Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/January 2012

• History: Is "a" missing from "while Mike Veletta made rapid 35..."?
• "An attendance of over 87,000 saw...". Might work better starting off as "A crowd".
  • Now it says "An crowd". Still think it needs to be "A". Giants2008 (Talk) 22:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oops, my mistake, fixed! The Rambling Man (talk) 22:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• The "baffled by the googly" quote could use a link to the term googly, for those of us who aren't that knowledgeable about cricket.
• Should "and their first win in final" also have "a" in it, before "final"?
• "It was also for the first time that the team batting second emerged victorious." Remove "for".
• "before Ponting and Damien Martin went on to score an unbeaten the highest partnership in any World Cup final with an unbeaten 234." First "an unbeaten" needs to be removed, as it is harmful to the sentence.
• "and opening stand with Hayden became the largest first-wicket partnership in World Cup history." Feels like "his" should be in there before "opening".
• LBW could stand to be spelled out.
• Remove space before reference 35. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:27, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Giants, I believe I've taken care of all of these comments. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:54, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I haven't had a chance to look throughly through this article yet, but on first read I can see a number of example of "with... xxxing", which isn't ideal. Take a look at User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing for help removing them. I'll look through the article more later! Harrias ^talk 13:14, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Had a purge of "withs", look forward to your comments! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:05, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "England is the only team to reach the finals and not win the World Cup," – I think that should be "final" singular, rather than plural which you use later to refer to the tournament as a whole.
  • Done by ATG. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "Keith Boyce added a quick fire 34.." – I'm not sure "quick fire" is encyclopedic language. Maybe just "quick"?
  • Done by ATG. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I'd link deliveries on first usage. Similarly link run out (which I wouldn't hyphenate).
  • Done by ATG. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "Four years later, the West Indies qualified for the final once again, this time facing England, the hosts at Lord's for the second consecutive tournament." – This sentence makes it sound like the West Indies are facing England at Lord's for the second time in a row, something that clearly isn't true from the previous sentences. Try to remove the ambiguity from the sentence.
  • Done, I think... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "An unbeaten 138 from Viv Richards, and supported by Collis King in a 139-run partnership for the fifth wicket, the West Indies " – The "and" seems superfluous to me in this sentence, but maybe I'm reading it wrong? Also, I think there needs to be another word before "the West Indies", possibly "helped"?
  • It sort-of made sense to me, but have re-worded, any better? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "A profitable yet slow opening partnership between Mike Brearley and Geoffrey Boycott (the latter taking 17 overs to reach double figures) saw England to 129 but following Brearley's dismissal, only Graham Gooch and Derek Randall made a "brief assault" on the West Indian bowling, before a batting collapse, Joel Garner taking five wickets in eleven balls, saw England all out for 194, presenting the West Indies with their second consecutive title, winning by 92 runs." – That is a very long sentence! Perhaps try cutting it into two, or maybe even three shorter sentences?
  • Split into three! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "This time, they faced India.." – Maybe replace "This time" with "On this occasion"?
  • Done by ATG. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• WP:CRIC#STYLE suggests using / rather than – when shortening cricket scores, as you've done in the table. I'm not over fussed either way, but be consistent between the table and the prose.
  • Slashed. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "but with 17 required in the final over.." – A little pedantic maybe, but I think it would be best to say "17 runs".
  • Runs added. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• MOS:NUM suggests that "Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all figures: we may write either 5 cats and 32 dogs or five cats and thirty-two dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs." So in this final sentence, I'd recommend either "but with 17 runs required in the final over to win, England fell short and lost by 7 runs." or "but with seventeen runs required in the final over to win, England fell short and lost by seven runs."
  • Bad TRM. Fixed. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "Pakistani batsmen Imran Khan and Javed Miandad saw a third-wicket partnership of 139." – Not keen on the use of "saw", maybe replace it with "built"?
  • "shared" alright with you? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "India and Pakistan along with Sri Lanka once again.." – I'd put "along with Sri Lanka" in a clause: "India and Pakistan, along with Sri Lanka, once again.."
  • Claused. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "Winning the toss, Arjuna Ranatunga sent Australia in to bat.." – Maybe "After winning the toss,"?
  • Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:08, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "..South Africa, Kenya and Zimbabwe, the final being a day-night match contested" – previously you've always written day/night.
  • Done by ATG. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "and ended on the highest score in World Cup final history, on 359–2." – I'm not keen on the repitition of "on", perhaps change it to "in World Cup final history: 359–2."
  • Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:11, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "Player of the series Sachin Tendulkar was dismissed.." – He might have been named "player of the series", but I think for the purposes of this article it would make far more sense to call him "player of the tournament".
  • Done by ATG. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Link Strike rate.
  • Done by ATG. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "..but a 97 from.." – I think this should either be "..but 97 from.." or "..but a score of 97 from.."
  • Yep, removed "a". The Rambling Man (talk) 08:56, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Refs 3, 4, 5, 6, 11 are missing publisher details (publisher and location)
  • Done to the best of my ability. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:08, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref 8 is missing the author: Martin Williamson.
  • Added. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:08, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref 9 is missing the date: 14 February 2011
  • Added. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:08, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Refs 15, 18: Norman Preston can be linked.
  • Done by ATG. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref 25, per your descriptions, the work should be Wisden Cricketers' Almanack, not ESPNcricinfo
  • Indeed, done. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:56, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• In your Cricinfo refs for the finals, you format the title in two ways: "Prudential World Cup, 1975" and "ICC World Cup – Final – Australia v India" – try to be consistent and use just one of these two options.
  • Well, Cricinfo themselves changed their match title formatting, but I've made it consistent here, all using en-dashes. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:08, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• This is simply based on my preferences but I would split the references into two columns
  • Makes little difference to me, so I've changed it to split in two, some browsers don't support it, but for those who do, enjoy! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• England could be linked in the lead
  • Indeed, my oversight, and I guess combines with the next comment.... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I would link the countries on their first usage in the history, especially the ones that don't have links in the lead
  • I've linked those who I believe I missed. I didn't link the "host countries" because they were countries, not the teams... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Images could do with alt text
  • Definitely, silly me. Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• The result column in the table is confusing me at the moment. Its sorting alphabetically, shouldn't it sort by biggest margin of victory? Or am I missing something.
  • Alphabetical was the only way I thought reasonable. What makes a 90 run win better than a 5 wicket win? It's subjective, so I've kept it alphabetical. Should it be problematic, I'll just make the column unsortable.

NapHit (talk) 16:14, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for your comments NapHit! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "from 2007 onwards, it also included albums sold through digital distribution." Since I assume the system still works this way, should it be "it has also included" to reflect a present tense?

• Done.

• "his 2005 compilation The Essential reached number one." Minor, but the full name of the album could be given here to match the table's entry.

• Done.

• What is sourcing Amy Winehouse's entries? The references are all archived entries from before her death. Is there an active version of the 2000s general ref that covers it?

• Whoops. Added a ref for 2011.

• For Winehouse's photo caption, there isn't anything in the article saying she'd reached number one with Back to Black before her death. That might be useful for the lead, but should be cited somewhere, either way. Giants2008 (Talk) 04:32, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Replaced with a ref that specifies that the album returned to number one. Thanks for the comments! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 15:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Not keen on the bold link at the beginning, MOS discourages that.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Update the fair use licensing on the JB image to add "List of" in front of JB novels and stories.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• " who write two novelizations" wrote (and not mad keen on all the z's, being a BritEng article, but not gonna make a fuss! Although later you use "organisation", so I'd at least be internally consistent with your s's and z's...)

• Neither am I, but according to the OED the correct word is "novelization": the OED don't even list the alternative spelling of "novelisation". - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "was asked to continue " by whom?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "followed, in 2011, " not sure those commas are really needed.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• In the infobox, why is Mother, Father, Aunt, Uncle capitalised while son isn't? Also not sure if "invalid" isn't a little ambiguous...

• Done (I've changed it to "null", which is a more correct term - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Upon accepting the job, Fleming requested that he be allowed three months holiday per year.[1] Publishers Jonathan Cape were initially reluctant to publish the book, ..." a bit of a non-sequitur for me....

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• You may wish to link s and d (shillings and pence) for those unfamiliar with pre-decimal British currency.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• You say Bond's an "intelligence officer" in the prose, but a "00 agent" (linked) in the infobox. I guess "00 agent" is an intelligence officer, but you may wish to be consistent.

• I've clarified the distinction in the text – 00 Agent being a sub-set of intelligence officer. - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "World War II" or "Second World War", be consistent.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Felix Leiter is overlinked (in the second novel).

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• fortune-telling is hyphenated.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Is it "Mr. Big" or "Mr Big"?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Bond is then nearly killed by Colonel Rosa Klebb, one of the SMERSH planners. "... is that how it ends?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "SMERSH target Bond to be killed and caught in a compromising situation..." doesn't appear to be written like the other summaries...

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• When you refer to Dr No a second time, you just say "No", but you don't with "Mr Big". Any reason?

• Big is a nickname (actually an anagram of his real name, Buonapart Ignace Gallia) whilst No is his real name - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Bond is told a story " so Bond isn't actually in A Quantum of Solace?

• Only at the beginning and end whilst his host tells the story—see the plot summary I did for the book version.

• "have hijacked and seized its two " hijacked what?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Is "The Spy Who Loved Me" really that boring? Just a question, the summary of it would indicate it could have been done in a couple of pages!

• Pretty much! There's a lot of back-story involved and Bond doesn't enter the story until the final third. - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Bond's continues to search " grammar fail.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Thorough contact " typo.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "and the pair, but Blofeld kills " missing word, probably important...

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Who's Bunt?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• " leaves him with amnesia and Bond lives " just "and he lives" is fine.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• You link CIA and MI6, so you ought to link KGB, the first time, not the second.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• " CBS television " shouldn't that be "the CBS television network"?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Climax!.[26]" avoid that double full stop.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Dates for publication of "For Your Eyes Only" and "Risico"? Presumably the same as "From a View to a Kill" so just repeat.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "The fictional chronology" -> "Fictional chronology" per WP:HEAD.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That gets me to the post-Fleming section, so I'll stop here and let you catch up. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:48, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for taking the time on that. I think I've covered all the points you raised, but please let me know if I've missed any or misunderstood your comments. Cheers - SchroCat (^ • @) 13:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments part deux (and yes, am satisfied the first tranche have been dealt with satisfactorily!)

• One I missed from before, "Ian Fleming, creator of James Bond." doesn't need a full stop.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I think we prefer to use unspaced en-dashes not em-dashes for year ranges, i.e. 1968–1979 instead of 1968—1979.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The third of the three novels in this section has a different colour border around it, are you seeing that?

• I am: there are three colours which underline the bottom of the boxes: a darker blue for the novels, a lighter blue for the short stories and the orange colour for the novelizations. Two of these are part of the template. - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• There is a linkable article on Aegean Islands you may prefer to use?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Not sure you really need to link "outer space", pretty common term for regular English speakers/readers.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Was it really a Space Shuttle? If so, capitalise it, if not, probably needs a more generic link. Our article says the first real Shuttle flight wasn't until 1981, this novelization was two years earlier... just wondering.

• Yes, it was a SS – the programme had been around since the 1960s, even though the first flight wasn't until 1981.

• Possibly worth linking "Maggie Thatcher" for those of a more modern generation...

• Done, although thanks for making me feel so old! ;) - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "In 1996, Gardner retired from writing James Bond books due to ill health.[53]" and "Ill-health forced Gardner to retire from writing the Bond novels in 1996.[55]" - don't need 'em both.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Bond goes undercover to be sacked from MI6" isn't it the other way round, "he is "sacked" from MI6 to go undercover"?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Link Moneypenny (notable supporting part).

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "The murder of two women connected to a Cold War mission are brutally murdered" que?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "multiple terrorist bombings " no need to repeat "terrorist" here.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Bond established the " keep tense consistent so "establishes"

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "the Brotherhood of Anarchy " -> The...

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Same coloured border thing above Broken Claw...

• As per the above - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• No need to link Russia.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Death is Forever, no need to relink CIA.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Could link Fourth Reich.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "American author Raymond Benson became the author " author author is a little tedious.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Who's Jeremy Black and why should I care what he has to say?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Benson followed Gardner's pattern of setting Bond in the contemporary timeframe of the 1990s[72] and, according to Jeremy Black, had more echoes of Fleming's style than John Gardner,[73] he also changed Bond's gun back to the Walther PPK,[74] put him behind the wheel of a Jaguar XK8[75] and made him swear more,[76] which led Black to note that there was an increased level of crudity lacking in either Fleming or Gardner.[73] " is one helluva large sentence.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "However, the Peterborough Evening Telegraph stated ..." is that the best source you've got (no offence Peterborough!)?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Shouldn't Kirkus Reviews be in italics?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Bond established that " same comment as before...

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Colour thing again, above "The Facts of Death[81]"

• As per the above - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "female TV news " television

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Electra - do you mean Elektra?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "preventing the assassination" +s.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "a post 9/11" hyphenate and link

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "a cancer drug" a drug to cure cancer?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Do you need a {{main}} template for Young Bond when you link the article straight away. Also, shouldn't" Young Bond be italicised every time?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• " the two children are kidnapped" which two children?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "and is eventually forced to flee " who is, Bond or the maid?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Is the graphic novel Silverfin or SilverFin?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 107 doesn't mention "A Hard Man to Kill", it links to "Danger Society"...

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 7 is actually by guardian.co.uk. (Check others).

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The British Library is just called British Library.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 45, is James Leasor the name of the article? The author? If the name, who wrote it?

• I've clarified the name of the article (it's Leasor's obituary) As with all Times Obituaries at the time, the author's names are not disclosed. - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Obviously once you've tidied up the repeated ill-health comment, refs 53 and 55 will be resolved. Keep 55.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 106, why is "(Graphic Novel)" in parentheses?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 14:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Again, thanks very much indeed for doing this and if I've missed anything, please let me know. Cheers - SchroCat (^ • @) 16:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Can we get an image expert to verify that the fair-use rationale for the lead image is okay? I remember what happened at the last Bond-related FLC and would like to avoid such a long debate if possible.

• I've asked Quadell, who does huge anmounts of good work at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, to comment on this one. - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• This is a very difficult case, and different people who each fully understand our policy might have conflicting opinions on whether this fulfills our non-free criteria or not. The relevant question is, is seeing the author's vision of James Bond necessary for fully understand an article on the list of James Bond fiction? If what unites "James Bond novels and stories" is that they all feature and are based on this one figure, then I could see it passing NFCC#8. However, if what unites them is that they are all books in a series, and it would be conceivable to have a "James Bond story" about Moneypenny and Q without Bond in it, then it would not pass NFCC#8. I don't know. Personally, I would feel more comfortable with a photograph of a stack or collection of James Bond novels which minimally reproduces copyrighted content (c.f. File:Videogameretaildisplay.jpg), which I feel would fully illustrate the topic, but I'm not an expert on James Bond, and I concede that this photo is not a clear violation. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:02, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll replace this shortly - probably later today: I'm on the hunt for a licence free image that fits the above criteria, but if I can't find one of those, then I'll take a photo of the spines of the Pan paperback versions I have - bot copyrightable as the print on the spine is too common. - SchroCat (^ • @) 15:30, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The current image is free and correctly tagged. (Typefaces are ineligible for copyright in the U.S., and there is nothing else copyrightable in the book spines.) There are no image concerns in this article. – Quadell ^(talk) 20:15, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The comma after James Bond in the opening doesn't add anything positive to the sentence.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• In the second paragraph, consider flipping "while" for "whilst"; that's usually preferred among the featured content processes' prose experts.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Also consider combining the third and fourth paragraphs, since the fourth paragraph is stubby and appears to be a logical fit with the previous one.

• Agreed: done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Ian Fleming: Try not to start a sentence with a number like in "4,728 copies of Casino Royale...".

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I may not be an image expert, but I doubt that two non-free images in a list can be found to pass muster. The second image perhaps could pass the criteria for Ian Fleming's article, but not for a list like this.

• I've asked Quadell to comment on this one too. - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Even though it is appropriate to have a section on Ian Fleming, I have to say that I don't think a photo is needed to fully understand the article. (I'm sorry to say this, since the photo is useful in the article, but not necessary to understand the topic, and that sets the bar rather high.) – Quadell ^(talk) 14:02, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sadly removed! I've added a copy of Fleming's signature in its plance and a number of free images of some of the authors elsewhere: if you think this is overkill then please let me know and I'll get rid of them. - SchroCat (^ • @) 14:30, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The short stories: Missing word in "Fleming adapted four of television plots..."?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "When the paperbacks edition of the book was published". "paperbacks" → "paperback".

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• In all of the Post-Fleming section headings, en dashes are needed for the year ranges.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• 1979-1996: "the Bond series was revived with new novels by John Gardner, although initially almost turned the series down." Missing "he" before "initially".

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Done - again! SchroCat (^ • @) 18:56, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• License Renewed: "Murik hired Franco to hijack six nuclear power stations in order to start a meltdown, but are prevented from doing so...". Feels like it's missing "they" before "are".

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Done - again! SchroCat (^ • @) 18:56, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Never Dream of Dying: "goesafter" needs to be two words.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The Man with the Red Tattoo: "to pursue terrorist Goro Yoshida. Yoshida...". Try to avoid this repetition from one sentence to another.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• There's a similar issue regarding Moon in the Die Another Die novel summary after the above one.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Double or Die: "manages to recue him." Typo hiding in there.

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Hurricane Gold: "Bond gives chases and is captured". "chases" → "chase"?

• Done - SchroCat (^ • @) 02:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Giants2008 (Talk) 01:50, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Two of the ones above (the non-struck ones) were identical to what they were before the changes. Is it possible that the edits were just previewed and didn't go through? Giants2008 (Talk) 18:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Weird! All (re-)done now! - SchroCat (^ • @) 19:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The short stories and fictional chronology tables need to comply with WP:ACCESS see MOS:DTT for more info other than that the list looks fine. NapHit (talk) 14:58, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Now done. - SchroCat (^ • @) 18:56, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

you need to add rowscopes, i've don the first table for you, so if you're unsure you can use that as a guide. NapHit (talk) 21:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Apols - missed that bit! Hopefully now done properly. - SchroCat (^ • @) 08:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Personally, I question whether that infobox is really needed - it details information about James Bond as a character, so it would make sense to use it at the James Bond (character) article, but it seems a bit superfluous in an article about a series of books.

• Done – SchroCat (^ • @) 08:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Per WP:OVERLINK, I wouldn't have thought that either Jamaica or Caribbean need be linked to.

• Done – SchroCat (^ • @) 08:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• In the fourth sentence of the second paragraph, you use "Gardner" twice.

• Done – SchroCat (^ • @) 08:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Whilst", "Upon" and "due to" seem a bit overly formal to me - I'd suggest using "while", "on" and "because of" instead.

• I've not changed these as I don't think that they are formal, at least not in British English, which is the varient used in this article (for example, a search of the Guardian website shows the word "whilst" being used an average of five times a day—and about ten times a day on the BBC website) If it was an MOS thing then it may be different (at least different enough for me to argue against it on a talk page) but the "overly formal" is just an opinion on a user page, yes?

• Per WP:HEADER, I think "The short stories" header should just be "Short stories". Similarly, I'd rather not see the "List of" at the beginning of the first level 3 header.

• Done – SchroCat (^ • @) 08:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "publishers of the James Bond novels, (since renamed Ian Fleming Publications)" - I'd put that comma after the closing parenthesis.

• Done – SchroCat (^ • @) 08:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "The first Young Bond novel, SilverFin" - "novel" shouldn't be italicised.

• Done – SchroCat (^ • @) 08:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Young Bond" in the Charlie Higson photo caption is not italicised.

• Done – SchroCat (^ • @) 08:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good overall, Nice job! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 01:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• General comment I'm similarly working on the sister list for my team of preference, List of New York Yankees owners and executives, and I've come upon a few stumbling blocks that would probably be relevant to discuss here, so that everyone's on the same page. It seems that the nature of Phillies' presidents is a bit different than for the Yankees, as the Yankees have always had someone known as an owner. On the Yankees page, we have listed all notable former executives in addition to current executives (someone else grouped them the way they are currently grouped, and I was thinking about merging it all into one bigger table since lists of farming directors etc. are incomplete). Do you think past members of the Phillies front office, people who were not presidents or GMs, should be included? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:23, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • As these folks are not inherently notable, my opinion would be no. That is why I included them under the "See also" umbrella. If that at some point becomes too cumbersome (like, if there are 15, 20, 30!?), then an "other executives" table would certainly suffice. — KV5 • Talk • 01:20, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm satisfied with that explanation. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Everything in the toolbox checks out. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• The "other executives" need some referencing. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:49, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • See also links do not require references, but reference 3 does verify that all worked for the team. — KV5 • Talk • 22:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• General managers: Don't think Bob Carpenter, Jr. needs another link in the intro text. There's already one in the previous section's intro, and ones in the tables.
  • Done — KV5 • Talk • 12:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Is there anything out there on whether the GM position was specifically introduced to the Phillies before the 1944 season? That's a sizable gap in the team's timeline that could use some explanation.
  • All information that I have says no. Specifically, Pennock was named the team's first GM; they did not have any before him. — KV5 • Talk • 12:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Also, was there a GM in 1949?
  • All of my sources say no on this point as well. — KV5 • Talk • 12:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Footnote b says Paul Owens resigned in 1984, but the tenure column in the table gives the end of his GM position as 1983. Which is it?
  • '83. I get my stuff mixed up because he was still the manager in 1984 but not GM. — KV5 • Talk • 12:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Publisher of ref 1 (Baseball America) should be italicized since it's a printed publication.
  • Done — KV5 • Talk • 12:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Publisher of ref 2 (ESPN) shouldn't be italicized since it's not.
  • Done — KV5 • Talk • 12:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Page range in ref 10 should be presented as p. instead of pp., as a single-page citation. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:26, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done — KV5 • Talk • 12:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• What's a "farm system"?
• "The longest-tenured general manager is Paul Owens, with 11 years of service to the team as the general manager" bit repetitive, can you rephrase?
• No need to re-abbreviate General manager in the General managers section.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:46, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• • All done. — KV5 • Talk • 11:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Check consistency in the refs for the way you refer to Cricinfo. - Done
• Not sure what the image caption has to do with the image. - Added (pictured) to show it is the Queen's Park Oval
• Could link List of International Cricket Council members#Associate Members for associate member to help non-experts. - Done
• Suggest you make the first "World Cup" link just to the Cricket World Cup. - Done
• Suggest you make "In the World Cup which was held in 2007" -> "In the 2007 World Cup, " and link the specific edition. - Done
• " which began a decline in Bermudian cricket which eventually ... which ..." repetitive "which", perhaps reword to lose the middle one -> "Bermudian cricket, leading to..." for instance? - Reworded, better?
• "now find themselves playing" just "now play" would be more encyclopaedic. - Yep, far better wording :)
• "with Irving Romaine and" no need to repeat his first name. - Done
• Ditto in the list of captains. - Done
• Where is the captain stuff referenced? More importantly, where is the stand-in stuff referenced (" Basden stood in for Romaine in a single match against the Netherlands in 2007, which Bermuda lost.")?
• Steven Outerbridge, it appears, should be Stephen Outerbridge... (unless our own article is wrongly titled, in which case, I'd suggest you move that). - Moved the page, our own article was wrongly titled
• HS col doesn't sort correctly at all. - Fixed
• BBI doesn't sort correctly. - Fixed

• Suddenly find myself a little bit surprised we don't have Economy for these one dayers...

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:00, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response

• I'll try and factor in an economy rate column. Trying to find a source for Basden standing in, the match reports unfortunately thus far haven't made mention of it :S AssociateAffiliate (talk) 19:04, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• I've removed the part about Basden standing in for Romaine, although more than likely, I can't seem to dig up a source to back it up. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 19:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Ok, I've experimented adding an economy rate column on my sandbox. It does squash the names up, which doesn't look too great. Is the economy rate column essential to the list? AssociateAffiliate (talk) 19:23, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, not essential. But in my system, it looks fine. Perhaps a comment that we should keep open for other reviewers. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've added an economy column. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Table fails WP:ACCESS, see MOS:DTT for how to rectify this
• Not keen on the colours in the table. Firstly they hide the sort buttons, which would make readers assume that the columns are not sortable. Secondly I'm not sure of the benefit. Its clear what statistics refer to batting, bowling and fielding I don't think this needs to be highlighted by colours, especially as they are listed under those three headings in the key making it clear what statistic refers to batting or bowling.
• Refs that are PDFs need the parameter format=PDF added to them
• Instead of having the refs next to the players name in the table, why not create a separate column at the end of the table, that it becomes more evident that reference is referring to the stats as well.
• Image needs alt text

NapHit (talk) 13:37, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response

• Fixed table. To be honest, I didn't realise they were sortable because of the colours! I've removed the colours, but left them on the headings. Ideally I'd put the headings above the sort boxes, but I can't seem to get it to work without glitching. I think perhaps the colours have some merit on the headings. PDF format code added. I'll experiment with a reference column later on :) Oh and added the alt text thing. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 16:32, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Guess you're right, looking at other tables the colours aren't really needed, which perhaps negates the need to put the "batting", "bowling" and "fielding" headings above the sort boxes. I've added the reference column too. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 17:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, if the sortable icon showed despite the colours then there would not be a problem, otherwise readers might not be aware the table is sortable. Regarding the table it still does not meet WP:ACCESS standards, you've added scope=col to one column this needs to be added to all, and the rowscopes need adding as well, I've done an example for you so you know what you're doing. Btw, you have to the information on separate lines, as I have done in the example otherwise the whole table will be highlighted instead of just the rowheader. NapHit (talk) 18:34, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the example :) Think those are now done.... think!!! AssociateAffiliate (talk) 20:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Feels strongly like something is missing here: "Dean Minors, acted as wicket-keeper in twenty of the county's ODI fixtures." Could be that the comma shouldn't be there.
• Not a fan of the "with" to "with" structure in the following sentence. Doesn't read that well. I'd recommend modifying that bit.
• Don't need to repeat Irving Romaine's first name in the captains sentence, especially since it's inconsistent with how the rest of the lead handles repeated names.
• "Where more than one player won their first caps in the same match". Something about this is bothering me. I think it should be either "won their first cap" or "Where multiple players" at the start. The way it is now, there's some singular/plural confusion between "player" and "caps".
• Photo caption could use a period at the end.
• Blank rows are in the table for Jacobi Robinson (average) and Dean Minors (caught).
• The publisher of ref 7 is listed as CricketArchive, but it appears to be Cricinfo instead. Also check that that source doesn't give a publishing date. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:27, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response

• Done! The comma after Minors shouldn't have been there, forgot to remove it from an older version where the sentence was longer. Removed the second mention of Romaine's first name, also changed the sentences mentioned around a little. Well spotted with reference 7, it was indeed Cricinfo! Blank rows removed too. AssociateAffiliate (talk) 09:28, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Aretha Franklin photo caption, remove the hyphen from "eleven-times". That's a stray one.
• In many other photo captions, with "xxx nominee, including xxx award winner xxx", the least that could be done is have commas before the winners' names. Not a big fan of that format in general; I find it a bit clunky.
• What makes Rock on the Net (second general reference) a reliable source?
• What makes Indiaserver (ref 6) a reliable source?
• Ref 21, from Billboard, could use a little more formatting than it's currently got. It looks barebones next to the other Billboard links. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both Another Believer's and Giants' comments have been addressed. Novice7 (talk) 11:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "takes the runner-up position with eight nominations" not really keen on that, perhaps "is second with eight..."?
• Franklin's caption, why is Award capitalised once?
• 1976 nominees is missing a bullet.
• Why isn't Franklin linked in 1982?
• And Chaka Khan in 1985?
• I would expect all winning works to have an article, surely being awarded a Grammy would make each and every one notable?

The Rambling Man (talk) 09:39, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator has retired and has asked fellow editors to watch over his nominations.

• I have changed to "is second with eight nominations". That sounds better.
• The caps must have been a typo. Fixed.
• Replaced quotation mark with bullet. Another typo.
• Have removed the <code>

• Not keen on the simple years being easter-egg linked. Perhaps intersperse with the odd "season", e.g. "since the 1990 season" and link the "season" bit as well.
• Consider linking "cylinder" appropriately.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments TRM, I've addressed them both. NapHit (talk) 10:46, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

• It is highly recommended not to introduce a list with "This is a list..." or "This list of Xs..."; check WP:LEADSENTENCE for more details. You can just remove that and start with the second sentence. Otherwise I would be happy to support this. — Lemonade51 (talk) 15:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have removed the first sentence as you suggest. Savidan 17:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Link conclave the first time, not second.
• On the page you link "Ubi Perculum" to, there is no mention at all of Ubi Perculum. Confused.
• "Oct. 1187" October... (and any others).
• "1799-1800" en-dash required for year (and page) ranges throughout per WP:DASH.
• Sortable tables so anything that's wikilinked needs to be linked every time.
• The December/October elections sort out of order, you need to force them to sort by something like 1187.10 and 1187.12... Check every table for this.
• It looks like a number of elections took place in multiple locations. This should be covered in the lead.
• Refs don't need to be sortable.
• Palais de Papes and Konstanz Minster captions, one with a full stop and one without, complete sentences need a full stop, others don't.
• "Council of Pisa (1409)" vs "Pisan papal conclave, 1410" consistency is needed, either (year) or ", year".
• "[53][1]" -> [1][53], check others.
• Why three refs for 2005?
• Check all page ranges have an en-dash and use pp., not just p.
• Refs 108, 109, 110 (although only one is really needed) appear to be book refs, so you should have a page ref for them.

The Rambling Man (talk) 13:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment need to ensure names sort correctly, i.e. that Pius IX follows Pius VIII etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:39, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have done this. Savidan 05:57, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• You can increase the size of the lead image up to a maximum of 300 px, as per MoS guidelines.
• Can you provide a source for the first sentence?
• I'd change the wikilink in "process for papal succession" to "Prior to 1959", because that's what the article is about: the election procedure before 1959 and not a general succession process.
• Remove the indentation and italics on the last sentence of the lead.
• In fact, you could place the sentence mentioned in the previous item just after the initial sentence, rephrasing it so that you state how many non-legitimate papal conclaves where held (in opposition to the 112 legitimate) and then mention between brackets something like "(listed in italics in the tables below)". In alternative, you could place all of the table sections under one top-level section "Papal elections", and place this sentence there, as a note applicable to every table. Take these only as suggestions.
• Singularize the last two headings; there's just one item in each.
• A period is missing in the caption of the penultimate image.

— Parutakupiu (talk) 23:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have implemented several of your suggestions. I have added a citation for the import of In nomine Domini, but I do not regard a citation as necessary for the count of 112. The body of the article contains a citation for each of the 112 and the lead simply adds these. Baumgartner's book attests to 111 of these (without counting), but it predated the 2005 conclave. I have not taken your suggestion regarding the note regarding antipopes. I want to avoid breaking the third wall by failing to distinguish stylistically between statements of historical fact and statements about how the article is organized. I also have not singularized the last two headings, but I will do so if you point me to a statement to this effect in the MoS (it is my longstanding understanding that the policy is the opposite). Savidan 01:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I'm not understanding how the citation (a list of the 1913 College cardinals?) sources the papal bull. Is the reference content complete? As for the heading singularization, I checked the guidelines and you're completely right - comment removed. Parutakupiu (talk) 01:40, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the cite. It appears there were two CE articles on Wikisource with the same title. Savidan 23:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• How come you decided to separate the list by century? Personally I think it would be more beneficial if the was all ion one, as it would allow the reader to sort by pope etc.
• Tables fail WP:ACCESS, see MOS:DTT, for further information, i've done an example for you in case you're unsure of what to do
• I know you've responded to TRM on this point above, but I really don't see the point in having three refs for in the last cell, when one would suffice

NapHit (talk) 20:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am willing to make the tables more accessible, but I do not understand this. Nothing at WP:ACCESS or MOS:DTT says anything about "plainrowheaders." Any why does it unbold the first column heading? I perceive more utility in being able to jump to a given century (for the reader who knows the approximate era of the election they are interested in) than in being able to sort alphabetically by pope (there's no real reason to see all the Pope Alexanders next to each other). If a reader is looking for a specific pope, ctrl+f is a much better move than alphabetizing the list by pope. Nor do I see the harm in extra footnotes. Savidan 01:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reason the first column heading was unbolded was because i put the wrong parameter in, fixed it now. Plainrowheaders is used to prevent the links in the row headers form be bold, thus ensuring they remain they are at present. So you know why these improvements are necessary I'll point you in the direction of this, where RexxS very eloquently describes why these changes are needed. Regarding the sorting I would prefer if the table was all in one, but its a matter of preference I guess, so i'll leave it at that. The footnote bit still bug me, why does Benedict warrant three sources while none of the others do? Its pointless to include three references when one can easily do the job, so I would like to see just one used. NapHit (talk) 12:42, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have combined the tables. I still don't know that I can implement sorting without eliminating the two uses of rowspan, which I think is the fairest way to indicate that the same election elected two competing candidates. Savidan 21:35, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added anchors for the centuries within the unified table. Savidan 08:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have eliminated the "extra" sources. Savidan 08:57, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Much better now, the anchors is a good idea as well. Two things you need to do i would make the table sortable, and you need to add rowscopes, I've done the first cell as an example, in case you're unsure of what to do. Once these two bits are done I'll be happy to support. NapHit (talk) 11:24, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added rowscopes. I cannot make the table sortable because of the need for rowspan for the 1130 and 1159 elections. If you can suggest a viable alternative for these, I will implement sorting. Savidan 21:20, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These are done. --♫GoP♫_T^C_N 22:10, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a way of doing it, I think this does it, will have a better look tomorrow, as its bedtime now. NapHit (talk) 00:23, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i've managed to fix the problem with the rowspan, and the table is now sortable, there are few cells that can incorporate the markup (mainly the location, but that's up to you. One problem that sorting has created is that the years don't sort correctly, this will need to be fixed, and isn't too much trouble. I'll do a few examples for you so you know what to do and then it should be a piece of cake. NapHit (talk) 12:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. I have fixed the sorting for the years. I do not see any need to modify the current sort for the location, but would be open to changing them if there are specific problems. Savidan 04:16, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "reaching winds of 145 mph " would prefer "with winds reaching 145 mph..."

• • Fixed.
• No 118km/h in the diagram at the top of the Timeline section.

• • 118 km/h is not used in any timelines, nor is it used by the NHC. It is skipped.
    • UNBELIEVABLE. No way. Unacceptable. So the scale specifically excludes 118 km/h? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, as seen in this image here. Tropical Storm ends at 117 km/h and Category 1 hurricane status begins at 119 km/h. – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 22:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Um theres one problem with that source that has to be highlighted, its a rip off our SSHS scale. it should be noted however that this is a new one on me - while its verifable that C1 starts at 119km/h but neither me nor Titoxd have yet found a source that proves where the tropical storm category ends on the SSHS in km/h.Jason Rees (talk) 22:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Update - i found the french verson of the Atlantic hurricane operational plan from 2011 in French which basically states that tropical storm ends at 117 and hurricane starts at 118 km/h.Jason Rees (talk) 23:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Alright, now that this has been settled, I have addressed all your concerns; thanks for the comments The Rambling Man. – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 00:39, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Note 2, the "Scale" is simply a "scale".
  • It is part of the name though, shouldn't it be capitalized?
    • Because it isn't capitalised. "Scale" isn't a proper noun, check out our own article. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Any reason why NHC is linked in its third reference, not beforehand, and not all the time (like the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory)?
  • Fixed. – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 21:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 09:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• You need to add rowscopes to the tables, I've done the first line as an example in case you're unsure about how to do this
• ref 1 needs format=PDF adding to it, think all the other PDFs have this

NapHit (talk) 23:32, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All addressed; I fixed the landfalls table too. HurricaneFan25 — 15:58, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep looks good, one more query, you use mention the saffir-simpson scale a lot without clarifying exactly what it is, I think you need to do this so the reader understands what it is. NapHit (talk) 16:13, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "is used for tropical cyclones that have winds ranging 131–155 mpg." Surely this needs "from" before the actual range?
• Statistics and background: "At that time, the advisories were written in cooperation with the with the United States Navy Fleet Weather Center...". Two excess words need removal.
• Minor, but the abbreviations could be moved outside the blue links.

  It should be formatted as such per this, though I could limit the blue link to the abbreviation if you want. HurricaneFan25 — 15:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "The National Hurricane Center's authority extended to the EPHC in 1988, and began maintaining the tracks in 1988." The authority maintained the tracks, or the center? If the latter, the sentence needs some fixing up in that regard. Maybe try "extended its authority" in the beginning?
• All images need alt text.
• Landfalls: All em dashes in the text are faulty; they should be either unspaced em dashes or spaced en dashes, depending on style preference.
• Hyphen in the title of ref 1 should be an en dash per the MoS. We are allowed to make style changes like this in titles, in case you're wondering. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:52, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  All fixed except the one noted.

• "Déjame Entrar " is a dab link.

FIXED. Jaespinoza (talk) 08:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Juanes image caption needs a full stop.

FIXED. Jaespinoza (talk) 08:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• As does those of Guerra and Perez.

FIXED. Jaespinoza (talk) 08:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• A lot of the album titles redirect to versions which are capitalised very differently. Suggest some work is done on this (not necessarily here) to work this out.

I will check it out. Jaespinoza (talk) 08:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "Joe Chiccarelli" -> "Joe Chicarelli" (occurs twice).

FIXED. Jaespinoza (talk) 08:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "was awarded in 2009" perhaps "was awarded the Grammy in 2009.."

FIXED. Jaespinoza (talk) 08:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• You link USA Today in the refs but not Los Angeles Times. Why?

FIXED. Jaespinoza (talk) 08:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Who publishes ref 8?

FIXED. Jaespinoza (talk) 08:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• You relink AllBusiness.com but not Latin Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences. Be consistent.

FIXED. Jaespinoza (talk) 08:12, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]