Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/September 2020

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 via FACBot (talk) 23:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Nominator(s): PresN 23:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We return to my animals-in-a-family series (previously: felids/canids/mustelids/procyonids/ursids/mephitids) after a couple months with list #7: viverrids, encompassing the 33 species of viverridae split primarily between the civets and the genets, aka the "mongoose-y cats". Unlike the previous lists, which usually had at least a couple well-known examples, many English-speaking readers may have never even heard of these animals, as they're a group of relatively small carnivores mainly hiding away in the jungles, forests, and shrublands of Africa and southeast Asia. As a result, we're missing images for a few of the rarer African genets, and a few others have to make do with drawings. As always, the list format is based on the prior lists and reflects FLC comments. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 23:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Under the common genet, I can see "eg. inland cliffs" - is the use of a single dot a typo? Or is that how it is written in US English (where I am we would either use two dots or none at all, but maybe it's different over there.....?)
• TBH I think that's all I have - great work as ever...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @ChrisTheDude: - nope, it's supposed to be e.g., which is how I missed it when removing those asides. Now fixed. --PresN 20:46, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Couldn't find anything — nice work. ~ HAL333 20:48, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Very nice as usual, nothing caught my eye. Reywas92^Talk 20:57, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Source review – All of the references are to high-quality reliable sources and are formatted well. The link-checker shows no issues, and overall the source review is a pass. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:16, 22 September 2020 (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) 21:11, 27 September 2020 (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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC) [2].[reply]

Nominator(s): Cartoon network freak (talk) 10:01, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it follows the path of its FL preecessor, List of Media Forest most-broadcast songs of 2009 in Romania. This list is longer, though, so comments are kindly appreciated :) Wishing a great day, Cartoon network freak (talk) 10:01, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just pinging some users on this: @Aoba47, MarioSoulTruthFan, and Paparazzzi:. They can decide whether they leave appreciated comments or not. This nomination didn't get any attention sadly. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 06:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Photo caption - "Smiley (pictured) and Carla's Dreams both had eight songs listed as the most-broadcast ones on radio and television" => "Smiley (pictured) and Carla's Dreams both had eight songs listed as the most-broadcast on radio and television"
• "They are based on the number of times tracks are broadcast" => "Chart placings are based on the number of times tracks are broadcast"
• "The first were [....] in January 2010." - well obviously the first number ones of the 2010s were in January 2010, so I don't think you need to say that
• "this feat was achieved by Carla's Dreams's "Luna" with a total of 15 weeks" - although technically correct, "Carla's Dreams's" looks really weird, so maybe change to "achieved by "Luna" by Carla's Dreams"
• "The latter artist and Smiley had the most songs to be listed as the most-broadcast ones" => "The latter artist and Smiley had the most songs to be listed as the most-broadcast"
• "Kiss FM, Pro FM and Virgin Radio Romania were the trendsetting radio stations" - what does this mean? In what way were they trendsetting?

According to Media Forest, this means that the respective radio station was the first one to broadcast a song (that would become a radio hit eventually and receive support from other radio stations too) on heavy rotation. Any idea how we could formulate this?

After giving it some thought, I think I would say "Kiss FM, Pro FM and Virgin Radio Romania were the radio stations that gave the first airplay to the highest number of songs which went on to top the chart" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• You don't need to say "(pictured)" in each photo caption unless it's unclear who is pictured e.g. in the Lady Gaga caption you don't need to say "Lady Gaga (pictured)" because obviously it's her. It is needed, though, in captions like ""Ecou" by Elena Gheorghe (pictured) and rapper Glance...." to clarify which one of the two she is
• "In 2013, Andra (pictured) contributed with two singles to that year's most-broadcast ones on television: "Inevitabil va fi bine" and "K la meteo"." - the English here is rather odd. I would just say "In 2013, Andra had two singles which were the most-broadcast on television: "Inevitabil va fi bine" and "K la meteo"."
• Think that's it from me - good work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: Thank you very much for your review! I implemented everything and answered to your question. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 15:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: So I actually took a look at another ref and they seem to be clearer there: "The title of 'TRENDSETTER 2019' is designated to the radio station that broadcast the songs that reached No. 1 in the MediaForest Weekly Charts the most during 2019." With that in mind, I added things to the sentence in the lead. Hope it's fine now. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 10:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the first three comments I left at the peer review have not been addressed.--NØ 03:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MaranoFan: I have addressed your comments. However, I do have a comment on your second one: I prefer using "the top ten most broadcast Romanian and foreign songs" over "the top ten most broadcast songs" because I want to stress the fact that there are two different charts for both radio and television airplay that list the Romanian and foreign songs separately. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 15:11, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• For this part, "around 100 singles each were listed", is there a reason why a specific number cannot be provided?

I purely think this is not needed. We would have different total numbers for both the radio and television charts, and everything would result in a wordy sentence. Wordier than some of the article already is due to the subject matter ahaha. I think an approximation is the good way to go in this case. Also, I've been doing this for my other Romanian chart FLs too. Cartoon network freak (talk) 18:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• This is more of a personal preference, but I would avoid using "latter" as done here, "The latter band and Smiley", and just say "Carla's Dream and Smiley". Your current wording is not wrong, but I just wanted to raise this to your attention to think about. Feel free to disregard this if you prefer the current wording.

This actually makes a lot of sense, thank you for pointing that out.

Everything seems to have already been addressed by the above reviewers. I just have a clarification question and a more stylistic suggestion. Otherwise, great work with this. Aoba47 (talk) 18:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: Thank you very much for your comments, I left replies. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 18:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your responses. I support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 20:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I went ahead and linked the unlinked publishers
• Reliability and formatting looks great, pass for source review Aza24 (talk) 08:14, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting- checked out MaranoFan's issues, and with the nominator's comment on why the specific wording is used, the only thing left is to archive references- which is now done. --PresN 15:03, 25 September 2020 (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.

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 via FACBot (talk) 23:45, 27 September 2020 (UTC) [3].[reply]

Nominator(s): EdwardUK (talk) 18:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because... with Grade I buildings in Wales being those of "exceptional interest" it seemed a worthwhile subject to be improved to a high quality, and a recent peer review suggested it was close to level required. As a first attempt at a featured list this specific topic was chosen as it had such a limited scope and with the intention that feedback and experience gained can be used for improving similar but longer lists. EdwardUK (talk) 18:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will be claimed for wikicup points

• "Newman 1995, pp. 434-5, 521." - Spell out 435 here.
• Add a short description
• "In 1746 Edward Williams was employed" - Comma after 1746
• Link River Taff
• " In 1746 Edward Williams was employed to build a bridge over the River Taff. The 27-year-old self-taught architect had gained a reputation for the quality of his stonemasonry but this was his first bridge. His three-arched design lasted less than three years before being washed away in a flood when the build-up of debris around the piers caused the flow of the river to be obstructed" - The cited page range is 73 to 78, but pages 73 and 74 don't seem to contribute any of the material from this, so they should be dropped from the page range.

• done - also changed url to match

• "Following this Edwards rebuilt the" - Comma after this
• Check on Worldcat to see if Smiles has an OCLC

• done - also added volume details

• ") to connect the industry to the docks at Cardiff, both of these passed through Pontypridd contributing to its development into a major market town" - semicolon instead of the comma, and add a comma after Pontypridd
• "and by 1875 when the Hetty shaft was sunk at Hopkinstown the population of Pontypridd had reached 8,000" - "when the Hetty shaft was sunk at Hopkinstown" is an appositive, and should be set off by commas.
• "In 1981 only 35 mines remained in Wales " - Comma after 1981
• For the date listed and the reference number in the table, use an intext citation so it's more obvious where the information is coming from, rather than linking the reference number to the external source.

• part done - added to date listed, but not changed reference number

• "In addition to being Grade I listed Pontypridd" - Comma after listed
• "1791-95" MOS:DATERANGE wants 1791–1795
• "Located on the west side of Hopkinstown the Hetty Engine House" - Comma after Hopkinstown
• The note needs a citation.

• done - I think this should cover it as there wasn't one that I could take from the standard templates.

Once these are addressed, I'll take another look at it. Hog Farm _Bacon 02:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have made all the changes except for replacing the external link in the "Reference Number" column with an inline citation as this is consistent with all the other UK listed building and scheduled monument lists, also had I used the {{Cadw listed building row}} template it would have been linked automatically. Note that I chose not to use the header and row templates for reasons mentioned in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Grade I listed buildings in Monmouthshire/archive1 - because the "Function" column and the image upload and commonscat links are undesirable, and it forces the text to be centre aligned. Thanks for the comments. EdwardUK (talk) 09:43, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That should work. I'm ready to support this one, although others are likely to have additional comments. Hog Farm _Bacon 14:24, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder - shall get to this on the weekend. KJP1 (talk) 18:00, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commented at the peer review, and the list has only improved further since then. A few minor comments/suggestions but nothing to stand in the way of my support.

• In two points in the lead, mention is made of South Wales. In the opening sentence, it's "the south of Wales", and in the fourth para. it's "there were 620 mines in south Wales". I think it should be capitalised (?), and I wonder if South Wales would help the reader, probably at first mention, i.e., "a county borough in South Wales". Incidentally, I think the lead now nicely contextualises the article.

• changed opening to South Wales and moved link to Wales to later in section

• 3rd para. - "In 1746, Edward Williams was employed" - you've flipped his names, from William Edwards. An easy thing to do! Will also need changing (x2) in the 6th sentence of this para.
• 3rd para. - "which used circular holes through the haunches reduce the load". First, I think there's a missing "to" after haunches. Second, is "haunches" a bit specialist for the general reader? "through the two ends of the arch"?

• changed - I chose "haunches" as this was used by Coflein and Newman (Cadw uses "spandrels"), but think that the simplified version is better.

• Bibliography - you could authorlink Newman and Smiles.
• Bibliography - You could also, for consistency, give the url for Glamorgan. As an aside re. the url for Hughes, I've had editors complain about links to Google Books, as it's seen as favouring a commercial site. Therefore, unless the url gives a snippet, I tend to use Worldcat. That said, there are very respected editors who loathe any url links at all, so it's merely a suggestion.

• Added Worldcat for Newman, and inline page-url for Hughes – for online book sources I usually give the url for where I read it (google, archive.org or others) to make it easier for verification, but with Newman I used a print copy and some of the referenced pages not visible online.

• Criteria - It looks to me that it meets all 6 criteria.

Pleased to Support. Great to see the lists of Welsh listed buildings being developed. KJP1 (talk) 09:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All changes made. Thanks - EdwardUK (talk) 12:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• All images are free and compliant with MOS:IMAGELOC. Hog Farm _Bacon 13:32, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 01:40, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Would link Historic England (ref 3), Cadw (refs 4, 6, 7, 12, 18, 20, 23, 25) and The Independent
• Are you sure that "The National Archives" is the publisher for ref 5? A lot of countries probably have a "National Archives" so surely the full name is different?
• When ever you have pp. with two numbers you should use an em dash " – " rather than a hyphen/minus sign "-" (small difference but this is the standard – is already done correctly in ref 17 anyways)
• Newman in the biblio needs isbn 13 (use the converter)
• Reliability is good – mostly government websites or those with statistical info Aza24 (talk) 02:12, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• All changes made – I have added a link for The National Archives and this appears to be the full name. EdwardUK (talk) 15:45, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah I see, well the link should be enough to avoid any confusion. Good work here – pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 06:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support ~ HAL333 04:37, 26 September 2020 (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) 21:06, 27 September 2020 (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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 26 September 2020 (UTC) [4].[reply]

Nominator(s): ~ HAL333 19:46, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cole was the first American landscape painter and the founder of the Hudson River School, a romantic art movement. ~ HAL333 19:46, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• it thrills me to see a list of paintings here, but as much as I hate opposing (or leaning towards oppose in this case) there are some rather big issues. Aza24 (talk) 04:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Major issues

• Every painting should have a column for if they're on canvas or panel (and if they're oil, tempera, water color etc.)

 Done

• With the above being said the entire notes section seems to only fill up space and not give anything valuable. The panel and canvas stuff could be in a new column per the comment above, the "also known as" could be in a note after the titles or under the titles themselves (perhaps with "small" parameters) and the "Recently sold, replaced by museum-quality replica" should be in a note or under the info in the collection column

 Done

• The country/state/city should really be listed after the museums – I'm not sure which would be most appropriate, perhaps state for the US and then city for other countries?

 Done

• I'm really confused by separating the height and width columns, I don't think any other lists of works on Wikipedia seperate them, and they are never seperated in the art world. Ideally they should be put together and would be better sortable by square centimeters.
• Would like to see a color for the sketches/studies to separate them from the actual paintings. I would recommend a neutral color like #FED or #FFFFDD that doesn't draw too much extra attention to them. This being said, moving them to a different section entirely might be worthwhile as well.

 Done

Minor issues

• Image column shouldn't be sortable

 Done

• I'm fairly confident that the words "Sketch" and "study" if directly relating to a painting he made later should not be italicized. (e. g. Study for The Angel Appearing to the Shepherds)

 Done

• Would put all of the "c." in a template:

  {{circa|year}} or {{circa|year–year}}

 Done

• The "excluding frame" notes are unnecessary – paintings are almost never measured with their frames included

 Done

• This may be just me, so take this with a grain of salt, but for tables like these the information may all look far better formatted if all centered. See my in process List of works by Leonardo da Vinci or the monster of a list List of works by Vincent van Gogh
• I am yet to read carefully through the lead or look at sources, but I would rather hear back from you first. I hope this doesn't discourage you, as you are a fabulous contributor and we need more FL for lists of paintings. Aza24 (talk) 04:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I really had no idea how to format it - I couldn't find any other lists like it. These two lists are very helpful. I've addressed some of your comments. However, I have a pretty big examination coming up, so I'm taking a bit of a wikibreak. I'll be able to address the rest if your comments beginning on Sunday. Thanks! ~ HAL333 22:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't blame you for being unable to find good examples of paintings lists. Besides the two I mentioned most of them only exist for the sake of existing and have little references and no lead. List of paintings by Johannes Vermeer is alright as well. The same issue seems to arise with lists of compositions for composers, besides decent ones for Bach and Beethoven, most are a lazy bullet list or weirdly proportionate table. Anyways take your time with the changes, it's looking better already Aza24 (talk) 00:18, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've also noticed that I'm missing a few of his works, so I'll be making a deep dive into his works. I was really busy over the past week and a half, and consequently, this is somewhat sloppy work on my part. ~ HAL333 22:47, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the lead

• Wikilink (and capitalise) Industrial Revolution
• Self-taught needs a hyphen
• "One of Cole's first landscapes Lake with Dead Trees (1825)" - need a comma after landscapes
• "the "the truly American forest"" - the the?
• "painted the The Course of Empire" - and again :-)
• "personal opposition to Andrew Jackson" => "personal opposition to US President Andrew Jackson" (for the benefit of those, including me, who didn't know who he was)
• "Later in life, Thomas transitioned" => "Later in life, Cole transitioned"
• Think that's it on the lead. I will look at the table later..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

🤦 Done ~ HAL333 18:07, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dank

• I'm a sucker for beautiful lists. For this review, I'm not commenting on anything that's already been covered above.
• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing.
• "Final works": Completed works?

 Done

• I haven't checked out the images yet.
• There's an argument that "Oil on canvas 64.1 x 89.2 cm" doesn't sort as expected because it comes after all the numerical entries (such as "64.2 x 89.7 cm"), but I can also see the argument that this might be the sorting you want. I fixed an apparent inconsistency with "Rhode Island School of Design Museum of Art". Otherwise, I see no problems with the table links and coding.
• FLC criteria:
  • 1. I'm going to pass on my usual copyediting. Lots of the paintings aren't set in New York State, so it's hard to justify "Nearly all of his works depict the wilderness, "the truly American forest", typically the Hudson River Valley and Catskills".

 Done I clarified that. ~ HAL333 23:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• • 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
  • 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
  • 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
  • 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
  • 4. It is navigable.
  • 5. It meets style requirements. You make excellent use of images (but that's about all I'm qualified to say).
  • 6. It is stable.
• I'll leave it there until you get back from your break. - Dank (push to talk) 03:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the table

• Does "final works" have a specific meaning in art? I had to think for a moment what it actually meant

 Done

• Most of the paintings have the medium missing - this info is known, surely?
• There's one sketch listed in the first table - surely this should be in the second?

 Done

• In the second table, the collection column is centre-aligned, but in the first it was left-aligned

 Done I was originally planning on centering everything, but I decided against it. ~ HAL333 22:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there a way to work in a wikilink to Study (art)?

 Done

• Think that's it..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Most of these comments are a result of Hal responding to my comments but being mid process in doing so. I agree with Chris that "final works" is rather odd and while I recognize that the "final works" is to contrast with the studies (which are effectively drafts for the "final works") it may be better to remove the sub sections and put the studies in another section entirely (in the process moving the "final works" to just the paintings section) Aza24 (talk) 00:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I broke it off into two sections: "Paintings" and "Preparative works". I was hesitant to title it studies because one is called a sketch. However, a provided a See Also link to Study (Art). Does that work? ~ HAL333 22:31, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Y"1837 portrait..." avoid starting sentences with a number. YIs this list comprehensive, i.e. do we have a source against we can check every painting Cole ever made is listed, or is it an {{incomplete list}}? I think I'm missing one or two. There have been a few sales and auctions in recent years. I'm currently going through a list and checking whether each one is in a public collection. ~ HAL333 00:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] I just finsihed going through all his paintings. All public documented ones are here now. ~ HAL333 22:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] YMedium, Dimensions -> dimensions. In the table, the dimensions should use the multiplication symbol, not an "x", and I would also expect them to be converted to Imperial too. Good news is the {{convert}} template facilitates all that. I'm hesitant to switch it to imperial. The metric system is kind of the go to in the art world. For example, infoboxes place the metric measurements before the imperial ones. ~ HAL333 22:03, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] I'm not saying switch it, I'm saying include both. It's common practice across the encyclopedia because while some understand cm, some only understand in. The convert template is your friend! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] Ah, okay. ~ HAL333 04:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] Some entries are missing medium, some are missing dimensions. What is the sorting methodology for the "Medium, dimensions" column? YWhy isn't Louvre linked? YNewark Museum is The Newark Museum of Art. What makes some of his paintings more "notable" than the others? I'm asking why some have articles and all the rest don't (and aren't even red-linked)? Some of the more well-known works have their articles; however there a quite a few that I would think are notable. Should I just wikilink them all? ~ HAL333 22:17, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] That's the crux of my comment really. Some have articles and have been deemed "notable" per Wikipedia standards, why not all the others? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] A sea of red it is? ~ HAL333 22:42, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] I'm just looking for consistency. And if you check out WP:WIAFL, you'll see that a list as a navigational aid is part of the criteria. You may need to make a few more articles! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:44, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] As I'm making these articles, it is becoming readily apparent why they didn't exist. There are barely any sources on them. Google and Jstor have next to nothing. ~ HAL333 20:14, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] So they're not particularly notable then? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:07, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] I'll make a few more. It seems to be completely random which ones I can find info on. ~ HAL333 04:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] For year ranges with circa, please ensure you have it formatted per MOS:DATE. YPeace at Sunset source says c. 1827, not 1827 precisely. Suggest all are re-checked. That's all I have, will be claiming WikiCup points etc etc for the review. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 09:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply] Sorting of Medium and dimensions column This has been brought up by multiple reviewers; however, I do not know how to tackle it. I'm not sure if sorting it by surface area would be feasible. What about the works which are circular, oval, and curved rectangles? Should I leave it as is (sorting by medium), or get rid of it all together. ~ HAL333 20:04, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] I would separate medium and dimensions altogether into separate columns and then sort by longest dimension. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 20:07, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HAL333: - some of the dimensions are missing, is this because you are still in the process of adding them, or are they unknown......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:39, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I haven't gotten to them yet. I'll be able to make some more progress this weekend. ~ HAL333 18:35, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:10, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisTheDude, The Rambling Man, Aza24, Dank, Hopefully I have addressed all of your concerns. ~ HAL333 23:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Exciting to see a paintings list going through FL, I really don't think there are any at the moment. Will do a source review below: Aza24 (talk) 23:15, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support (assuming TRM is satisfied). I did a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. Where I added "(1836)", "(1833–1836)" would be better if the first painting in the series was displayed in 1833. Excellent work. - Dank (push to talk) 00:25, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doing shortly Aza24 (talk) 23:15, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• wrong date for ref 4 (and in the wrong place – or is that the template?)
• I would remove location from ref 6 since it's the only one with a location (needs ISBN as well)
• capitalize "Historic" in ref 8 (same in 65)
• capitalize "Memorial" in ref 13
• ref 26 is broken
• should probably have spaces in title of 45
• Would rather see LACMA spelled out (Los Angeles County Museum of Art) in ref 111 and 120
• ref 6 is the only ref without a retrieval date, although I'm not sure if this is just because it's a book
• That's all I got. Reliability looks good – nice to see a lot of referencing to the Museums themselves.

 Done I acted on everything except adding the access date to the book. ~ HAL333 19:14, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Splendid, great work here. Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 01:29, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting. --PresN 15:03, 25 September 2020 (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.

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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 26 September 2020 (UTC) [5].[reply]

Nominator(s): Harrias ^talk 14:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alfredo Di Stéfano was one of the best footballers of all-time, and something of a rarity for playing for two international teams. Although he was highly successful at domestic level in Argentina, Colombia and Spain, he never quite reached the same peaks internationally. He score six goals in six games to help Argentina win the 1947 South American Championship, but that was the sum total of his international success. He never played in a World Cup or European Championship, and didn't really see eye-to-eye with his national team coach either. This list is modelled on those that have gone before, although I've had to improvise for how to include his two playing nations. I opted for one table including all his goals, rather than splitting it into two tables, but let me know what you think. As always, all input welcome. Harrias ^talk 14:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Link friendly to Exhibition match.
  • Linked in the prose, not sure if it is needed on every occasion in the table too, what do you reckon? Harrias ^talk 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Looking at similar lists, Zlatan Ibrahimovic for example, these tend to link all uses in the table. I don't think I'd argue for or against either way really, unless someone points out a compelling reason. Kosack (talk) 17:56, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Linked it throughout the table for consistency. Harrias ^talk 18:55, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "Brian Glanville suggested that was unable to dictate play", something missing from here.
  • Added the missing word. Harrias ^talk 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two very minor points I noticed on a quick run through. Kosack (talk) 15:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Kosack. Query above. Harrias ^talk 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to support following the issues addressed her and in Chris' comments. Kosack (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

The opening sentence is incorrect, as he actually played for three national teams - he also played for Colombia. He didn't score any goals for Colombia, but it probably still needs to be mentioned...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:43, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I disagree, ChrisTheDude. The opening sentence is 100% correct: it omits Colombia because the matches he played for them were unsanctioned. The lead makes passing reference to it for completeness, but it is not significant enough to be included in the opening sentence. Harrias ^talk 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough. I didn't realise that his matches for Colombia are not recognised as official internationals -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

• "He was twice named the Ballon d'Or winner" - I think "He was twice awarded the Ballon d'Or" would work better personally
  • Agreed, changed. Harrias ^talk 16:54, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Note a "The South American Championship was the predecessor to the Copa América." seems odd placed after "Di Stéfano made his international debut for Argentina in December 1947" given that the sentence makes no mention of the South American Championship
  • Oops, moved things around, and forgot to move the footnote. Sorted now. Harrias ^talk 16:54, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks as always ChrisTheDude. Harrias ^talk 16:54, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support ~ HAL333 13:35, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added one publisher link – reliability is good and formatting is consistent. Pass for source review Aza24 (talk) 05:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Standard WikiCup claim disclaimer

Promoting. --PresN 15:03, 25 September 2020 (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.

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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC) [6].[reply]

Nominator(s): PK743 (talk) 13:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel the list meets FL criteria. This article provides a listing of the notable awards and nominations received by the 2017 Indian drama film Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum. This film is notable for garnering its cast and crew members, especially Fahadh Faasil, several awards and nominations. I hope to receive constructive comments to improve this list. PK743 (talk) 13:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: Thanks for your comments and support appreciate it. PK743 (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Nicely done. ~ HAL333 15:43, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HAL333: Thanks for your support appreciate it. PK743 (talk) 16:57, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support My concerns have been addressed. Good work overall. --Ab207 (talk) 07:36, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ab207: Thanks for your support appreciate it.PK743 (talk) 08:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Refs 2, 3, 4, 6, 14 need authors

Updated authors in the mentioned refs.

• The AP herald link was not redirecting to its main page like the user above said – for me at least

Replaced it with a new source.

• Ref 20 should have a "|language=Malayalam" parameter, not the "in Malayalam" outside of the ref template

Resolved the error and added language inside template.

• Reliability looks ok – AP Herald is not on the WP:ICTFSOURCES list as far as I can see Aza24 (talk) 08:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As the link is broken and redirecting to Indian Herald replaced it with Firstpost Article.

• @PK743: Courtesy ping for nominator who may have missed these and the above comments Aza24 (talk) 08:05, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aza24: Thanks for your comments. PK743 (talk) 04:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! Pass for source review.

• Support – My concerns have been satisfactorily addressed. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:17, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting. --PresN 15:03, 25 September 2020 (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.

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 via FACBot (talk) 00:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [11].[reply]

Nominator(s): Ab207 (talk) and MSG17 (talk) 23:35, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mahesh Babu is an Indian actor who is currently one of the most famous male leads in Telugu cinema. Over the past couple of months, both of us have put significant work into the article, which included reworking the lead and citations as well as changing the table's structure. I think that it now fits the criteria and is ready to be reviewed. MSG17 (talk) 23:35, 21 July 2020 (UTC) (PS: This is our first FL nomination for either of us.)[reply]

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: No major issues (maybe redirects and inconsistent film spellings can be fixed like Rajakumarudu, but that's your choice). Do call me when nominating other film lists for FLC. --Kailash29792 (talk) 11:49, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! I've fixed the spelling and look for others, if any. --Ab207 (talk) 19:04, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 22:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 4 has no date and an incorrect title?

Accessdate and date were mixed up, fixed this and title

• The Times of India should ideally be linked every time (ref 5 and 9, 29 for example)

Fixed

• Link these as well: Vogue India, Oneindia, Firstpost, The Hindu, Deccan Chronicle, Hindustan Times, International Business Times, The Hans India, Zee News, Idlebrain.com, Rediff, Bangalore Mirror

Fixed

• Ref 11 should have "The Times of India" and should be under "|work="

Fixed

• Ref 12 seems to be the wrong date

Fixed

• Ref 25 should be The Times of India

Fixed

• Ref 35 and 39 appear to be the same ref

Fixed

• Why is Ref 38 (the Youtube video) even here?
• In fact why are any of these videos here?
• Refs 56–58 is missing the authors

Fixed, sorry Radhika Rajamani!

• Since you're not including staff writers for the other refs, "India, The Hans" (which shouldn't even be formatted like that) should be ommited

Fixed

• Reliability looks ok, rest of the refs are good Aza24 (talk) 22:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comments. I have now addressed most of them. As for the YouTube videos, they are links to the film themselves when no other source has character names. I did this after looking at other FLs, such as the filmographies of Suriya, Vijay and MGR, that also used links the same way. MSG17 (talk) 02:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Upon looking further in WP:ICTFSOURCES, Idlebrain.com does not seem to be a reliable source and should be replaced. Aza24 (talk) 03:43, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly done Except for one instance where the source is an exclusive interview. --Ab207 (talk) 06:07, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine to me. Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 06:25, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support this nom. Yashthepunisher (talk) 08:49, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at this article, and give some comments on how it meets the FA criteria in a little while. If you fancy doing some QPQ, I have a list of items that can be looked at here.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Puri Jagannadh's action-thriller Pokiri - can we reword to avoid WP:SEAOFBLUE? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Same with: psychological thriller 1: Nenokkadine and drama film Seethamma Vakitlo Sirimalle Chettu. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• failed to make back its budget - quite an informal way to say this. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changer to "failed to recover". Better? Kailash29792 (talk) 07:09, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Sea of blue at Koratala Siva's political film Bharat Ane Nenu . Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed

• Do we need a note to say it's two characters they played? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because he has also played a characters with multiple personalities/names. It is standard practice for Indian filmographies due to the high amount of films where the lead actor plays multiple roles. MSG17 (talk) 12:37, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Is the unreleased yellow part of the MOS? A dagger on its own would be fine for me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at WP:FILMOGRAPHY but retained to maintain consistency with other FLs, Scarlett Johansson on screen and stage, Jake Gyllenhaal filmography for instance. -- Ab207 (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Happy to pass Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:03, 19 September 2020 (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) 22:18, 20 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [12].[reply]

Nominator(s): Lulusword (talk) 20:24, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because he is a prominent figure in South Korean entertainment industry, having an extensive filmography. I have been working on this article since January, and I believe it has meet the criteria. Lulusword (talk) 20:24, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only outstanding thing I can see is that the notes are not complete sentences, so should not have full stops. I did mention this above, but they are still there. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:39, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I must have overlooked them. I've fix the issue now, hopefully I didn't miss anything else. Lulusword (talk) 08:35, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Intending to claim WikiCup points for this review.)

• "K-pop boy band Super Junior" is a sea of blue that could be remedied by unlinking boy band.
• The lead should be at most four paragraphs long; I'd recommend merging the last two paragraphs and listing fewer award/concert hostings.
• The "Television shows" has a hardcoded width in pixels that makes it very thin on my monitor, and very wide when I minimise the screen. By removing this width specification, it makes the tables display appropriately on a wider range of monitors and web browsers.
• I'd expect each table to be sortable by every column other than "Ref", particularly useful for sorting "Television shows" by name or network.
• Some tables use "Ref." and some use "Ref" but I think all should use {{Abbr|Ref.|References}}.
• Each table should have a caption (achieved by |+ Title of the table) e.g. "List of Leeteuk performances in film" for accessibility reasons (so people who use screen readers know what the table is about).
• Should The Best Cooking Secrets be "2017 – present" rather than "2017 – 2020" (like the value below it)?
• Super Junior Kiss the Radio should use "2006–2011, 2016" rather than "2006–2011; 2016" (for consistency).
• When are networks linked and when are they not (e.g. SBS isn't for Salamander Guru and The Shadows but is in the following Star King)?
• Why is File:20180820 Leeteuk ISAC Chuseok Special.png displayed at a size considerably smaller than the image above it?
• I'm not a fan of File:Leeteuk Analog Trip press conference (cropped).png, which looks a bit bad quality to me, and has logos and is very tall. I'd suggest removing, but if it is to be kept, could it be cropped (to a similar body portion as the other images)?
• ... to celebrate those who had honorably completed their military service is not neutral, and I think the note could be removed completely as it doesn't give any more information than the title "Military Service Awards".

Thanks for your work on the list. — Bilorv (Black Lives Matter) 15:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bilorv, thank you for the comment. I've fixed most of the things you point out but as I can only edit on mobile, I am not sure how the layout looks now as I can only rely on "view on desktop site" setting. The table was hard coded with pixel mainly because it is quite large and take up the whole space, but since you pointed out the issue, I have move the pictures to the top of the table. I also changed the Analog Trip press conference image with a better quality image. Is that okay? Leeteuk's departure from The Best Cooking Secrets had been announced and the last episode featuring him will air on July, so I use "2017–2020" as the year range, while SJ Return is still filming, with episodes written up to January/February 2021 and does not have confirmation on when the season will end, so I use "2017–present" for it. Is that okay or should I still use "2017–present" for both of them? Lulusword (talk) 09:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I've made one edit about the refs being unsortable here but otherwise everything has been suitably addressed—thanks for those answers. Probably good that these tables have been designed with mobile foremost as that's where most of our readers are viewing, and it does look good on my desktop at least. Support (with references taken on good faith as I can't speak Korean). — Bilorv (Black Lives Matter) 19:02, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:35, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup entry

• "He had hosted" has.

• Done Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "which were screened in selected cinemas." where is this cited?

• I sourced to KOFIC which indicate the number of screens, is this acceptable? Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "a host when he hosted t" repetitive.

• fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "he enlisted in the military" shouldn't that really be "he was conscripted into"?

• I'm not sure about this, because news article always used the term "enlist" when Korean entertainers go into the military, I rarely sees the term conscription. Should I change it, regardless? Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• No it's fine. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "He started hosting" why not just "He hosted"?

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Film title should be the row scope, not the year of release.

• Do you mean film title should come first or film title should have the grey background, because the most recently promoted filmography list Javier Bardem filmography looks similar to what my table looks like now. Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• That's what I mean but it's not a deal-breaker. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Television shows, don't use colour alone to denote something, per MOS:COLOR, a symbol as well please.

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Note column need not be sortable as it's free text, not useful.

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Sortable table needs each linkable item to be linked every time as after sorting you aren't sure which one lists first.

• Can you clarify what do you mean by this? Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Items in sortable tables which are linked should be linked every time. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 06:29, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Television show title should be the row scope.

• same as above Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• See MOS:DTT for information on "scopes". The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Tables with one entry need not be sortable, looks silly.

• fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Spaced hyphens should be en-dashes per MOS:DASH.

• fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's it on a first pass. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the comment! :) Lulusword (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Quick comment – I haven't done a full review of the sources, but on a glance I can see that references 5 and 6 have all caps in the titles, which should be removed per the Manual of Style. Giants2008 (Talk) 15:27, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Fixed. Lulusword (talk) 16:21, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• A lot of sources! From a first glance it looks like you've included translated titles and "in Korean" markings so that's awesome to see. Anyways, doing (full) source review now Aza24 (talk) 06:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• ref 4 missing date

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:53, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 15 shouldn't be in all caps, per WP:MOS (as far as I remember at least)

• Fixed Lulusword (talk) 07:53, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• ref 2 in 50 missing author
• refs 79 and 80 missing authors (at bottom of page)
• is there a reason is "Naver news" for refs 25 and 49a instead of just "Naver" like the rest?

• Fixed. Lulusword (talk) 06:34, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ugh I hate to call you attention to a tedious task, but most of the "Naver" sources are missing the authors. This may because some of them are at the end of the articles
• In fact, it looks like a lot of refs are missing authors (probably because a lot are like the above, at the end of the page), if you want we could split the refs in half and each go through checking for authors? The sources look good otherwise. Aza24 (talk) 07:05, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• That will be cool. Please let me know which half I need to do. Lulusword (talk) 07:48, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I've started from the top. If I'm not finish by the time you check in, you can start at the bottom. Otherwise, I think I can do it. It's tedious but it's not that hard :D Lulusword (talk) 08:14, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I have some other things I'm in the middle of but I'd be able to go through the other half tomorrow. If you want to do so before then feel free to, but if not no worries. Aza24 (talk) 04:56, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, I've finished adding authors to all news articles that have them. Lulusword (talk) 06:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for getting through them, I was just about to do so but it looks like you beat me to it. Anyways, great work here, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 23:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support ~ HAL333 19:57, 25 August 2020 (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) 22:07, 20 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [13].[reply]

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:03, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another list of number-one country songs. If 1963 (currently at four supports) and this one pass, it will mean a run of 50 consecutive years all at FL status. This time round the artists included Patsy Cline, possessor of undoubtedly one of the greatest voices of all times, and Marty Robbins, my father's favourite when I was a child - I have strong memories of his music drifting through our house....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:03, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing.
• FLC criteria:
• 1. The prose is fine. I've done very minor copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. There were no redirects to avoid in the table. The coding in the table seems fine now; I've added a table caption that will be readable only by screen readers.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. You make excellent use of images (but that's about all I'm qualified to say).
• 6. It is stable.
• Support. - Dank (push to talk) 17:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Everything looks good. I'm just not a huge fan of the lede image and its lighting. If you wanted to to, you could change it to this more colorful picture, perhaps cropped. Not a huge deal though. ~ HAL333 20:53, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I linked some works/publishers, pass for source review – reliability and formatting is good. Aza24 (talk) 21:34, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support — Great work! ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 10:59, 20 September 2020 (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) 22:29, 20 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [14].[reply]

Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 22:38, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let's get this show on the road. The other half of this list is at List of descriptive plant epithets (A–H), and yes, I got permission to nominate this half before the other half is finished ... but it's almost done. (I was advised at WP:VPT not to put the whole list on one page.) There are a lot of annoying little technical points to consider here; I've mentioned some of them on this list's talk page. Hopefully, when we get the annoying stuff out of the way, the end result will be fun and useful for a wide range of readers. Many thanks to Dudley Miles for FLC-specific input, and especially to all the great writers of plant species articles ... this list is largely an attempt to highlight their excellent work. This list tries to do a lot of different things at the same time ... maybe too many things for the typical Featured List. It's all good, and any effort that reviewers are willing to put into making this a better list will be appreciated, regardless of the outcome of this FLC. - Dank (push to talk) 22:38, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just swapped in 10 cropped images created by PawełMM at the Graphics Lab ... beautiful work! - Dank (push to talk) 12:40, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We just finished List of descriptive plant epithets (A–H). - Dank (push to talk) 17:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Links to Glossary of botanical terms are all done now. - Dank (push to talk) 19:08, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Guerillero

The list is gorgeous. Very nicely done. A few thoughts

• Since you are using Stearn 2004 and Stearn 2002, you should probably include a year for at least that one in the sfn
• Why does only Coombes get a citation in the table?

--Guerillero | Parlez Moi 14:45, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• • I'm really glad you liked it. I replaced "Stearn2" with "Stearn 2004" throughout; happy to make other replacements if required. All six of the main sources are (mainly) alphabetical glossaries or reference works, but Coombes alphabetizes by genus rather than by species, so readers will need page numbers to find the cites to the species. Everyone I asked was okay with leaving page numbers off for glossaries. A pageless citation to, say, Harrison wouldn't add any new information when we've already got an "H" column (which I can't take credit for thinking of ... that was Dudley's request). As a bonus (and this is in the footnotes), for those few places where a citation is necessary, the fact that the first 5 sources cited don't usually need page numbers means that the superscripts for those sources don't change, so readers who get familiar with the table will be able to tell who's being cited just by the number. - Dank (push to talk) 15:47, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another issue that we don't usually see at FLC is: if we add templates for every citation, then we might need to split this list into three pages instead of two pages, and no one wants that. - Dank (push to talk) 13:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Mattximus

The lead needs some work. Leads in featured lists should not start with self-referential statements such as "This is the second half of a list" or include any mentions such as "this is a list of". A better opening sentence will include the definition explaining what descriptive plant epithets are and their purpose.

Thanks for your comments. Does this work for you as a first paragraph? If so, what are you looking for in a second paragraph? "Since the first printing of Carl Linnaeus's Species Plantarum in 1753, plant species have been assigned one epithet (name) for the species and one for their genus (a grouping of related species). These scientific names have been studied and catalogued by a variety of botanists, including William Stearn. Stearn (1911–2001) was one of the pre-eminent British botanists of the 20th century: a Librarian of the Royal Horticultural Society, a president of the Linnean Society and the original drafter of the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants." 01:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I made the change (with a slight modification). Let me know. - Dank (push to talk) 00:19, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some concerns are "ianthinus" which is not in any reference, so it is unreferenced? How do we know you've included all unreferenced names? Mattximus (talk) 00:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the answer is my last comment before your section: the page is already so large that it may not load for some readers. If we add templates for every citation, repetitively, all the way down the page, then we might need to split this list into three pages instead of two pages, and no one wants that. One thing I can do that may help is to move the sentence about Gledhill being a reference for every row back up from the footnotes; I'll do that now. So, every row in the table has at least two sources: Stearn's Dictionary, and Gledhill. - Dank (push to talk) 01:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• My main query is that I found the explanation of what the list covers confusing, and after reading the lead several times I am still confused about your sources. In paragraph 2 you say that all species epithets come from Stearns' dictionary, in para 3 that Gledhill's book is the source for all species epithets in column 1. You are not allowed to start the article "This is a list...", but I think you need to start the second or third para with something like "The article covers descriptive epithets for plant species listed in (sources)"
  • I'll be more precise about Gledhill and make an edit to deal with your next point; I think those two edits may fix the problem. - Dank (push to talk)
• "All species epithets in the following list come from Stearn's Dictionary, except for words following "from" (which are related words from Classical Latin) and epithets following "Cf."" This is confusing as all cases of "from" or "Cf." are in the meaning column, not the epithet one. Presumably you mean alternative epithets given in the meaning column?
  • Great suggestion. In the original version, I had to do it that way because there were a lot of epithets from Stearn in the 3rd column and in the footnotes; I missed the fact that there are now none in the footnotes and only a few in the 3rd column. I've just made a few edits in the 3rd column along the lines of "Stearn lists ...", so now I can change the wording in the intro to what you're looking for (I think). - Dank (push to talk)
• "this excludes all genus epithets" I think it would be better to leave this out and just say that it is a list of species epithets.
• The query by Mattximus about unreferenced items could be dealt with by adding a citation to Gledhill's The Names of Plants to the Epithets heading.
• "Links to species". "Links to" in this heading is superfluous.
• "Contents:" I think this should be above the key.
  • I don't follow; I don't know how to split {{Compact ToC}} into two pieces. I had it above the Key section originally, and you asked me to move it down. - Dank (push to talk)

• Ah I had not seen Compact TOC done that way before. My point is that it seems to me more logical to have a contents for the whole article, not just for a few sections. You can do this by deleting "|seealso=yes |notes=yes" and adding at the end of the lead __FORCETOC__. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Done. - Dank (push to talk) 15:13, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• You should give the issn for Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society.
• This is an impressive list. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:41, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Much appreciated. I have done or am about to do everything you asked for, except as noted. - Dank (push to talk) 14:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I am not clear why the key has "cited to" instead of "cited in"
• You seem to have deleted the explanation that H and S columns are not referenced because the works are in alphabetical order. You could add this as citations to the headings.
• As many of the items in the Meaning column are additional epithets, you might consider changing the heading to "Meaning and additional epithets". Dudley Miles (talk) 17:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• All done (see if you agree). - Dank (push to talk) 17:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Still one niggle. I do not think it is helpful to readers to explain under a note to C why references are not supplied for H and S. (Also why use efn suffixes (such as efn-ur) to give note 1 and then the other notes as i to vi?). You could have a note to H: {{efn|name=source|References are not supplied for Harrison's ''Latin for Gardeners'' and Stearn's ''Botanical Latin'' as the entries are in alphabetical order.}} Adding a note to S {{efn|name=source}} would make one note for both. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• This is a disability issue (of sorts), and I'm not going to budge on this. Making multiple single-letter columns wider than they need to be, for no real gain, makes complicated tables ugly at best, especially for those of us who need a zoom of at least 120%. The C column is already wider than one letter because of the superscripts, so that's a better choice for where to put the footnote. It's not far from the H and S columns ... it's not like readers who would see a footnote next to the H or S are going to miss it next to the C ... and it's just as relevant to the C column. If you don't like it there, we could put it anywhere else, but not in the H or S column. And even in the C column, "iii" won't work; that would widen the column. I switched to upper-case footnotes for that to make it an "I". I could live with other options, including "γ", but probably not "iii". - Dank (push to talk) 19:23, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. I thoroughly disagree with your last comment, but we can agree to disagree on that. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks kindly. - Dank (push to talk) 19:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• "those that he doesn't cover verbatim" => "those that he does not cover verbatim"
• Why does the contents table go all the way from A to Z when the article only covers I to Z?
  • It's one list across two pages. Click and see! - Dank (push to talk)
• I would put note D in the column header rather than against the first asterisk
• "Cyperus imbecillis,* Agrostis imbecilla*" - should that first asterisk be before the comma?
  • Well, it's less than ideal, so I've moved the ones with asterisks to the last position throughout. - Dank (push to talk)
• This also occurs in a few other places
• "Illustration of Epacris impressa" seems to be missing/not displaying. Don't know if this is a Commons issue?
• Same for quite a few of the others
  • All of the images are coming up for me, but on a few occasions, I've had to refresh to get them all. For anyone who's wondering why this very long list is split across two pages ... this is an example of what can go wrong. It would be worse if I combined the two pages into one.
• "Fatty; oily" - random first capital, none of the others have one
• Think that's it from me - great work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:04, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, all done. Sorry about the very long list ... most of my plant lists will be a breeze compared to this page. - Dank (push to talk) 19:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - still can't get all the images to load but I'll accept that's a technical issue rather than a defect with the quality of the article itself..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Chris. Please let me know if the problem persists. - Dank (push to talk) 18:10, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 07:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• If you're going to link Infobase Publishing and Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society I would link University of Chicago Press (which should be without the "the"), Cassell (publisher), Oxford University Press and Cambridge University Press
• The ISBN 13s should either be without any dashes or with all of them. At the moment they're all missing one dash, they should have 4 in each. The 4th dash should be after the 4th digit (e.g. Coombes: 978-1-6046-91962). I'm fairly certain that's the rule but if you need to check you can use the converter to convert to ISBN 10 and then convert them back to ISBN 13 where the 4th dash will be filled in.
• Would also link Smithsonian Institution Press in further reading and tweak ISBNs like above
• Reliability and rest of formatting looks good. Aza24 (talk) 07:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks much. I removed the links to Infobase and the journal, and removed all ISBN and ISSN hyphens. If that works for you, then everything's done, I think. - Dank (push to talk) 13:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Lol that is one way to do it – I mean I guess I expected you to just link and add the hyphens but removing the links/hyphens entirely is also a acceptable solution. (Consistent formatting is what's important) Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 19:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thx again. - Dank (push to talk) 01:29, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support ~ HAL333 23:43, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks much. - Dank (push to talk) 23:58, 18 September 2020 (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) 22:23, 20 September 2020 (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 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [15].[reply]

Nominator(s): Jaberts123 (talk) 03:48, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I have been making a significant amount of changes to the page to ensure it is around the same layout and inline with similar awards pages of singers and artists. It is referenced well and is easy to navigate with a nice introduction. Jaberts123 (talk) 03:48, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Note: You made two FLC nominations with Demi Lovato discography. Unfortunately, we only allow one nomination at a time. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 11:50, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the note! Do you know which list would be considered first? --Jaberts123 (talk) 18:22, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Entirely up to you which one to proceed with, but you need to withdraw one -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:52, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• UPDATE nominator withdrew the discography nomination. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Following major improvements, I now support this nomination. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, SNUGGUMS! --Jaberts123 (talk) 04:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

• "Lovato released her third studio album Unbroken, releasing two singles" - repetition of "released/releasing". Change the second one to "featuring"
• ""Skyscraper" won Best Video with a Message and Choice Summer: Song" - according to the article on the awards, the category was called Choice Music: Summer Song, not Choice Summer: Song
• "was nominated for two awards at the 2012 Teen Choice Awards: Choice Summer Song" and "Choice Love Song"" - why are these category titles suddenly in quote marks (or half quote marks in the case of the first one?
• "Lovato was nominated for three awards at the 2018 Billboard Music Awards, including Top Female Artist and received" => "Lovato was nominated for three awards at the 2018 Billboard Music Awards, including Top Female Artist, and received"
• As an aside, Cutest Musician's Pet is possibly the most moronic award I have ever seen in one of these lists, but that's nothing to do with the quality of this article :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, ChrisTheDude. All the comments have been fixed. Quotation marks have been removed from award category names, comma was added in 2018 BBMA, releasing was replaced with featuring, and the Teen Choice Award category name was changed! Thank you for all the help! :) --Jaberts123 (talk) 00:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:10, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, ChrisTheDude, for the support. --Jaberts123 (talk) 19:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from GagaNutella

• Infobox: Latin Billboard Music Awards and Billboard Touring Awards, Billboard is in italic. GAFFA Awards (Sweden) you don't need to mention Sweden. Glamour Awards, Glamour is in italic. InStyle Awards, InStyle is in italic. Guinness World Records is in italic. Wikilink MTV Millennial Awards Brazil.
• Table: Wikilink Billboard Touring Awards. Bravo Otto (Hungary) you don't need to mention Hungray. GAFFA Awards (Sweden) you don't need to mention Sweden. Change MTV Millennial Awards (Brazil) to MTV Millennial Awards Brazil. Don't use quote marks on Lovatics. (with ...) or (for...) should be placed on the Recipient(s) and nominee(s) column. Wikilink everything possible on the Category column.
• MediaWiki:Toc isn't working.
• Ref: 34: The Grammys isn't in italic. 63: Entertainment Weekly is in italic. 68: Deadline is in italic. 75: it isn't working. 84: change PeoplesChoice.com to People's Choice Awards.

I will run AutoEd to clean up the article. GagaNutella^talk 19:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]