Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/February 2010

• The 2009 Atlantic hurricane season was a below-average year, the quietest since the 1997 season, during which nine tropical storms formed. - "Below-average" will mean nothing to the average reader.

It's easily understood in the first sentence of the second paragraph. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The season officially began on June 1, 2009 and ended on November 30;[2] however, a pre-season storm, Tropical Depression One, led to the season's starting on May 28. - Unnecessarily wordy and cumbersome.

Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The season's last storm, Hurricane Ida dissipated on November 10, resulting in the season ending within normal boundaries. - Same as above.

Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• of which nine intensified into tropical storms—an average season has ten tropical storms[5]— - Would this not be better in parenthesis?

Just going by previous FLC's for timelines. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still go ahead and fix it. :P –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The inactivity throughout the basin was linked to the formation of an El Nino which increased wind shear throughout the basin. - Two "throughout the basin"s not needed.

Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Hurricane Bill was an unusually large storm, ranking fifth in the basin, and was also the season's strongest, attaining winds of 135 mph (215 km/h). - Fifth what?

Clarified Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The bit about landslides from Ida is unnecessarily detailed and not really relevant.

Removed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• You link low pressure area twice in the May section alone.

It's piped to a different term that has the same general meaning. I've done so in accordance to requests from other editors in previous FACs. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• 8:00 p.m. AST (0000 UTC on August 15) needs a full stop at the end of the sentence.

Not sure what you mean Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• 1:00 a.m. EDT (0600 UTC) – Tropical Depression Four develops over the extreme northeastern Gulf of Mexico, roughly 60 mi (95 km) west-southwest of Sarasota, Florida.[13] - Don't you mean southeastern...?

Corrected Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• 2:00 a.m. AST (0600 UTC) – Tropical Storm Grace forms out of a previously extratropical system roughly 135 mi (225 km) west of Lajes, Azores, becoming the northeasternmost forming tropical cyclone in the Atlantic basin on record. - A couple redundant words could probably be removed.

Condensed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The tenth tropical depression of the season forms roughly 775 mi (1,250 km) east of the Lesser Antilles. - Was it not named TD 10?

No, it was immediately declared Tropical Storm Henri. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a good idea to clarify that then. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "See also" should go before "References".

Moved Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:Timelines isn't needed.

JasonRees got it Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

–Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:15, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Probably mentioned this once (or thrice) before, but the caption saying "storms" is a little confusing when this is about "hurricanes"...

Can't really say hurricanes as there are lower classifications of storms in the map, I changed it to tropical cyclones to be a bit more general. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• As a non-expert, I need to understand what "a below-average year" really means.
• " (an average season has ten tropical storms[5])" ah, now that's what I was looking for, perhaps as a footnote rather than this awkward parenthetical note. And move that ref to outside the ).

Moved to footnote Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "The two most notable storms ..." according to...?

Specified Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "thus remain on the list of names for the 2015 season" - this isn't logical to a non-expert. Why not the 2010 season? I guess they rotate names on a six-yearly basis...

Added footnote about this Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Timeline graphic needs en-dashes for speed ranges.
  • En dashes added. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 20:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "The season officially began on June 1, 2009 and ended on November 30;[2] however, Tropical Depression One formed on May 28." The logic is confusing. You might say something like "Although Tropical Depression One formed on May 28, the season officially began on June 1, 2009 and ended on November 30.[2]" (italics not necessary; I just put them there for emphasis).

Changed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "The inactivity throughout the basin was linked to the formation of an El Nino which increased wind shear." Comma after "Nino". And shouldn't "Nino" have a tilde on the second n?

Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Instead of using >= or <= to signify greater/less than or equal to, why don't you use the proper symbols that can be inserted (see below the edit summary box). You might look into fixing this on other timeline pages too.

Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Some of the alt text needs tweaking for verifiability issues, but I can address this if the previous concerns are addressed. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The first three notes need references. Assuming you're getting them from the first ref (NOAA), the first note doesn't match. This article says "ten tropical storms" while NOAA says "11 named storms"

• Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "the fewest since the 1997 season"

• Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Why not link Tropical Depression One (2009)?

• Linked Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Can you explain in a footnote why the season "officially" started a couple days after Tropical Depression One?

• It should be rather obvious. The depression formed outside the official bounds of the hurricane season, specified as starting on June 1 and ending on November 30 by the National Hurricane Center. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• In the second sentence, you might want to put the year after the first date (May 28) rather than June 1.

• Moved Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• A comma is needed after Ida in the first paragraph.

• Added Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Again, explain why there season ended 20 days after Ida dissipated.

• See above comment about TD One Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Very picky, I know, but you have both [footnote][reference] (paragraph 2) and [reference][footnote] (paragraph 1)

• Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The second paragraph's first sentence needs commas

• Added Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Link Bill in the second paragraph

• Linked Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "on the list of names for the 2015 season" → "available for the 2015 season" the list is explained in the footnote, which comes after this sentence, so you shouldn't refer to the list yet

• Reworded per your suggestion but I'm not sure what you mean with the second part Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Landfall (meteorology) is linked twice in the lead

• Delinked the second use Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Why "as well as dissipations" instead of simple "and dissipations"?

• Condensed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• In the EasyTimeline, you may want to remove the colors for Categories 5 and 1 as they aren't used. Your call, though

• The categories are all there by standards. We just have to have the whole scale there for comparisons. Also best not to skip categories as people may ask what is between Tropical Storm and Category 2. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Link Bill in the entry for August 15?

• Linked Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Did Bill really go from Bermuda to Newfoundland in one day?

• The storm took almost two days to do so, but it passed by Bermuda early on August 22 and made landfall in Newfoundland late on August 23 so by just looking at the dates, it may look like one day. That's why the times are there :) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Should Rio Grande, Nicaragua be La Cruz de Río Grande, Nicaragua?

• Yes, didn't know it had a different name Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "regains hurricane-status for" shouldn't be hyphenated

• Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Either link none or all storms in the image captions

• Delinked Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Dates in image captions need non-breaking spaces

• Added Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• 2009 Atlantic Hurricane Season shouldn't be under See also, as it's linked in the lead

• Removed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• You link the NHC in reference 3 but you don't link any other publishers

• Delinked it in ref. 3 Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• There's both "Eric Blake" and "Eric S. Blake"; I'd prefer having the middle initial in all.

• Corrected Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll support once these issues are resolved. Mm40 (talk) 17:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "He is also one of three batsmen who have scored triple centuries on two occasions. The others are Bradman and Virender Sehwag." – this sounds a little clunky and forced to me, is there anyway you can merge the two sentences into one more fluid sentence?

• Done: How is it now?

• "Lara scored thirty four centuries during his Test career..." – per WP:MOSNUM should be '34'.

• Not done: This is allowed per WP:ORDINAL AFAIK. I'm trying to use numbers only for scores, wickets etc.

• "By the time of his retirement, he had scored nineteen centuries in One Day International matches." – again, should be '19'.

• Not done: Per above.

• In your key you state "The number of the Test matches played in that series", I think it should read: "The number of the Test match played in that series." which makes better grammatical sense.

• Done

• Also in the key, some of the meanings have full-stops at the end and some don't, could you be consistent.

• Done

• Caption doesn't need ", has " in my opinion.

• Done

• Shouldn't "high scoring" be hyphenated?

• Done

• "his introduction to international cricket" I'm sure he was introduced to international cricket earlier (like watching it on television!) I think it'd be better as "his debut in"?

• Done: Fair enough.

• "His score of 277" perhaps reinforce "in that match" here as you mentioned a century in the previous sentence and then talk about 277 (could be confusing for non-cricket types).

• Done: I was thinking that too, but was unsure how to word it.

• Should "fourth highest" be hyphenated?

• Done

• "first One Day International century" you abbreviated it, why not use the abbreviation?

• Done

• Is there a suitable link for strike rate in the lead?

• Done: I had missed that.

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I should familiarize myself better with WP:HYPHEN; that always comes up :) ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 01:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "The German navy, the Kaiserliche Marine" I notice that Kaiserliche Marine does not italicize the name.
• The "Main guns" column confused me. Does "8 × 28 cm (11 in)" mean that the ship had eight 28 cm guns?
• Sentence fragments don't need punctuation at the end: "Scuttled at Scapa Flow on 21 June 1919, wreck raised 1930s and scrapped at Rosyth."
• "otherwise very similar" Wordiness; does "very" add substantial meaning?
• I suppose this has been discussed already, but instead of having a gallery couldn't you move each image to the top of each relevant section? Dabomb87 (talk) 17:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I fixed everything you mentioned except for the point about the main guns column. I'm not sure exactly what to do to make it clearer (other than adding "guns" to the "2 x 28 cm" bit, which seems redundant to me). Parsecboy (talk) 23:56, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• You could add some kind of a key to what that means. Like how some of the baseball lists give explanations for what their abbreviated positions mean (sorry to relate everything to baseball, it's just the FL field I know). Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:07, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, Stax's suggestion is good. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Shouldn't "Kaiserliche Marine" be italicized because it is a foreign language? —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 06:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I stole the box from List of Silver Slugger Award winners at shortstop. Does that help? Parsecboy (talk) 10:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Link battlecruiser the first time, not the second.
• You italicise "Kaiserliche Marine " on its second use but not its first. Any reason why?
• "during World War I saw relatively heavy combat during the war" during x2, war x2, can we rejig this a little?
• Prefer consistent use of either World War I or First World War (the latter is preferable to me).
• You don't have "laid down" in your key (amongst others) - this is a term I'm not familiar with so would like to see explained.
• Could link the Battle of Jutland.
• You link mine under the Moltke class but not in the lead.
• Worth linking Parsons Marine Steam Turbine Company?
• If 25,400 metric tons is 25,000 long tons then how can 5,300 metric tons be 5,300 long tons? I'm guessing rounding down to the nearest 100, but it does look odd to me.
• You use mt as metric ton abbreviation, does the t in the tables just mean ton or some other measurement?

The Rambling Man (talk) 12:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • Thanks for reviewing the article, and sorry for taking so long to reply. Real life and all...
  • The first "Kaiserliche Marine" was italicized, but someone pointed out that it shouldn't be during the MILHIST ACR; I just missed the second one.
  • I reworded the "during World War I..." sentence, does that work better now?
  • I know there is a bit of ENGVAR in relation to "World War I/First World War," but I've always used them both (I'm a yank) and I thought it would mix up the word choice a bit. If it's better to just stick with one, the article is written in American English (again, I'm a yank :) so I guess it'd be "World War I."
  • I added an entry for "laid down;" let me know if that's clear or needs tweaking
  • Jutland is linked in the intro, do you think it's needed in the sections too? I didn't want to err on the side of overlinking.
  • Mine link location fixed
  • Parsons is now linked
  • For whatever reason (presumably because I didn't specify AE in the template), it gives just the "t," which would be "tonne" in BE, the equivalent of "mt" in AE. Perhaps if I add in the "
• Shouldn't the n of navy be capitalised per our own article?
  • I left it uncapitalized because I was using it as the common noun (because Germany has had several navies), as in the second half of the introductory sentence in the German Navy article (i.e., "the navy of Germany"). Does that make sense (it does to me, but I'm not sure I'm being clear)?
    • I just felt that because you were referring to it as The German Navy (not just a navy of Germany) it should be capitalised. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, that makes sense. I've capitalized it now. Thanks again for reviewing the list. Parsecboy (talk) 21:17, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Hat notes: I'd do them manually so you can avoid showing the colon in the category and the hash for the section.

Fixed — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "playing in Football League One" I prefer the more active "who play in ..."

Done — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "Eastville Rovers[1] and moving to a site known as Three Acres in 1884." the name is reffed but the move isn't?

This is covered by ref [2] at the end of the next sentence. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "in 1897.[2] Two years later, in 1899, " not sure you need both "two years later" and "in 1899" because most readers can take 1897 and add 2 without get confused!

Done — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Consider linking £ for our non-Brit readers.

Done — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "In the football club's early history" no need for football here.

Done — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• " no buy/no sell " I imagine these need hyphens.

Done — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Same for "most used"

Done — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Minor point but I think you can remove Bristol from "Bristol Rovers career"

Done — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Just four images? By my reckoning, the page could support another six without running off the end...?

This is an issue that came up at peer review, I haven't found many free images that I can use here. I'll try and pick out a few more if I can find any though. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 20:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found File:Holloway.jpg by chance, perhaps not entirely "footballing" imagery but still pretty relevant... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added that one, and I managed to find a picture of Gary Mabbutt on Flickr with a free licence, which I've also put on. I'll continue searching for more. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 22:33, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. It can take a month of Sundays to find something useable on Flickr but keep up the great work! The Rambling Man (talk) 22:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've managed to find a few more pictured to add, hopefully this should be enough now. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 11:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm fine with the redlinks, I've been doing the same with MLB draft pick lists (and those aren't even guys who yet pass WP:ATH like these fellas do, just recent picks who are likely to very soon).
• Table section header should probably just be "Players". Any inclusion limitations should be in the text, as List of Major League Baseball players with a career .400 on-base percentage does with plate appearances.

Ok, I've changed that. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 08:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Speaking of which, any particular reason for the 100 game limitation beyond simplicity? I don't mind, and it makes sense given the long history of the team, but it'd be nice to know.

It's because a full list of all players would be far too long, and the more significant players in the history of the club would get lost in amongst all the people who have only played one or two games. I am working on two other lists to go alongside this one which list players with 25–99 appearances, and fewer than 25 games played. Again, the reason for this split is for length and readability. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 08:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Could you use {{ref label}} and {{note label}} instead of endnotes? That would let you bounce back up to the point in the table you were at once you've read the note.

Done — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 22:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Does Byrne and Jay cite positions along with the stats for the players it covers?

Well done, I didn't notice this before. It does give their positions, but not in the pages I've given in the reference. The list of names, dates, places of birth, appearances and goals is given in a table at the end of the book, which is what I've referenced, but the positions are given in the actual text elsewhere in the book, so I'll need to go through and sort this out when I get home this evening. The same goes for national team appearances, which are given in another table. I'll work on getting the ref label and note label templates to work properly then as well. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 08:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notes now added for international appearances and playing positions. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 22:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I think most of the text above the table can be de-italicized except the "Statistics current as of..." bit. The rest is actual information. Can also combine the second sentence into the first to just say "Includes...... and substitute appearances." (emphasis mine)

Done. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 08:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Position text could probably be a touch bigger.

Done. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 08:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Am I correct that "capped at full international level" means, for example, that Junior Agogo also played for the Ghana national team? Staxringold _talk^contribs 22:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. I've wikilinked the term capped so that people unfamiliar with the term can look it up, and 'full international level' is specified to make it clear that this doesn't include age-group level, such as under-21 or under-18. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 08:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your comments, I hope I've answered all your queries satisfactorily. I'll sort out the problem with the referencing this evening, as indicated above. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 08:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully that should be ok now... — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 22:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The intro seems quite boring to me. The first paragraph is just a chronological summary of the list. The second paragraph is fine. I suggest expanding the intro (and maybe removing/shortening the first paragraph). Some questions I had when reading the article might be helpful for the expansion: How are state symbols selected? (Can anybody propose state symbols of arbitrary type?) Is the list of state symbol types fixed or could it be extended (the state beer,...)? What does it mean to be a state symbol? (What is the reason for designating state symbols? Are state animals/plants ... specially protected? Are inhabitants especially proud of their state tree...? Are state symbols used for promoting the state?)

I structured the lead the same as the Oregon list. You raise great questions, but I think the background for each symbol is different, so it is difficult to define the process. As indicated in the lead, the Washington State Legislature officially designates each symbol, but how they are introduced varies. Unfortunately, the Revised Code of Washington does not state what it means to be a state symbol or how the symbols are used. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could add a sentence or two saying that there is no fixed procedure how state symbols are chosen. In this context you could give some examples (proposed by individuals or groups of individuals, chosen directly by the state, the state lets individuals or groups of individuals decide,...). How about the "types"? Is there a limited set of types that can be chosen as state symbol? If the law does not mention anything, you could state this in the intro. With Oregon designating a "state hostess" I suppose the range of types is rather broad. Regarding the "meaning", I was not thinking of a meaning as written down in the law. However, I still wonder what the point of designating state symbols is. Is it a way of shaping the image of a state? (I acknowledge it might be difficult to find RS for the latter.) Also, while I can imagine how a state flag and seal are used, I cannot imagine what to do with a state grass. Again, I don't mean a use as laid down in the law; I just wonder where I would see or hear about a "state amphibian, arboretum,..." outside of the official lists.

This source helps. I expanded the first paragraph of the lead to include a sentence about how and why the symbols are chosen. Let me know if anything else should be expanded. --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• What is "RCW"?

Done. Revised Code of Washington. Linked in the table. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

• Can you expand on the "four-year effort" of the students at Windsor Elementary School. What exactly did they do?

Not certain, as the source does not expand. If required, I could do additional research, though I don't think the process of how the symbol came to be is as important as the symbol itself and why it was chosen. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I agree that the symbol and the reason for choosing it are more important. I just felt that there was something missing in the "effort" sentence.

• Is there no better picture of an apple on commons? White balance seems a bit off. At first I thought it was a peach.

As a pop-in, I suggest File:Sundown and cross section 2.jpg. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now, that looks like an apple. Thanks.

• In "Washington, My Home" was approved unanimously a State Senator from South Bend introduced", there is probably a full stop missing after "unanimously".

Done. Now states "was approved unanimously after a State Senator..." --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

• Is there no picture for Bluebunch Wheatgrass?

There is not, and I am not familiar enough with the image uploading process to add one myself. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try uploading one? It is not that hard. If you have a picture, I could help you with putting it on wikipedia if you wish.

I did not. I am not really familiar with which photos can be uploaded and which ones cannot due to copyright issues. I'm afraid images and licenses are not my strong point. --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I thought you already had a suitable picture which just needed to be transferred to wikipedia. I am sure sooner or later somebody will upload a picture.

• What year was Washington, My Home written?

Done. 1950, as indicated by newly-added source. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

• Since the list is about state symbols, I'd swap the "type" and "symbol" columns.

This is the format used by other state symbols lists. If a user wants to find the state bird, it would be much more difficult to do so without the Type column being first. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, done.

• I'd remove the first of the navigation templates ("State of Washington") since the cities, regions, etc are not exactly related to this list.

The symbols page is listed and linked under the "Topics" section of the template. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. Done.

bamse (talk) 23:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to offer comments and suggestions. I hope you are pleased with the improvements, and feel free to let me know if you have additional concerns that remain to be addressed. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing most points. Sorry for my ignorance concerning the state symbols in general, but I still think that the lead could be more interesting than saying: "first A became a state symbol, then B, then C,...". I gave some more suggestions above.bamse (talk) 10:12, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While I am not familiar with image uploading and licenses, I will see what I can do with the lead. --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is more interesting now, but could be expanded even more ("non-fixed designation procedure",... see above). I'd wait for other reviewers to see if it is really an issue or if it is just me being picky.bamse (talk) 23:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will be sure to expand further if I come across a source indicating how symbols are designated in the state. I have no idea if there are different ways a symbol can be proposed, but I imagine a group (students, lobbyists, etc.) bug a politician long enough that he or she actually submits a bill so that the Legislature can (arguably, waste their time to) vote for or against the symbol. However, I am not certain if there are other ways the proposal can be submitted. --Another Believer _(Talk) 02:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Could make lead image bigger, up to 300px if I recall MOS properly, as long as the resolution of the image supports it.

Done. Now 250 px.--Another Believer _(Talk) 04:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Symbol doesn't sort properly because of the quotation marks.

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I always thought direct quotes needed direct reference, e.g. when you say "... is a "living museum" that ..." you need to say exactly where you get that quote.

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Seems a little odd to me that tanager isn't capitalised while Song Sparrow is.

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Just a quick glance of fr.wikipedia and the French Wiktionary, I can see no definitive statement that quadrille means square. Any chance of an independent verification of this?

Done. Actually, I went ahead and removed the translation, as different sources seem to have different information about the background of the dance. Besides, I don't think it's literal translation is too relevant. --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "Steelhead Trout (also known as Rainbow Trout)" links to "Redband Trout"... a touch confusing.

Done. Apparently this fish has several names. I went ahead and changed the "also known as" to Redband Trout to avoid confusion. --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 21:39, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to offer suggestions. --Another Believer _(Talk) 04:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "Fourteen additional symbols were added between 1950 and 2000. "additional ... added"; check for redundancy.

Done. Removed "additional" --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I understand that you've linked it for consistency, but do you think readers won't know what an apple is? I don't think it's a high-value link.

Readers may know what an apple is, but considering this list is about symbols, I think it is important to provide links to those symbols when used so that readers can easily access the article to that symbol (if they wished to do so). I can remove the link from the lead if you feel strongly that is should be removed. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can live with the link in the table, but the lead already has a lot of blue, so I think delinking apple there would be beneficial. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 06:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "Prior to"-->Before (it's simpler)

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The alt text is very good, by the way.

Thank you. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "the Legislature never officially adopted either" Can you clarify that you are referring to the Washington legislature?

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "meaning "bye and bye" in Chinook Jargon" Comma after here.

Of course. Thank you. Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Category:Symbols of Washington (U.S. state) is a subcat of Category:Lists of United States state symbols by state so you don't need the former. On the other hand, consider adding Category:Washington (U.S. state) culture to the list.

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dabomb87 (talk) 16:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:24, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Could you mention 'United States' so it is clear what country Jersey City, New Jersey is in. This is not at all obvious to a person not from the US. While this applies to all places, this is particularly important for this article, since a lot of people associate "Jersey" with a British island off the coast of France.
  • Done. Linked as "American city of Jersey City..."
    • I hate to be strict on this one, but "American" is a rather vague term, particularly when trying to describe a country "out of nowhere". American can be used when United Statian sounds awkward, but in this case there is no problem just instating "United States" somehow. It is always better to be clear than vague. Arsenikk ^(talk) 18:49, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Done. My orginal edit was unlinked later, so I have gone ahead and done t the simplest way. Jim Miller ^{See me Touch me} 19:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• The image File:Wittpenn 01.gif is used under fair use. It not only lacks a rationale, but I would not think this article could use a fair use image of him (only his biography article or another article about exclusively about him).
  • Removed, no justification for this article
• Don't think "Mayor-Council" is capitalized.
  • Done.
• "All terms are four years." is a very short sentences; it would sound better if merged into another one.
  • I reworded this into a more detailed explanation of the structure of mayor and council
• "Deputy Mayors", at least where used here, is not capitalized.
  • Done
• Coming from a country with a very different local election system, I find the "Duties and powers" section a bit difficult to follow, in particular since it more or less requires the reader to look at the Faulkner Act (Mayor-Council) article. For me (with a "political background" from Scandinavia) it is not intuitive that the mayor is not really part of the city council. As I understand it, the mayor functions as the executive branch, where the city council is the legislative branch. Perhaps these are not the technically correct terms, but I would like to have seen a little more elaboration in the beginning of the section, although a sentence or two should be sufficient.
  • See your comment 2 above here. Hopefully I have made this more understandable.
• Again, "Business Administrator" should only be capitalized if used in front of the name or in the full title "Business Administrator of Jersey City". Similar with "Acting Mayor"
  • Done
• The single-sentence paragraph under "succession" should be merged with the previous paragraph.
  • Merged with an exlpanation of when automatic succession began
• It is unclear what reference is actually for the list of mayors.
  • Now there is only the one source. I wasn't sure where I would cite the NJCU source for the list
• Because the list is sortable, all instances of the party must be linked or unlinked. Similarly with the mayors that were in office several times.
  • Done
• I don't really see why the dates need to be center-aligned. All it does is mess up the table and make it harder to read.
  • It doesn't look much better when left aligned. The month-year dates seem to make any alignment look irregular
• The {{main}} under "election" should probably be {{seealso}}, since the article only cover the most recent mayoral elections.
  • Done
• Could not the link to the articles on the individual elections be put into the table some how. Perhaps by linking the dates or # or something.
  • The dates of the elections and the term don't always match up, and I don't know that linking them would make it clear what the links were for.
• In "United States Citizen", "citizen" is not capitalized.
  • Done
• Don't use all-caps in references; all-caps is a typographical choice (just like bolding) and should not be duplicated here.
  • Done
• In the notes, it is not obvious what "N.J.S.A." is.
  • Figured out how to directly link to each section of the law, and formatted proper references for these
• The two links under "sources" need to be formatted.
  • Done, for the one that is still there
• I don't see how the external link adds anything to the article. It is best to remove it, as an ideal article has no external links.
  • I had left this there for the images it provides. If I remember correctly, most of those images were uploaded here several years ago, and later deleted as copyvios. I felt that the pictures added to the article enough to keep it.
    • After rereading WP:EL, I am still in doubt about this. Personally I do not think that tit contains useful information, but if you insist, I will let it pass. If other reviewers support my motion, then I will dwell on the issue again. Arsenikk ^(talk) 18:49, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arsenikk ^(talk) 13:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC) Looking good. I found a few more things to pick at:[reply]

• The MOS is very strict at using italics, and it should not be used for things like 'unknown' and 'incumbent' in the table. Also, choose between either capitalizing non-proper-nouns or not in the table (i.e. 'Unknown' and 'incumbent').
  • Done.
• This may seem obvious to you Americans, but could you just put in a word or to mentioning that the mayor is directly elected. In most countries I have studied the political system of, mayors are normally appointed by the council, even when the mayor leads the executive branch. Of course, most English-language countries have direct mayoral elections, and the US is one of a minority of countries where it is common with a direct election of a single person to appoint the executive branch. This also helps a little with the lead that is slightly short; but I cannot see anything else to put in it.
  • Done, and reordered the sections to match the order of mentions in the lead.
• I find a few terms underlinked: 'charter', 'ordinances' and 'bond'.
  • Done, although now I have found some new articles to add to my own to-do list for later.

Hopefully this is all, sorry for not catching them the first time ;) Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:14, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to have more, but why isn't "The next Jersey City mayoral election is scheduled to be held in 2013." referenced? Arsenikk ^(talk) 13:01, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • Done. Probably just too familiar with it myself to realize it should have had one.

• • Another thing is that for those, we use "Took office" and "Left office", since many people take office and leave office on different dates than their actual term, and it just sounds better? *shrug* I could be wrong. :)
  • As for actual issues...
    • I don't think footnote [a] is necessary; he didn't switch mid-term, and by the time of his third term the Whig party had ceased to exist, so it makes perfect sense that he'd've switched. It definitely doesn't need to be in its first two locations, and I think it's not needed at all.
      • I think it has to be referenced somehow, as listing one person with two different party affiliations would require a source. I have just removed it from the first two terms and left it on the third. The source used just lists him as a Republican, so I think the explanatory note is needed as well.
    • You aren't using the ref tags, I won't fault you for that, as they're ugly for footnotes sadly, but you need to at least have multiple callbacks to the cited material when you have multiple calls to a footnote.
      • Had to think about that one for a few minutes before figuring out you meant to have Note 1|a|a Note 1|b|b. Done.
        • Nope... there's a way to do it resuing letters. I think you want something like... oh hell, let me find my old version... [8] I've thrown up a proof of concept here [] and reverted, since it's just one, but that's one way to do it; or you could hardcode the letters like in the old Alabama list version and then just do |a|1} and |a|2}. All that said, I suggest learning how to use nested <ref>s, they're so much easier, though slightly uglier. :) --Golbez (talk) 15:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note [j]... in other lists, I would simply have said "Died in office." The bit about him being the first African American mayor... would you have a mention of that had he not died in office? If not, then it seems like extraneous information for that footnote.
      • No, but I would have had to put it somewhere else. As the only mayor to die in office, there was no need to reuse the note. And a paragraph describing 39 white men, 1 woman, 2 African Americans, and one death in office seemed far worse than one extensive note.
    • Note [g]... you should indicate whether or not he succeeded in his endeavor.
      • Done.
    • I note that no one leaves office on the same day as the next one took office; this would seem to be incorrect at least in the case of the acting governors, as I presume that not everyone resigned or died precisely at midnight. And does the Mayor of Jersey City indeed take office at midnight? (I know the Mayor of New York does, but that's a pretty rare arrangement in US politics I think)
      • See next, but apparently they can take office at midnight as it happened in 1985.
    • The external link should be moved up to general references, and be replaced with a link to the actual official page of the mayor, which already exists in the infobox so either duplicate it or remove the header altogether.
      • The external link is to a page that hosts photographs of the portraits of many of the mayors. They cannot be used here due to copyright, so it is an external link per WP:EL. BUT, I am using it as the source for most of the dates and you are the second reviewer to mention this. I have formatted it as a source, but then those are the dates we have to use. Done.
    • A footnote explaining the unknown party of Alexander and McMartin would be useful, rather than just supplying it at face value. Even something so simple as a note saying "It is not known what their party was" would help; otherwise, it looks as if it could be a placeholder for further research and was forgotten. --Golbez (talk) 22:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • And done. Jim Miller ^{See me | Touch me} 05:52, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Salary 1000s delimiter should be a comma in the infobox.
  • Seems to be an issue with some browsers. The source uses a comma, but the infobox cuts off the bottom of that line in IE8 making it appear to be a period. Firefox displays it correctly.
• "This form provides..." no need to repeat "form" in my opinion.
  • Done.
• Note c could use a period.
  • Done.
• As could l, m, n and p... these are complete sentences...
  • Done.
• Ref 4 has a spare .
  • Done. Another template issue. There was a period in the source after "Co", and the template added another after the field.
• Sometimes you link NY Times, other times you don't - be consistent.
  • I have fixed this so that the first use is linked, and linked a few other sources. My reading of WP:MOSLINK gives no exception for reference sections, and only the first instance of a particular source should be linked to avoid overlinking.

• SAFE or S.A.F.E. (per the article you link to)?
• Possibly link "charter" and/or "scheduled" in the lead as these are airline-specific terms.
• Ok, you link charter, but on the second use...
• "The destinations in Asia were served from 1949 to 1954. From 1952, Braathens became a domestic airline, and did not have international scheduled services again until 1987" seems to contradict itself, unless your first sentence was supposed to include "chartered"?
• I think you could reduce the number of images in the lead and history section, it's a little over the top for me, especially since several of them aren't directly related to the destinations themselves, featuring mainly just aircraft with little context as to where they are.
• "Northern Norway" is Northern really capitalised?
• " It excludes airports where Braathens only operated charter services." - can I ask why? If this is a comprehensive list of destinations, shouldn't it include charter destinations as well?
• "Malmö Avition" typo.
• Per a question above, perhaps a note explaining why some of the airports have no codes?
• Presumably refs 32 and 33 are in Norwegian as well? They appear to lack a language parameter. Can you check all others?
• We're missing consistency between pp. and nothing for page range refs...

The Rambling Man (talk) 19:36, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • I use 'SAFE' consequently, as it is by far the most common printed usage. I changed the mention in the 'Braathens' article from 'S.A.F.E' to 'SAFE'.
  • There isn't really an article on scheduled airlines, so I linked to 'airline timetable'.
  • Changed to ...and did not have international scheduled services again from 1954 to 1987, except during part of 1960.
  • I removed two of the images, leaving the two most dominant liveries/aircraft used by the company. Unfortunately, there are very few images that show both the terminal buildings and Braathens aircraft. I wanted all the images along the list to actually be on the list, so I did not want to add planes at other places there.
  • Northern Norway is a proper noun: although not a single political entity, it consists of exactly three counties. It's a bit like Western Australia. I wikilinked 'Northern Norway'.
  • Concerning the scope: 1) It would be impossible to source any airport that Braathens happened to have operated a charter flight to in 58 years, particularly one-event charters (such as flying Rosenborg BK to a UEFA Champions League away game) 2) There is agreement at WP:Aviation and at several AfDs that the scope of destination articles is to contain only scheduled flights, in part because of the issues raised above. Somewhat simplified (after having been involved in/seen dozens of AfDs), there seems to have been established consensus that a scheduled service is in itself considered notable, while a charter service is not considered inherently notable. 3) Due to charter legislation (particularly pre-deregulation), a charter trip would have to be sold as a package (including a hotel) to avoid flag carrier agreements. These flights would not be part of Braathens' service, but simply where they happened to fly a plane, arguably making them not Braathens', but the holiday company's destinations. 4) Making a list over all places an airline landed a plane would in my opinion violate WP:INDISCRIMINATE point 3: excessive listing of statistics.
  • The following text should be sufficient: IATA and ICAO codes are not listed to airports which were closed or converted to general aviation before being issued such codes.

Thanks for the feedback. Except where noticed, I have amended the article as you suggest. Arsenikk ^(talk) 21:57, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Tense problem here: "The Longhorns have played in 1,200 games during its 117 seasons."
  • Fixed? Maybe?—NMajdan•talk 21:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Bible and Royal have been inducted in the College Football Hall of Fame." "in" should be "into".
  • Done.—NMajdan•talk
• Mack Brown's first name doesn't need to be repeated in the last sentence of the lead.
  • I do this for emphasis as I feel it is a very important sentence and his name, as the current head coach, is worth repeating.—NMajdan•talk
• Is the Mack Brown-TexasFootball.com site related to the official Longhorns website? From going to the Texas athletic website once in the past, I remember it being that way. Want to ask about it anyway in case anyone else has questions about it.
  • Yes, it is the official website for Texas Football.—NMajdan•talk

Giants2008 (27 and counting) 16:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "They played without a head coach their first season. " stands in isolation and breaks the flow a little, you could merge it with the previous sentence which talks about them starting to play organized football. And I would suggest "coach in their first season" or "coach for their first season".
  • Reworded.—NMajdan•talk
• You repeat "Longhorns" five times in five sentences which doesn't help the prose.
  • Changes some to "Texas."—NMajdan•talk
• Any thoughts on a totals row at the bottom of the table?
  • I don't think it is necessary. I like to keep these as simple and consistent as possible with these lists.—NMajdan•talk
• "# - Number of coaches[A 1]" this doesn't read correctly to me - e.g. Mack Brown has 28 number of coaches? He's the 28th coach, but this key is not worded correctly. Maybe just replace "Number of coaches" with the information you've put in the note.
  • Done.—NMajdan•talk
• Sorting by OT in descending order, I get Mack Brown at the top despite him have — - I'd expect him to be at the bottom of a descending ordered list.
• Same for the other columns where you have a mixture of 0's and —
  • I don't think this is possible. I had previously used {{tlx|ntsh|0}} but I found this put the dashes in between the 0s and 1s. Doing {{tlx|ntsh|999}} at least puts the dash completely outside the value range. Although a side effect of that, as you pointed out, is it sorts it at the top when in descending order. So, the question is, would you rather have the dashes in between the 0s and 1s or above the greatest value?—NMajdan•talk
    • Oh, it's possible alright. Have a look at some of the markup on List of England Twenty20 International cricketers, that may help, say the "Wkt" or "Mdn" columns... The Rambling Man (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hmmm.... {{SortKey}} doesn't appear to be working like it does on that list. I'll look into this some more tomorrow.—NMajdan•talk
        • Ok, think I got it fixed.—NMajdan•talk 13:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• I can't get the "archived" citations to work at all, but a more pertinent question, where is Bible and Royal's entry into the HOF cited?
  • I have added citations for the HOF entries. Yes, it appears WebCitation is down.—NMajdan•talk

The Rambling Man (talk) 12:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Term does not sort correctly. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding the sort issue, I have raised an issue with it on another FLC and would like a discussion.—NMajdan•talk 15:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose until the sorting is sorted out. I have seen lists of much greater complexity (particularly cricket ones) that have their sorting correct). And as I discovered today, IE7 doesn't sort the C% column at the other FLC correctly, and I wouldn't therefore assume that IE6 would either, and that's 35% of all browsers according to Nmajdan's source here. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sort issue fixed.—NMajdan•talk 16:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "The team has had 28 head coaches since organized football began in 1893 with the nickname Longhorns" Fuzzy logic, I'm not sure whether "with the nickname Longhorns" applies to. Also, a comma after this clause would be nice.
  • This has kinda become standard with these lists as this issue wasn't raised previously with my other lists. The Longhorns is the team's nickname and has been as such since the program began.—NMajdan•talk
    • I understand, but that doesn't mean it's right. I still have trouble decoding what is being said. How about something like: "The team has had 28 head coaches since it started playing organized football in 1893 with the nickname Longhorns, although they played without a head coach in their first season." Dabomb87 (talk) 23:19, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fixed.—NMajdan•talk 15:08, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "win-loss percentage" En dash, not hyphen.
  • Fixed.—NMajdan•talk
• In the table, not sure if it's worth putting the number of championships next to the years they were won; it crowds the cells and seems redundant.
  • Removed.—NMajdan•talk
• Otherwise, the list looks good; will support once TRM's sorting issue (which I can't find) and my comments are resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:48, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bingo. Good work, looking forward to Dabomb's support. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Do we really need to link World War I?
• "playdowns " Is there a less jargon-y word that can be used?
• "The Western Hockey League has won the most Memorial Cup 18 times since the adoption of the three league tournament format in 1972." This sentence reads strangely ... "has won the most Memorial Cup 18 times"?
• "Amongst " "Among" is simpler and nicer.
• "with for titles each." Typo?
• "Canada in the first World War." Same comment about linking WWI here, and it might be better to say "World War I" here too for consistency.
• "It was to be awarded to the junior hockey champions of Canada in an east versus west format." If possible, could you specify which teams (leagues?) comprised the east and which comprised the west?

• Not possible. In the early days, any team sanctioned by its provincial governing body was eligible. This would have represented dozens of leagues over time.

• "The head-to-head competition for the Memorial Cup changed formats several times over the years." Redundancy
• Why not make the tables sortable?
• The abbreviation "TG" needs to be defined.
• Is it worth redlinking 2011 Memorial Cup yet? Dabomb87 (talk) 17:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The host city for the 2011 tournament is scheduled to be selected in April, with an acompanying article likely created then. No harm in leaving it redlinked.

All dealt with except those I replied to individually. Thanks! Resolute 01:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "Major Junior" or "Major-Junior"?

• Without the hyphen. I've never really seen it used with.

• Apart from the two times in this list? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• lol, whoops. Fixed. Resolute 01:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• " won the most titles, six." perhaps "with six"?
• "who died for Canada in" perhaps this is CanEng, but didn't they come from Canada and die in WWI rather than "die for Canada"?
• Junior ice hockey appears to be overlinked.
• "The head-to-head competition for the Memorial Cup changed formats several times" - has changed.

• Disagree. Adding "has" implies to me that the format described continues to exist. Without has, it reads as a past tense statement, imo.

• Yes, it changed in the past, it isn't changing now. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Result col (in the first table) sorts oddly for me.

• In what way?

• Well, I get 7-5 ahead of 2-0 one way and 4-3-1 the other way. I'm not sure what the sort is supposed to be doing. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• 7-5 is a combined score over two games, as denoted by the (TG) notation, while the 2-0, 3-1, etc are the number of games won by each team. There really is no better way I can think of to sort that given the differing formats. Resolute 01:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• I tried to add a clarification to the hatnote above the table. Resolute 01:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Blank cells never good - perhaps a TBA or TBD?

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All changed saved the lines I individually replied to. Thanks! Resolute 19:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• First a question: Is the list "light rail stations of the Sacramento Regional Transit" or "stations of the Sacramento Regional Transit Light Rail"? This is essential in establishing capitalization.

From what I have seen, light rail in this context is not a proper noun, and the naming I used for the article was modeled after that of the Dallas list.

There are several mentions of the "Sacramento RT light rail system". I would argue that if "light rail" is not part of the name, then the system should be referred to as either "the Sacramento Regional Transit", the "Sacremento RT" or "the light rail". By consistently mixing the two, you are "admitting" it to being a proper noun. Arsenikk ^(talk) 14:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have now corrected the text appropriately to address this concern with the relationship netween Sactamento RT and light rail service. Patriarca12 (talk) 23:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I would have said that The stations along the Sacramento RT light rail network are... could be shortened to The stations along the network are... because there it is inherently understood which network is being discussed.

Done

• After "The various works represent an array of media including:", I would have used a comma instead of a colon. (The colon forces an unnecessary long break to the reading, given the short sentence.

Done

• The sentence "both stations were deferred due to neighborhood opposition only to be built later due to changing attitudes towards the rail project" has two "due to"s.

Changed

• I would have though outside of Sacramento was redundant to outside Sacramento (or is this a matter of dialect?)

Changed

• Comma after "between 2003 and 2007".

Done

• Image licenses check out good.
• "Alkali Flat/La Valentina" and "Roseville Road" are in the wrong order in the list.

Done

• Why is there not a sort button for station? After for instance sorting for date or jurisdiction, the reader may want to sort again by name.

The stations were originally unsortable, as the stations beginning with a number would not properly sort (i.e. 4th, 7th & 8th). However, I do agree with your point and although not perfect, I made the stations sortable.

• Could you say at what end (for a person who knows absolutely nothing about the geography of Sacramento) the extension of the Blue Line will be? For instance, north or south; alternatively provide a map.

Done

• No more than a sentence, but would the Geeen Line share track with other lines?

Done

• The alt text for "Mather Field/Mills Station" sounds awkward. The word "approach" should be cogitated or something.

Done

• The alt texts seem to overemphasis the overhead lines (which don't need to be explained as "...powering the vehicle".

Corrected

• I find the "City College Station" image very dark; personally I think it is not high enough quality to include, as it doesn't add any value beyond showing "yet another" station. Are there more images available?

Good call. I only added it because there are not that many available illustrating the stations available. I'll keep my eye out for new images in the future.

Arsenikk ^(talk) 12:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have corrected the issues mentioned. Thanks again for taking a look! Patriarca12 (talk) 14:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "Works of public art included at several stations were developed as part of the RT Public Art Program.[5] The various works represent an array of media including, mosaics, sculptures, metalwork and murals. " merge these two sentences to improve the flow.
• Station names with numbers don't sort as I'd expect them to, i.e. 7th comes after 59th...
• Archive Plaza station image doesn't appear to show anything remotely station-like!
• Not sure "Opened" is appropriate for planned stations.

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed all but the second comment, as I changed it from unsortable to address a previous reviewers comment. I understand it does not sort correctly with the numbered stations, but can be useful still with the non-numbered ones. I have no strong feelings either way and am agreeable to any consensus made on the issue. Comments addressed. Thanks for taking a look at this! Patriarca12 (talk) 23:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would have though using {{sort}} and then sorting the station as 04th... etc would solve the sorting issue. Arsenikk ^(talk) 23:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eureka! I did not know that functionality. I have corrected accordingly. Thanks for the link! Patriarca12 (talk) 02:02, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]