers.com includes Earl Smith and Mike Merriweather on their all-time roster, but neither played in a game for the team. As such, they are excluded from this list). BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*facepalm* thanks BeanieFan11! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:14, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there an existing "standard" for NFL all-time roster lists? I only ask because if you look at equivalent lists for association football, e.g. List of Arsenal F.C. players, the standard format includes more information i.e. the dates of a player's career, their nationality, their playing position, and their stats, whereas this article is just literally a list of names. Appreciate that stats might not be appropriate in this case given that players are not all measured in the same way and nationality might be excessive as they are/were probably pretty much all American, but would giving the positions and dates not be beneficial to the reader? Just a thought...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisTheDude, there is no WP:NFL standard that I am aware of. If you look at almost all the team lists (easily looked at List of NFL players), they are a mix of just bare lists all the way to tables. That said, my reasoning on this list was based on accuracy, ease of updating and page size. If you go back and look at all of those lists, none are actually up-to-date. Seeing as this list is currently over 1,800 players and grows by about 30 a year, it just becomes too cumbersome and difficult to update when you have to include years and games. Positions become difficult too, as many early players played like 6 different positions. That will also increase the size of the page exponentially, necessitating splitting it at some point, making navigation and updating even harder. The companion of this list, Lists of Green Bay Packers players, provides easy navigation to the type of tabular lists that provide that information. And per WP:NOTSTATS, if you really want to dive into a searchable statistical database, you probably go elsewhere then Wikipedia (Pro-Football-Reference.com, as an example). Lastly, the criteria say where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items. I think the where appropriate part provides the type of wiggle-room that has led Outline of lichens, for example, to be a FL, and what I am looking for here. I wanted a page that I could conceivably manage each season and maintain a high level of accuracy. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:33, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I now note that you said pretty much all of that in the nomination statement that I was clearly too lazy to read ;-P -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:22, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha no worries! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:33, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisTheDude, I just wanted to note that WikiOriginal-9 has been doing a crazy amount of work on these lists, including creating List of NFL players and all of its sub-articles, as well as overhauling each list, completely separate from my work on this list. They have chosen this standard format for all of the lists they have overhauled, standardizing this across the board. See for example List of New York Giants players (A–Kim). The only difference being my use of a general source for the list, which then removes the need for 1,800 references, helping keep the page size and loading times down. But from a standard layout, including not providing position/year/college data, I think this is now the acceptable format. Does this satisfy your concerns and provide an avenue for you to support the nomination? Thanks for any insight you can provide. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:50, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, I did check this list as well and totaled the same number of players as Gonzo, so it's 100% accurate. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisTheDude just wanted to note that I have added some symbology for the players in the HOF and for players in the GB HOF. Let me know if there is anything I can do to address any concerns you have. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:01, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @FLC director and delegates: I would like to withdraw this nomination for now. Thank you. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:00, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:02, 23 October 2024 (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 withdrawn by Hey man im josh via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC) [8].[reply]

Nominator(s): Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:55, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I have spent the past few days drafting up an overhaul of the list in my sandbox. I adapted the format from the other FLs in the series particularly the Arizona. I am disclosing upfront my reasoning for nominating this which is I hope to get it passed for the Wikicup. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:55, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive by comment: Double check accuracy of 1940. How did Roosevelt win with 43% of the vote, when his opponent had 57% but only 34k votes? Ravendrop 23:29, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well its simple, someone incompetent put in the wrong numbers Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "It was initially granted 7 electoral votes,[2] gaining three following the 1910 census" - write both numbers as words
• "to 8 votes in the 1950 census[5] before returning to its original 7 following the 2000 census." - write those numbers as words too
• "was won by Republican candidates Richard Nixon/Henry C. Lodge" - any reason for the slash rather than "and"?
• " decided cast a faithless vote" - the word "to" is missing
• "for Harry F. Byrd/Barry Goldwater" - same comment about the slash
• "While the state initially went back and fourth " - last word is spelt incorrectly
• "etween voting democrat and republican" - capitals on the party names, surely.....?
• Comma needed before "most recently"
• "Republicans having won every single county since the 2004 presidential election and the state being Donald Trump's third largest margin of victory in 2016" - this is not a grammatically complete sentence
• "Republicans have won the election without carrying the state only twice" - what does "carrying the state" mean?
• "While democrats have won without the state 8 times, most recently Joe Biden in 2020." - this is not a grammatically complete sentence
• also that 8 should be written as a word and Democrats should have a capital D
• "Additionally, a third party did not qualify every single year." - no need for the word "additionally" here
• That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @ChrisTheDude: I think I fixed all of it Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:46, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  "Carrying the state" is still unexplained and the final sentence of the lead is still a fragment rather than a full sentence...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:07, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @ChrisTheDude: I replaced carrying with winning and per another editor merged the final two sentences. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  One last query - the double dagger in 1920 is bolded - is this intentional and if so, what does it signify? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Nothing. It was a mistake Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:22, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824

• The scope for "Winner", "Runner-up" and "Other candidate" should be colgroup.
• Bold text shouldn't be the only way to indicate something. Use a symbol too.
• 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 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. !{{anchor|1912}} becomes !scope=row|{{anchor|1912}} (on its own line). 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. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:41, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @MPGuy2824: Done :D Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Bold text shouldn't be the only way to indicate something. Use a symbol too. On second thought, this is not needed. The winners (in the state) are already in the "winner" colgroup and so don't need the extra symbol to differentiate them. My fault for not noticing. Sorry about that.
  • I'm also noticing a cs1 error for the wsj 2016 ref. Please fix. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    So I fixed the first thing. Secondly is the issue also in WSJ 2012? Because the two citations look identical besides the title and dates. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I would merge the last two sentences, because that While at the beginning of the last one feels a bit odd.
• For purposes of these lists - Even though there may be other lists for other states, we only have one list in hand here, so I'd say something along the lines of "For the purpose of this list".
• At the beginning of the second paragraph, "1960 election" should be in blue and not only 1960.
• The state later passed a law that would invalidate any votes cast - I don't think I understand that. So is any vote cast invalidated? Or only those by faithless electors?
• Republicans having won every single county since the 2004 presidential election, additionally the state was Donald Trump's third largest margin of victory in 2016 - The way this is written, I feel the sentence would read more naturally without the "additionally".

That's what I saw, OlifanofmrTennant. Kind regards, Alavense (talk) 06:48, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adressed most of the comments, for the fourth point: you've taken a portion of the sentence and not the full one Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. But the sentence didn't make sense. It does now, though, because of the change ChrisTheDude made. Is that what you meant originally? Alavense (talk) 20:12, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Republicans having won every single county since the 2004 presidential election; the state was Donald Trump's third largest margin of victory in 2016. - That sentence still doesn't quite work. Either you exchange the semicolon for a comma or you say "Republicans have won every single county". Alavense (talk) 20:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just gonna send a ping to see if all of @Alavense's concerns have been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poking @Alavense once again. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't see the first ping. I'm afraid I'm in no position to support yet. I feel as if the text could still be worked on a little bit more. For example, when reading the first paragraph out loud, you'll find out that it's a constant "census ... census ... census ... census". Same about While the state initially went back and forth between voting Democrat and Republican, more recently the state has been considered a safe red state, which has too many "states". Alavense (talk) 15:58, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alavense: I addressed the second concern but the first one kinda has to be that way since its discussing results of the census. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:22, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alavense: Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I feel the article is not up to the standard yet with regard to how it's written. I don't really know how I can help here, but I'm afraid I cannot support. Kind regards, Alavense (talk) 14:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Always a pleasure to see that this series is being continued on the format I set some 3 years ago!

• What is Oklahoma? Ofcouse it is a state but I don't expect a non-American to know it, or to know what are we focusing on trends of a state. The first introductory sentence should be like "Oklahoma is a state in __ part of the Southern/Central United States", like the first sentence here.
• "Since it first joined the United States in 1907," : How many times has Oklahoma joined the United States?
• "electoral votes, gaining" --> "electoral votes, but/and gained"
• "it was given an additional vote in the 1930 census" --> "it was given an additional electoral vote following the 1930 census"
• On another note, why are we so much inclined to list all the changes in its electoral vote count? These lists are to analyze the results of elections every 4 years in these states. I think all we should be specifying should be the current electoral vote count (as of 2024).
• "In the 1960 election the state was won by Republican candidates Richard Nixon and Henry C. Lodge" --> Can just say Republican ticket lead by Nixon. Why mention Lodge?
• "votes cast by and issue fines to faithless electors" --> "votes cast by faithless electors, in addition to issuing fines to"
• "While initially Oklahoma went back and forth between voting Democrat and Republican, more recently it has been considered a safe red state." - What is "initially", what is "more recently". It is always better to provide years, if not decades (like since 70s, its a safe red state)
• "Republicans having won every single county since the 2004 presidential election, the state was Donald Trump's third largest margin of victory in 2016." --> This sentence simply doesn't work for me. It state two arbitary facts and tries to combine then in attempt to get a link between both, which doesn't happen. Split and state both things as separate facts. And why does it matter if it is the third largest margin of victory for a particular candidate. We are writing this becuase contemporary media articles have stated this. Did we conduct a thorough research (which I admit, as wikipedians, we are not responsible of doing. We are not historians) whether Oklahoma had third or second or fourth largest margin of victory for Bush 92' or Nixon 68' or not? I don't know, neither do I expect anyone to know, but whats the point of writing it was for Trump in '16 if there is no conclusion we can draw from it?
• "Democrats have won without the state eight times, the most recent example being Joe Biden in 2020." : Whats the importance of giving most recent example when it has happened 8 times?
• "Note – Percentages may not total 100.0% because of rounding." Not just because of rounding, also somethimes there are some 0.02 or 0.07 percentage of votes to a fourth candidate not in the table. I don't think we need to justify this, it is pretty obvious. I'd suggest removing this, but I won't oppose just on this.

Im sorry but I am leaning to oppose due to the prose and anaylsis part. The table is fine; in fact it looks perfect. The references need a bit of formatting changes. The is missing in NYT, WSJ, etc. I rarely oppose, especially here at FLC. I have to oppose becuase this is a "short and sweet" article, we have nothing more to give to a reader than the table and formatting. So there is no reason why it should be a FL unless it has a strong interesting lead, alongside solid references and sources. This has scope for improvement, but that would happen if the entire prose part is re-written. I am willing to help if you wish. As the things stand, this unfortunately does not "exemplify Wikipedia's very best work". Let me know if you need any help, I am willing to remove the oppose if substancial changes are made.

– Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kavyansh.Singh: Thank you for your comments. Unfourtnetly I saw your comments as I was withdrawing this nomination while I rework the lead. I'll defently take your notes under consideration. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou @OlifanofmrTennant, that is a very kind thing to do. The list has potential to be a FL, feel free to leave a message at my talk whenever (if) you need any help reagrding this list or any other similar list, and I'll be more than willing to help. p.s. you'll need to inform one of the FLC coordinators that you are withdrawing this nomination to prepare it off FLC. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Due to substantail prose issues noted by multiple reviewers I wish to withdraw this nomination and both rewrite the lead myself as well as requesting a copy edit at the GOCE. @Hey man im josh: I saw you commented twice so maybe you wish to do the formal closureQuestions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:15, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries @OlifanofmrTennant, I hope you come back with this again sometime or another nomination.

• Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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