Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/December 2013

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 31 December 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Nominator(s): Zia Khan 14:15, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This list is based upon pre-existing lists of the similar type and I believe this is according to the FL criteria. Comments and suggestion are appreciated! Zia Khan 14:15, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 15:35, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 03:34, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The only issue I can see is this: "His accomplishments with the bat during the 1993 English cricket season led to him [.....] and described him that he......" - his accomplishments with the bat didn't describe him as anything, also in English we don't "describe that" something. I would re-write the sentence to "His accomplishments with the bat during the 1993 English cricket season led to Wisden naming him as one of their Cricketers of the Year in 1994 and describing him as "the most assured batsman in the Australian team"". Hope this helps -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:44, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. Zia Khan 12:13, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - you missed out a word when you put my suggested revised sentence in, but I fixed that for you -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:54, 12 December 2013 (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 promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 31 December 2013 (UTC) [2].[reply]

Nominator(s): GRAPPLE X 02:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This one was progressing alright the first time around but then I had to go and disappear for a while (aliens). I think I've caught up to everything that had been mentioned the last time around, plus any relevant material from the intervening time has been added (along with a nice shiny picture). I promise I won't get abducted a second time around. GRAPPLE X 02:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - My comments were all addressed the first time around. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:44, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Why is there not a template for the artist at the bottom? CrowzRSA 22:34, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Good catch. Added GRAPPLE X 01:24, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - everything else looks good to me. CrowzRSA 16:52, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Lightlowemon

• He played bass guitar with the group between 1987 and 2001. Any chance this sentence could be merged with the one before or after? It sounds like a fragment.

  Merged. GRAPPLE X 20:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• In his time with the band, Newsted was given writing credit for only three Metallica songs. I count six in the table.

  I guess that does look a bit off. There are three actual songs which he has credits for ("Blackened", "My Friend of Misery" and "Where the Wild Things Are"), but there's also a bass solo from a live album listed there, which is his own work (I don't own it but I'm 99% sure it's actually the bass intro to "My Friend of Misery"), another live bass solo which might or might not be the same work, and a medley of songs ("Justice Medley") which includes parts from "Blackened" (here's a breakdown of the parts). I'm at a loss for how to succinctly explain that only three studio-recorded songs featured original work credited to him though. :( GRAPPLE X 20:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The only thing I can think of is to adda note to those three songs and put it in a notes section at the bottom. --Lightlowemon (talk) 06:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• However, Newsted faced difficulty integrating with the group, and found little opportunity to add his music input. In his time with the band, Newsted was given writing credit for only three Metallica songs. to add his music input? The sentence sounds a little off, since this seems to be a cause and effect thing (as in the sentences are directly related), maybe merge these sentences somehow?

  How does it look now? GRAPPLE X 20:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Still not a fan of the term music input maybe musical influence? Other then that looks good. --Lightlowemon (talk) 06:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Newsted wrote and recorded three albums with the band: Voivod, Katorz and Infini. You just mentioned three different bands in the sentence before, so you need to specify which one you are talking about (even if it is obvious due to the album titles. Also you mention these three albums and yet I only see one listed in the table, why is this?

  Reworded it in the intro, but the three albums are definitely listed in the table (sort by "artist"; the first three Voivoid songs are each from a different album). GRAPPLE X 20:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• My mistake, had it sorted by album name at the time. --Lightlowemon (talk) 06:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I do find it a little strange that you have 13 artists yet only mention 9 in the lead, missing The Moss Brothers, Unkle, IR8 and Sexoturica and Sepultura

  I couldn't find anything about his involvement with Moss Brothers beyond the raw credits in order to say anything about it, and I wasn't sure a one-song cameo for Sepultura was worth much of a mention. I could see about digging up some of the other stuff, though the IR8 and Sexoturica stuff is just one split demo that appears to have been a pair of self-released vanity projects. GRAPPLE X 20:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• This isn't a point that would stop me supporting, just seems a little odd is all, especially since you've mentioned bands his done less work with. --Lightlowemon (talk) 06:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Several songs and a few writers are redirects, you don't have to do anything with these just pointing them out:

Songs - ...And Justice for All (both occurrences), Battery (both), Blackened, Die, Die My Darling (listed with an extra comma after the second Die), Sad But True (all versions; in regards to the above comment, it should be spelt however it appears on the album), To Live Is to Die, The Unforgiven II (links to section) and Welcome Home (Sanitarium)

Writers - Chris Exall, Clive Blake

• I figure there's no harm keeping extant redirects in case they're expanded in the future; I'm not worried about creating anything yet though. GRAPPLE X 20:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Die, Die My Darling and Sad But/but True still need to be fixed (the extra comma and casing). I agree there's no harm in keeping them, just thought I'd let you know. --Lightlowemon (talk) 06:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, why is Papa Wheelie not linked in the navbox?

  I kept reading this as infobox and wondering what I was missing—fixed now though. GRAPPLE X 20:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Echobrain is used as a reference name twice in the article.

  Fixed the web ref to another name. GRAPPLE X 20:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The AllRovi site seems to be down, any idea if this is permanent?

Looks good overall. --Lightlowemon (talk) 13:52, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• About to start working through these now, but about the last one—apparently AllRovi has once again split into the two sites that merged to form it in the first place (AllMovie and AllMusic, where "Rovi" comes from is a mystery). Looks like the content still exists but just elsewhere. I'm going to poke around and see if it's an easy fix or if I need to replace all the URLs manually. GRAPPLE X 19:58, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Struck the comments that had been addressed and left comments. Once the reference and the remaining small issues are fixed I'll be happy to support. --Lightlowemon (talk) 06:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Added in an extra line in the lead which should mean all acts are now covered, and have fixed the unnecessary redirects. I also managed to get the URLs fixed in the refs for AllMusic; as I had hoped it turned out to be a simple change that could be applied en masse to everything. GRAPPLE X 00:25, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• My deepest apologies I thought I replied, due to the names implying they aren't lyrical tracks and are just audio, I'm happy to support this list. --Lightlowemon (talk) 05:50, 20 December 2013 (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 promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC) [3].[reply]

Nominator(s): Lemonade51 (talk) 21:34, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating this again after no 'consensus' was reached at the first time of asking. A complete list of Arsenal's record against every team they have played in the league, which wasn't the case when I nominated this months ago. All feedback is welcome, thanks. Lemonade51 (talk) 21:34, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• There should be a totals row. Nergaal (talk) 10:05, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confused. There is already a totals row. Unless you mean something else? Lemonade51 (talk) 20:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe he means at the very bottom of the article there should be a totals column for Arsenals overall record throughout their history. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure whether that is a necessary requirement. It'll be easy to accumulate the Premier League total, but very time-consuming for the other leagues Arsenal have played. Lemonade51 (talk) 17:05, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Anyway, other than what Eddie said I can not find anything wrong with this list. It has everything someone doing research would expect and more. Easily earns my support. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 22:57, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• In regards to the season articles, and the fact that some of the years relate to different leagues (united league, football league etc) it night be worth adding some sort of note and symbol to show that the first match against a club was in either the united league or southern district combination league.

Adding symbols would mean adding a colour scheme and in the case of West Ham, it would have been conflicting as they are Arsenal's divisional opponents, who they first met in the London League. So left notes clubs Arsenal first played in the United League, the Southern District Combination, the London League Premier Division (ie: discontinued leagues). Lemonade51 (talk) 21:32, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is probably a better way of showing the information. All issues resolved. Support. Eddie6705 (talk) 22:50, 27 November 2013 (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 promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC) [4].[reply]

Nominator(s): PresN 22:47, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm finally nearing the end of getting all of WP:SE's lists to featured status- though of course, that means we're down to the even-more-obscure ones. Here we have what should be the bottom of that- the DS:Style line of educational software products for the Nintendo DS, which started out in 2007 with fascinating topics like gardening and yoga, and ended after 22 releases in 2011 with study guides for the Japanese real estate exam. Riveting stuff. The main point of notability for these Japan-only products is that they represented an attempt by Square Enix, a massive video game developer/publisher, to expand their product lines to include the non-traditional-gaming public. Turns out there's only so much you can do with that when producing software for a video game console. Anyways, thanks for reviewing! --PresN 22:47, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments These lists really are getting to obscurity aren't they? Good luck on the last two Dragon Quest lists. Not sure what your position is on red links, but I'd consider linking LEC certification test, Japan Legal Mind, and even Tipness. They may not get articles any time soon, but a red link isn't necessary a bad link. Due to there being no parent article, a third paragraph in the lead with a bit of overviewing reception of the series from the reference links might give the article a bit of a boost. Also, just a heads up that all the Gamespot links are broken I believe. This is (as you noted) a very obscure list, especially as it doesn't have any English release and it's content is pretty much only concerning the originating language, good luck on the nomination. --Lightlowemon (talk) 11:37, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the broken links and added some redlinks. --PresN 18:32, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they are, mind if I ask for your feedback about a potential third paragraph? --Lightlowemon (talk) 11:03, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added one, but there weren't really reviews for them- they're really just software products, and as such after the first blip were largely ignored- they're the kind of thing you pick up in passing in the store, not the kind of thing you read big reviews of on websites, regardless of country. --PresN 04:15, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I figured, but pretty much what you put up was what I was looking for, just a couple of sentences given that this list has no main article. I see nothing else wrong with this now. --Lightlowemon (talk) 00:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Everything seems to be in order. Well-references, well-written, and seemingly complete. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:44, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...}:

• Make sure tables comply with MOS:DTT and utilize column and row scopes. If you're not a proponent of the bold row headers, you can use "wikitable plainrowheaders", but I'd suggest using row and column scopes anyway.
• I'm very worried about the use of GameSpot as a reference for the items in the tables. Per WP:VG/S, GameSpot's database is NOT considered a reliable source. It is shared with GameFAQs, which is entirely user-contributed without editorial oversight, and GameSpot mirrors it in a rather deceptive fashion. Can you find another source for the games?

Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 03:28, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• ...I can't believe I forgot about that. Ugh. Of course you were going to call me out on that; you did on my last video game FLC as well. We're in luck; IGN covered most of the games, and the Square Enix sites for the others had the release dates (which they don't always). No Gamespot refs remaining, col/row scopes added. --PresN 04:02, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, with one more comment. Well done. I promise, I'm not trying to pick on you for that; GameSpot just happens to be rather deceptive because it doesn't look like it's a user-contributed database, yet it is. About the most that GameSpot can be used for are for staff-contributed opinions and statements, as long as they're verified staff members of GameSpot. Now, I'm already willing to support this list, but given the red links in the lead, can anything be said about some of the items linked to help understand the subject? For example, I'd understand the sentence about a study guide for LEC certification tests if we had such an article, but we do not, so can something be said about what an LEC certification test is for right after that? I didn't withhold my support because it's of little relevance to the subject itself, but it would help readers to understand what they're reading and what we're talking about when we don't have an article for something. Thanks, Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 13:51, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Turns out LEC is actually a strange acronym for Legal Mind, K.K. (i.e. Inc.). Probably makes more sense in Japanese. Changed the text from the Japanese LEC certification tests to "Japanese professional licensing and civil servant exams". --PresN 18:49, 28 November 2013 (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 promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC) [5].[reply]

Nominator(s): MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this a 2nd time for featured list because I still believe it meets the criteria. The first time around it was not promoted because the review timeframe expired and nobody seemed to have shown sufficient interest in the topic. Thanks to anyone willing to comment this time around. MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsNot supported Support by Peacemaker67 (send... over) 08:51, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• the rank or date citations for several recipients are not cited for the date given in the table, only for Scherzer's alternative date, please check all the ones with a Note. The fact that this isn't seen in the Role and unit column indicates it may have been intentional, but I feel it is necessary for completeness. Examples include:
  • Botho von La Chevallerie
  • Dietrich von Choltitz

No changes made: It is a procedural question. I had built this list with the information from the AKCR/Fellgiebel. I cited this information in the Role and rank column only, one cite per row. In the second pass, I verified this with the information from Scherzer. Here I chose to cite every item of the table. This helps me keep an overview. MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree. I don't think a "one citation per line" approach is the answer to this query. Either all information on each recipient is clearly sourced, or it is not. My view (as described) is that it is not in its current form. I cannot support this nomination with that approach to sourcing, in my view a sortable tabularised list such as this is effectively incomplete without greater clarity of sourcing. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:51, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The citation style, citing every bit of info, follows the principles established during the reviews of List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (A), List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves recipients (1940–1941), 1942, 1943, 1944 and 1945. All of which are featured lists today. Even if your comment warrants addressing, which I have, I feel that a final review comment "Not Supported", without first engaging in an open discussion, is not best practice. MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:11, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I consider the citation approach used is not adequate in its current form, regardless of the status of the other articles that might use it. The result of the citation approach you have used is that the source of some of the data (Fellgiebel) is not evident. I have changed my precipitate opposition to a tentative one, but I firmly believe this must be addressed. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:32, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As stated in my previous comment. I have implemented your suggestion! Have a look. The article lead already states that the list is based on Fellgiebel's book and deviations are derived from Scherzer's work. I don’t think that adding even more citations to this table helps clarity in any way. It would only impede load times. MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:14, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see where in the lead it says that "the list is based on Fellgiebel's book and deviations are derived from Scherzer's work". It states that the list (the assumption is the list of recipients) is drawn from Fellgiebel, but the point there is about the inclusion of a name on the list, not the details of the award itself in terms of rank or date of award. The addition of further citations from Fellgiebel is a significant improvement, but for example, Richard Czekay's rank of Hauptmann still needs to be cited, as does Erwin Clausen's date of award. When they are done I'll be happy to support. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:39, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It states "These recipients are listed in the 1986 edition of Walther-Peer Fellgiebel's book". Thanks for finding the other two citations. done MisterBee1966 (talk) 13:44, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that the lead doesn't state that some of the data varies between the two sources, predominantly ranks and dates of award. A list of names is one thing, variances in data relating to the award between the two sources is another as far as I am concerned. Regardless, the additional citations from Fellgiebel resolve my issue, supporting. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:24, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is there anything I can do to attract more reviewers? Help MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:02, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll pop by in the next couple of days - ping me on Tues if I've forgotten by then. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 11:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support much like the other lists, this has evolved and improved over time to be a good example of what to nominate at FLC, well done. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:36, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Nice piece of work: happy to support on this. - SchroCat (talk) 16:03, 4 December 2013 (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 promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC) [6].[reply]

Nominator(s): ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 10:59, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it meets all the criteria. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 10:59, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose As somebody who's spent a lot of time on chief-minister articles, I've come across a number of difficulties which has prevented me from nominating any (except the relatively simple List of current Indian chief ministers) at FLC. I see a number of those problems here:

• the primary one is sourcing. WorldStatesmen.org seems to be a crowdsourced project, and I thus doubt it can be considered as a reliable source. You'll have go to individual state-govts' websites and hunt for CM-related info. In several cases these don't even exist.
• What makes photius.com an RS?  Done
• The Term (tenure length) column seems to be inspired by this. However that article was simpler in the sense that whoever was longest-serving was also the earliest occupant. In this BJP article, there's no way to use the sort function to rank by tenure lengths. There's also no mention of total length of tenures.  Done
• You don't need to use ref [4] in the lead. It is backed up by the table.  Done
• That map is extremely strange. It goes from lighter to darker shade of the same colour--giving the impression that a darker state has had more CMs than a lighter one. For eg.
• IMO don't make any special indication for "regional party supported by the BJP". This article is about BJP's CMs, not BJP govts. Plus it's never really clear who is supporting who in Indian politics, so you'd need a source to back these claims.
• On the whole: reconsider the purpose of the map. As a national party, obviously it will have a presence in nearly the whole country. Maybe just listing the four incumbent states is enough? Or maybe colour-code the states by no of CMs?

See below

• "(First time)" and so on don't really serve any purpose. The tenures are clear without them.  Done—indopug (talk) 21:33, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened a thread here about the source. I will fix all other issues once it gets clear whether the source is reliable or not. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 13:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support This article is complete in itself with reliable sources. This article should be in Featured list.--Prateek Malviya^Talk 03:33, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC) [7].[reply]

Nominator(s): —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 18:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've modeled this list based upon List of centuries in women's Test cricket. Look forward to your comments and suggestions. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 18:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Harrias ^talk

• "Date" should sort as "No."
  • I'm unclear, should I remove sortability for the No. column? —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 07:35, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 10:20, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove the superfluous second and third sets of "headings", which poorly affect the sortability. Harrias ^talk 12:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree, but won't it be helpful for the readers when they navigate through the list. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 07:35, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "Players from teams that have permanent ODI status.." Should be "Players from all the teams that have permanent ODI status.."
  • Done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• How do you know that Amiss' century was scored before Turner's? The matches were played on the same day, and as far as I can figure were probably played concurrently. Amiss scored slightly quicker than Turner, but I can't see any compelling evidence that he reached his century first? Unless you have more information than is being presented?
  • Interesting question, but Amiss was the first man to score a century in WC. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• I would put in a placeholder flag for East Africa, so that the text aligns with the rest: {{noflag|[[East Africa cricket team|East Africa]]}} should achieve it.
  • Done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "It remained the highest individual total over the next two editions when Indian cricketer Kapil Dev scored 175 not out against Zimbabwe in 1983." Should be "..until Indian.." not "..when Indian.."
  • Done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Expand Ganguly's name on first use.
  • Done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• I think more explanation needs to be given of the relevance of Flower's century, at the moment it looks a little out of place. Is he the only player to score a century on ODI debut during a World Cup?
  • Done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Link not out and balls in the key. I know they both appear in the lead, but I link a bit of duplication is fine, given some people will skip straight to the list.
  • Okay —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Century #69 needs a space between the comma and the town/city name.
  • Done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Century #114 doesn't give the town/city name. Harrias ^talk 08:59, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 13:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support good work! Zia Khan 19:00, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 10:41, 1 December 2013 (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 promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC) [8].[reply]

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Loosely modelled on existing FL List of former Football League clubs (except that it in this case it features every club to have played in the league), I feel this meets all the requirements.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – meets the standards! Zia Khan 10:53, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Looks grand to me now. GRAPPLE X 16:41, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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