Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/October 2014

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

The list was promoted by SchroCat 08:42, 28 October 2014 [1].

Nominator(s): Wikipedical (talk) 21:58, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comprehensive, up to date, and meets all Featured List criteria. Last nomination was closed with one Support and no other reviewers. See Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Louie/archive1. Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 21:58, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good day, I will be reviewing this article, let me say, first off, how unfortunate about the previous FLC, I hope more reviewers will take the time this time around. Second, I must say, I'm not a big fan of these kinds of lists while the show is still running. Back in the day when I was still fully active I managed to get an awards list for Dexter to FL, yet it was demoted after a while because it was no longer up to date. So, I urge you to keep the page up to date (the Emmys, at this moment are something to remember). I'll post my comments below.

• In the table, could you replace the '1' nomination of the Peabody Award with a '-', as I believe a show can't be nominated for a Peabody, it just receives one, like the nobel prize.
• May I ask, when does an award get it's own section, the PGA's and DGA's for instance, why aren't they just in the 'other awards' section?
• I believe the SAGs are awarded by members of SAG-AFTRA as of 2012, not just the SAG.
• Why is the date in italics in the PGA source, that appears to be a mistake.
• Why do the tables have individual titles? They don't appear to be necessary.

That's all, good work :). If you resolve these (small) issues you will receive my support. Also, if you have the time, I have a similar list up for FLC at this moment (here), if you have the time it would be marvelous if you would help me out. Don't feel obligated of course, it is my pleasure to have reviewed this list without getting anything in return, Louie is one of my favorite TV shows (and how nice to see that David Lynch received a nomination for his guest performance, he was awesome in that three-parter).--Music26/11 00:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey Music2611. I have made the appropriate changes per your 1st, 3rd, and 4th bullet points. With regards to PGAs and DGAs having their own section- they are extremely notable and among the most prestigious awards in entertainment (the DGAs have been given out since the 1930s, before TV even existed). They are among the highest "craft" awards and I'd say deserve their own sections, as they do at List of awards and nominations received by Arrested Development and others. With regards to the tables having "individual titles," see MOS:DTT. Table captions increase Wikipedia's accessibility. Thanks for the review. I will be getting to a Boston Legal awards review shortly. Cheers. -- Wikipedical (talk) 04:14, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've struck remark 2 and 5, their both more a matter of personal preference than a violation of wikipedia guidelines. The table headers don't really appeal to me, they appear to give information that's already there, I mean they're right below the section header. But, again, it's a matter of personal preference, and it won't stop me from supporting, as you have done some good work here.--Music26/11 04:56, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support, my comments have been resolved, this list has the right quality in my opinion.--Music26/11 04:56, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reiterating my Support from the previous nomination. Cowlibob (talk) 13:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Comment from Crisco 1492

• The lead feels really light. A quote from the "positive reviews", a bit on the other cast members, or the co-writers... or something. Something to contextualize this is necessary. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:55, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Anything? This is about ready to be archived. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:22, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Crisco, I have added a sentence summarizing other co-nominees. Is the lede long enough now? For reference, it's around 230 characters more than FL List of awards and nominations received by 30 Rock and 150 less than List of awards and nominations received by Arrested Development. -- Wikipedical (talk) 21:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Excellent. Support. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. – SchroCat (talk) 08:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The list was promoted by Crisco 1492 07:39, 28 October 2014 [2].

Nominator(s): LADY LOTUS • TALK 20:23, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it is a good representation of his extensive and still growing career LADY LOTUS • TALK 20:23, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support very well-written and comprehensive, deserves to be FL. All my concerns were addressed during peer review. Downey himself would be quite proud :D! Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:28, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Aww thanks Snuggums!!! LADY LOTUS • TALK 11:53, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • My pleasure :) Snuggums (talk / edits) 12:43, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Well-sourced and well-written list and it meets the criteria. --Carioca (talk) 20:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Excellent prose in the lead section. A deserving candidate for FL status.--Skr15081997 (talk) 03:07, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492: Whatcha say about promoting this? :) LADY LOTUS • TALK 16:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps later today. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:39, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• There's also Hahc21, SchroCat, Giants2008, and NapHit who could promote it as well. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:43, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment from me, before promotion (well, after Cowlibob finishes reviewing): can we include a bit more variation? You use "appear" or a version of that word at least 8 times in the lead, and much of it reads as proseline (prosified lists). Better flow would be nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:24, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I did a bit of tweaking. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should be better now LADY LOTUS • TALK 16:03, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• All sorted now. I now support this list. Another great job. Cowlibob (talk) 18:34, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:35, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The list was promoted by Crisco 1492 05:29, 25 October 2014 [3].

Nominator(s): —Vensatry _(ping) 18:47, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A list modeled based on List of Cricket World Cup centuries, an existing FL. Look forward to your comments and suggestions. —Vensatry _(ping) 18:47, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support meets the criteria - NickGibson3900 ^Talk 05:45, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Another good list. Cowlibob (talk) 20:39, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – meets the standards! Waiting for you at my nom...... --Khadar Khani (talk)
• Support. Meets the criteria and it is well-sourced. --Carioca (talk) 19:17, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks all for your review and support. :) —Vensatry _(ping) 14:22, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The list was promoted by Crisco 1492 09:27, 25 October 2014 [4].

Nominator(s): PresN 23:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Over the past year or so, I've been increasingly impressed by the way a group of users from WP:SEGA, especially User:Red Phoenix, have been getting all of the Sega console articles and lists up to good or featured status, and I decided to pitch in a bit. The result is this list, designed to tie together the consoles into a massive featured/good topic. I've gone through and hunted down, to the best of my ability, references for facts about the lifecycles, abilities, add-ons, and sales performances of every console Sega ever released, including the ones no one outside of Japan has really heard of. The consoles are illustrated, generally by User:Evan-Amos's delightful photos, and I think it's a solid little list that's a bit different from what I usually do. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 23:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Very nicely done! I've added Sega's logo to the lead just to give the article a little color and help illustrate the company which is the focus of this article. Sega's logo is PD because it doesn't meet the threshold of originality, so there are no image copyright concerns. Awesome work! Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 04:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to Red Phoenix's comments:

• Intro could probably use some more citations for things not covered in the body... list, like the first sentence about Sega itself.

• Found a good "History of" article to source things to. --PresN 23:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd suggest splitting the opening paragraph after "the Dreamcast in 1998".

• Done, now that I've added a few sentences to both sides. --PresN 23:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Also might be worth listing Sega's formation date and saying a little about their early history - mainly arcade games and pachinko, I think - for context on what they were doing before consoles.

• Done. --PresN 23:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Why is every instance of the generations linked?

• When tables are sortable, instead of just linking the first instance you link them all, since you don't know what row is going to be first for a given reader. --PresN 23:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Not a requirement, but I'd like a little on why Sega's significant in the game industry (e.g. forming the first serious challenge to Nintendo, Virtua Fighter, Sonic the Hedgehog in the early '90s and again around the turn of the millennium, Altered Beast, maybe Jet Set Radio).

• I've added a bit about them being a primary competitor to Nintendo, but I don't want to turn the lead into a "history of Sega"- the Sega article should do that. --PresN 23:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great otherwise, though, and I'll be happy to support in what should be short order. Oh, and PresN... you said to remind you at the end of the week about my FAC, so hey. Tezero (talk) 19:17, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing, Tezero! I'll review your article tomorrow over lunch. --PresN 23:24, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support; good point about the sorting, something I'd never thought much about before and that's applicable to many, many other FLs. Not sure why you cited the same source twice in succession in the lead, but hey, sometimes that extra bit of justification is deemed necessary. Good work. Tezero (talk) 00:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mean to throw a wrench in this, but Jucchan claimed Pico's Japanese discontinuation date isn't in that source. « Ryūkotsusei » 18:32, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adjusted to just be "2005"; that was the year the Beena successor came out, and the last year any games were released for the Pico, but he's right that it may be a bit spurious to claim that the Pico was discontinued on that specific day just because that was when the successor was released. --PresN 22:13, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Looks good to me. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:22, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:17, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The list was promoted by SchroCat 16:03, 22 October 2014 [7].

Nominator(s): ɱ (talk) 20:37, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Briarcliff Manor is a small village in the New York suburbs. It has plenty of interesting history and quite a few notable residents. The village also has a number of parks and historic buildings.

After working on the main municipality article, I decided to arrange village events into a clear timeline, which I just finished. I hope it meets all of your standards.ɱ (talk) 20:37, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a box around the timeline then go to the top and add "class="wikitable"" in front of "align="right"". Jimknut (talk) 19:15, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – One thing that jumped out at me was the size of the lead, which is rather small for an FL these days. I'd expect to see a lead twice this size for a list of this length, and there are certainly enough interesting facts presented to be able to add to what's there now. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many leads serve a purpose of general information about the topic, although that's already heavily covered in Briarcliff Manor and History of Briarcliff Manor, so much that I thought writing any more in this lead would seem redundant, and just another re-hash of the same information. The lead size issue is just a guideline, and if there's not enough fresh information to fill it out, we shouldn't just throw in whatever to fill that gap.--ɱ (talk) 00:21, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per comments below. I also provided feedback for the main article's FAC, if any administrators are wondering.

• Congregation Sons of Israel is formed by eleven men in Ossining - I think you should change men to people.

I normally agree, although the source said "men" specifically. It was a congregation of and for men, formed by men. Putting 'people' just makes it less specific and removes detail, and why?--ɱ (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Elliott Fitch Shepard's masnion Woodlea is completed. - Big typo here.

That's really not so big. Fixed.--ɱ (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The first twenty-nine street lights, all electric, are installed - Something off with this line. I'm not sure what.

You've got to be more specific on how you think it should be changed. I can't read your mind; the line seems perfectly fine to me...--ɱ (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• After Hurricane Irene, a sinkhole about 20 feet in diameter forma on North State Road in front of a gas station and repair shop, and New York's department of transportation spends about $900,000 repairing the damage. - Needs copy editing.

How, where, and why? This seems fine to me too, what's off with this?--ɱ (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Too big. URDNEXT (talk) 23:20, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As in 'too much information', or 'not worded concisely enough'?--ɱ (talk) 23:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ɱ Not worded concisely enough. URDNEXT (talk) 23:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

done, I don't know how much shorter it can be now.--ɱ (talk) 00:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I'm talking about, ɱ. I personally think the article is good enough to pass. URDNEXT (talk) 00:14, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• During the week of October 14, the petition is filed with the town of Ossining and the village of Briarcliff Manor. - You should make it clear what the petition is for.

I talk about the petition in the sentence above. Not every bullet has to be independently understandable. With that logic, I would be linking every instance of Briarcliff Manor and Briarcliff Manor Fire Department throughout the whole article.--ɱ (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• For some reason, peobaly the huge images on the side, makes the lead look to tiny and confined. I think you should put that big one somewhere else in the article.

I had it that way before; the above reviewer wanted it at the top. I can't please both of you...--ɱ (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ɱ Hope this passes. URDNEXT (talk) 20:20, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--ɱ (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ɱ I'm trying my best, but there aren't a lot of things wrong with the article. URDNEXT (talk) 23:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's good, thank you.--ɱ (talk) 00:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support – this seems like a pretty qualified list, though I will add more comments in the next 2 days. For now, it seems pretty well laid out.

One question, though; wouldn't the timeline in the lede look better if it were to the right of the census data? It may be a stylistic preference, however. – Epicgenius (talk) 00:53, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, although I'm not sure if it's technically possible. And the other two reviewers also had other ideas about its placement; I'm not sure what would be best, but it's such a minor issue that I think any or all of the options presented are fine. Thanks for the general compliments.--ɱ (talk) 01:18, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Only one other issue — the statement "Rosemont, a Scarborough Historic District property, is demolished" is unsourced and there's no exact year. Otherwise, perfect. Looks like I don't have to wait until tomorrow to do the review at all. – Epicgenius (talk) 01:44, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me. I knew it had been demolished based on what the historical society had said, and since it's one of seven properties in the district, that it was important to note. I later asked one of the society members, who directed me to a more concrete answer and source. I'll fix that momentarily.--ɱ (talk) 01:51, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All good to go. – Epicgenius (talk) 02:05, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support

• "The following is a timeline" is the cousin of "This is a list", and shouldn't be used. The reader knows it's a timeline- it's the first word in the title. I'd start the list off the same way the history of article starts- "The history of Briarcliff Manor, a village in the county of Westchester, New York, can be traced back to the founding of a settlement between the Hudson and Pocantico Rivers in the 19th century."

In its defense, that wording was taken from a very detailed and well-made municipality timeline. Regardless, I agree with you, I've changed it.--ɱ (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd prefer if the war points (e.g. "World War I") had dates like the other ones- so, "1914–1918 (World War I)"

Good idea, done.--ɱ (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Briarcliff Manor is redirecting, in the lead

I am familiar with three guidelines that support using redirects over piped links, so unless there's something I've missed, shouldn't the redirect be preferred?--ɱ (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "the house of Elliott Fitch Shepard is purchased" - you've linked him earlier, and you should probably mention that the house is Woodlea again.

Good catch, fixed.--ɱ (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Maybe add the annexation of Scarborough to the timeline bar, since you spend so much of the timeline on Scarborough pre-annexation. Maybe Mount Pleasant as well, since there's a gap there

I'll try it, but unfortunately that timeline template isn't so good, the 1906 annexation will likely be messily written over the text of the 1902 and 1908 info.--ɱ (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I feel like the lead could be a touch longer- maybe mention what size it is now, since you say it started at 1 sq mi, or what the population is/was.

Another good idea.--ɱ (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• While certainly optional, if you felt this review was helpful, consider reviewing List of Sega video game consoles further up the FLC page.

Sure, I'll take a look at it, although it might not be for a few days.--ɱ (talk) 17:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• --PresN 22:34, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Switched to support. --PresN 21:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks PresN. I'll make sure to write some comments on the Sega review.--ɱ (talk) 23:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. – SchroCat (talk) 15:55, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The list was promoted by Crisco 1492 09:59, 19 October 2014 [8].

Nominator(s): —Vensatry _(ping) 17:48, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A list modeled based on List of Cricket World Cup centuries, an existing FL. Look forward to your comments and suggestions. —Vensatry _(ping) 17:48, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

• Add "the" before Cricket World Cup in the lead?
• List of centuries: This section heading can be shortened to just "Centuries", with the understanding that it is a list because of the article's title. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:13, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Fixed both. Thanks for the comments —Vensatry _(ping) 16:57, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – meets the standards! --Khadar Khani (talk) 18:42, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Made some copyedits and did some rephrasing of the lead. I think you should cut the picture description to just "was the first player to score three centuries in the tournament's history" as it's confusing to include the record bit but other than that another good list. Cowlibob (talk) 20:10, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've undone a few changes made by you in the lead. Agree with you on the picture's caption. Thanks for the support :) —Vensatry _(ping) 17:07, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, your edits were an improvement. If you've got some time, I have another accolades list up for review at FLC, Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Blue Jasmine/archive1. Cowlibob (talk) 20:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. It is well-sourced and meets the FLC criteria. --Carioca (talk) 19:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:51, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The list was promoted by SchroCat 12:30, 15 October 2014 [9].

Nominator(s): Noswall59 (talk) 21:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article lists those who have received the highest grade of one of the orders of knighthood in the UK at a time when Britain was a leading power in the world; the list includes foreign heads of state, notable British soldiers and courtiers and ambassadors, reflecting the diplomatic relations and social structures of the time. Due to the number of people awarded the honour since it was founded in 1896, it seems sensible to split it into appointments by reign, and this is the first, covering the appointments made by Victoria from 1896 to her death in 1901. Although not experienced in this process, I do believe the article is well-written, with a lead which introduces and summarises the topic well. It is complete and incorporates sorting on the name, country of origin and date of appointment of individuals. Similarly, all items in the list are reliably sourced, as is the lead. Many thanks, --Noswall59 (talk) 21:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support

• What an overly-complicated way to say "the queen/king likes this person or something they did". Anyway.
• Letters patent doesn't seem to be capitalized like that at the linked article
• "Instituted with five grades, [dependent clause]." - missing a subject for this sentence, like "It was instituted"
• "The the two highest"
• "and the order remained in the personal gift of the sovereign" - you said that in the first sentence of the article already
• Any reason why you don't state the name of the "Prefect of the Alpes Maritimes" in the lead?
• You should explain the difference between a GCVO and an honorary GCVO. Also, you imply that some foreigners got regular GCVOs- any reason why? Any non-foreigners get honorary honors?
• "Where applicable, the occasion is that listed either with the notices, or in published material elsewhere, in which case, that material is cited." - whoa, commas. Try "Where applicable, the occasion is given that was listed either with the notices or in published material elsewhere, in which case that material is cited."
• Dash or office/occasion missing for "Field Marshal His Royal Highness Albert Edward, Prince of Wales"
• "(Caucasian Cossacks of the Line), in the staff of Nicholas II, Emperor of Russia." - why the parentheses?
• Also, why the period? You have this for several others as well.
• "Emperor of Russia's Coronation" - don't see why coronation is capitalized
• "Emperor of China's Mission" - same with mission
• "Emperor of Russia's Visit to Queen Victoria" - and visit.
• Consider linking who those emperors were
• Odd italics for "Membre du Conseil Supérieur de la Guerre, Inspecteur d'Armée"
• Parentheses again for "(King's Royal Rifle Corps)" - if you're doing it because the original title is non-English, list the non-English title first
• Why is the star before the honor for Gustavus Ernest, Count of Erbach-Schonberg* KCVO?
• Stars missing for His Highness Abbas Pasha, Khedive of Egypt GCB GCMG and His Serene Highness Henry XXX, Prince Reuss
• Stray periods for the occasions "The Duke of Connaught's attendance at the recent French Military Manoeuvres.", "On his return from active service in South Africa.", and "Duke of Connaught's visit to Berlin for the Bicentenary of the foundation of the Kingdom of Prussia."
• I'm really confused how the sorting by name is working for this. Some people you do first name (Prince Albert) while some you do last name (Count Benkendarf). Unless there's some strange rule that English princes don't get sorted by their last name, or that "William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin" should be sorted by Kelvin rather than Thomson and "Emich Edward Charles, the Hereditary Prince of Leiningen" by Leiningen rather than Charles, please be consistent in sorting.
• Ref 14 is linking to issue 26755, p. 3853, not the stated issue 26758, p. 4025
• All your non-book citations are formatted oddly; I think it's because you're missing a publisher for all of them, though that's probably because the publisher is the government of the country in question. That said, your book citations are also weird- you list all the bibliographic information in the bibliography, so the citations should just be like "McCreery, p. 29", rather than listing it all out again.
• Most of your redirecting links are capitalization changes or spelling changes, ones of note that you might fix are: Nicholas II of Russia, Russians (as Russia Empire, Austro-Hungarian (as Austro-Hungarian Empire), all your Generals are redirecting to General officer, you have KP as Order of Saint Patrick instead of Order of St. Patrick, ADC as Aide de Camp instead of Aide-de-camp, and PC as Privy Counsellor (UK) instead of Privy Council of the United Kingdom, and Carl of Denmark piped to Haakon VII instead of Haakon VII of Norway.

--PresN 22:22, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN: Hi, thanks for the comments. All those with strike-throughs have been addressed now. A few points:

• I believe I've clarified the situation with honorary knighthoods - let me know if I'm still not clear.
• I've also updated the book citations, but I'm not sure whether you wanted me to alter the non-book ones, so let me know if that's the case.
• As for the italicised part, it's like that because it's given in a foreign language, unlike most of the others (I don't know why it's like this, but that's how it was listed in the sources) - I can change it if you would like, but I don't see how that's odd.
• The parentheses include branch of service or regiment details, as opposed to offices; would you like me to remove them?
• As for the name sort: basically, those who held substantive titles (X, Duke of Y) are listed by their title; British princes are listed by their given names, even if they have titles (e.g. Charles, Wales, Prince of); those who were styled Dukes, Counts, etc. (Duke X of Y, Count X of Y) are listed by their surname if applicable (this is what has been done in the DefaultSort Count Illarion Ivanovich Vorontsov-Dashkov's article). I've corrected Leiningen's, but Kelvin does not need updating, nor does Prince Albert. See WP:PEERS.
• The redirects for Knight of St Patrick, Privy Councillor and Aide-de-Camp are all from the "post-nominals" template, so I can't alter them. The rest have been corrected.

Thank you again for your review, these corrections are certainly improving the article. --Noswall59 (talk) 08:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Alright, made a few tweaks, but changing to support. --PresN 17:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, --Noswall59 (talk) 19:52, 20 August 2014 (UTC).[reply]

• Support. Excellent work. Well-written and well-sourced list. --Carioca (talk) 19:39, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the support, --Noswall59 (talk) 20:53, 22 August 2014 (UTC).[reply]

• It remains in the personal gift of the monarch - Not sure what you mean here.

Basically, most honours in the UK are now awarded by the government; the king/queen are only nominally involved; however, this particular award is still handed out by the monarch without any involvement by the government. Hopefully my alterations make this clear.

• "It is granted personally by the monarch", perhaps? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done.

• one Austro-Hungarian, Chinese, Dane, Egyptian, Montenegrin and Spanish citizens. - feels like you're missing something. Maybe "and one"... would help...

 Done.

• King of Spain, Emperor of Germany and Prince of Montenegro -Link them?

The positions or the office-holders?

• office holders, assuming there was only one during this period. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done

• This along with a * indicates that the appointment was Honorary. - Colour-blind people will have problems with "this". Perhaps state what "this" is? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do I do that? I thought the star would be enough... I notice a similar method has been used on the List of Victoria Cross recipient articles, for instance List of Victoria Cross recipients (A–F)

• I'd have raised the same issue if I'd reviewed that list. Then again, looking at the other articles in this category, it looks like that's already standardized. No worries then. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator response: Hi @Crisco 1492:, thanks for your feedback. I've commented above, and asked some questions. I am happy to make any changes once you've responded and clarified where I'm not so sure. Many thanks, --Noswall59 (talk) 20:00, 14 October 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks again @Crisco 1492:, I've altered everything as requested. --Noswall59 (talk) 08:24, 15 October 2014 (UTC).[reply]

• Support - Good work. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:58, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, --Noswall59 (talk) 10:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC).[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. – SchroCat (talk) 12:34, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 01:07, 13 October 2014 [10].

Nominator(s): Cowlibob (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this list because I think it gives a good summary of Hanks' extensive career as both an actor and as producer. As always look forward to all the helpful comments to improve it. Cowlibob (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looks excellent to me.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:36, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Skr15081997

• Put a comma after "Hanks made his debut as a director and screenwriter in the 1996 musical comedy, That Thing You Do!".
• Ref. 38 has an unnecessary space between the publisher and the closing ")".
• In Ref. 45 The New York Times is unlinked.
• Link Roger Ebert and Box Office Mojo.
• Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is not linked in Refs. 12 & 14.

These are minor issues which I can fix but don't know whether this is allowed or not.--Skr15081997 (talk) 12:14, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Skr15081997: I've fixed point 2-5. Not sure what you mean by the first one as they're two separate sentences. Cowlibob (talk) 16:32, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support Excellent work.--Skr15081997 (talk) 10:18, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Excellent list, meets the FLC criteria and it is well-sourced. --Carioca (talk) 19:38, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The list was promoted by User Giants2008 01:07, 13 October 2014 [11].

Nominator(s): NG39 (talk) 07:42, 20 September 2014 (UTC), Macosal (talk) 07:42, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article was created by Macosal. Then their was one more edit from Macosal and then an edit from FrescoBot. And finally my one edit. You might ask how can a list with only four revisions be up to FL standard and how can a nom only have made one edit to it. Well Macosal's original article was very good and my edit took seven hours and had at least 100 "show previews". In that edit; I completely rewrote the lead, added 2 pictures and more references. Since this nom was filed I have done another four edits (2 DAB fixes, 1 ref fix and a key change). This is my first FLC so any comments positive or negative are welcome -- NickGibson3900 ^Talk 07:42, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Did you have a word with Macosal prior to initiating this nomination? —Vensatry _(ping) 04:18, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry:, I mentioned it on his talk page but he hasn't replied. Considering I wrote all the prose and kept the actual list bit he did I don't see your point - NickGibson3900 ^Talk 04:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes can confirm I was made aware of the nomination on my talk page. Macosal (talk) 06:39, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NickGibson3900, I was just asking you. I see that you have added Macosal as a co-nom. —Vensatry _(ping) 18:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry: Ok cool, sorry for any misunderstanding. BTW would who like to do a full review of this. Your choice. NickGibson3900 ^Talk 05:25, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Would you like to have a look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of ICC Champions Trophy centuries/archive1 and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Asia Cup centuries/archive1? —Vensatry _(ping) 18:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – I've made an edit there. Meets the standards! --Khadar Khani (talk) 17:12, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Nice list. Happy to support! —Vensatry _(ping) 18:33, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Image captions which are complete sentences should use a full stop.
• "during the 2009 Ashes" would prefer to see "series" at the end of that.
• When sorting by wickets, equal wickets with fewer runs is better so should sort in that order.
• Check ref titles for correct use of en-dash for date ranges.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:58, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Thanks for the review! Done point 1, 2, 4. As stated above I'm not sure how to do point three. - NickGibson3900 ^Talk 09:08, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the sort key coding on an existing FL of this type. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:10, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: thanks for the tip. I worked it out and it should be fine now. Any more comments or is this list okay now? - NickGibson3900 ^Talk 07:55, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Good job. Cowlibob (talk) 18:27, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Meets the criteria, well-sourced and well-written. --Carioca (talk) 21:07, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 (Talk) 01:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC) [12].[reply]

Nominator(s): Imzadi 1979 → 08:34, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

After a quiet nomination without much comment, I again present to you the list of Interstate Highways in Michigan. This is the first, of what I hope will be, a series of similar lists for the Michigan State Trunkline Highway System, and hopefully the first of several similar lists on highways in the U.S. This used List of Interstate Highways in Texas as a starting point, but it uses specialized templates developed to implement WP:USRD/STDS/L, a project standard for lists of highways. We hope to use feedback from this nomination to improve both this list and the new list standard. Imzadi 1979 → 08:34, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've also notified the reviewers from the original FLC and the A(L)CR, as well as notifying WikiProject Michigan. Imzadi 1979 → 09:05, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, again. I reviewed the list at ACR and feel that it meets the FLC criteria still. Dough4872 00:12, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments (first look)

• Alt text – You might want to say (in a few words) the subject of the photographs.
  • The captions already do that, so I'm unsure of what to add that wouldn't duplicate the captions. Imzadi 1979 → 04:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref 108 is to a Wikipedia article Michigan Department of Transportation – can you find an external direct source? I’m not sure I see an official highway map in the article. Does that mean that similarly named references (for different years) come from the same Wikipedia article?
  • No, it is not a reference to a Wikipedia article. It is a reference to a paper map printed by the then-Michigan Department of State Highways and Transportation that has its publisher linked in the citation. Similar is true of footnote 9, which is an article from the print edition of The Grand Rapids Press where the name of the newspaper is wikilinked. Imzadi 1979 → 04:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay, I see that now.
• Primary Interstates – Not sure if there is anything that can be done, but the notes section is making the segment very long.
• Business Routes-In the notes section, if they do not serve a defined area, perhaps put a dash.
  • I only noted the cities they serve if they terminate outside of the city. So the first BL I-69 serves Coldwater, but because it terminates on the southern Coldwater city limits ("south of Coldwater"), there was no need to mention that in the notes. The third BL I-69 terminates on the west side of Lansing in Delta Township and on the northeast side of East Lansing in Bath Township, so unless the notes mentioned Lansing and East Lansing, it would not be apparent which cities it serves. Imzadi 1979 → 04:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Understood. My point was that a dash in an empty cell indicates that nothing belongs in that cell (i.e., the information, or lack, is complete), but it may be stylistic.
• Only cursory review of prose (will give it a second reading)
  • “I-75 is the longest highway of any kind in Michigan and only the highway on both Upper & Lower peninsulas.” Do you mean “the only highway on both Upper & Lower peninsulas”?
    • Fixed. Imzadi 1979 → 04:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Clearly a lot of work went into this.--Godot13 (talk) 03:40, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, a lot has gone into this. Imzadi 1979 → 04:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Godot13: any more review comments? Imzadi 1979 → 22:28, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'll give it one more read-through to see if anything else jumps out.--Godot13 (talk) 04:06, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • In the "Business routes" table, how do you feel about moving the box that indicates "former" from the bottom of the table to the top? It's not immediately clear what the grey highlight means.--Godot13 (talk) 04:10, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'm not in favor of that change. The color key is in the same location on those tables as the analogous color key on junction list tables in highway articles, like the one that appears at the bottom of Interstate 696#Exit list. Also, just like the colored rows in junction list tables, if a reader hovers his cursor over the colored rows in these tables, a tool top pops up with an explanation of the color. In this case, it says "Former route". Imzadi 1979 → 22:22, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, most concerns resolved. I currently have a FLC and hope you will consider reading the list and making comments or a review. Thanks in advance.--Godot13 (talk) 22:43, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. It meets the FLC criteria. --Carioca (talk) 19:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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