Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/log/February 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 delisted by Crisco 1492 12:21, 18 February 2014‎ [1].

Notified: WikiProject United States, WikiProject Law Enforcement

I am nominating this for featured list removal because FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives should be a full article about this most wanted list and therefore eligible to be an FA, not an FL. This article only lists the fugitives who are currently on the most wanted list, but the paragraphical information is about the most wanted list in general, covering the whole history of the most wanted list. This should be the general article, and much more paragraphical information should be added. A table listing the fugitives currently on the most wanted list should remain in the article, but that fact doesn't make the article a list article. It is only the year- or decade-specific lists that should be eligible to become FLs. Neelix (talk) 20:37, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment how did this qualify for an FL? It should nominally be in constant flux as people are added and removed, therefore is never a stable list. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 08:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist per 70.50.148.122. Unfortunately, this is by nature a dynamic list. Tezero (talk) 03:58, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

1. Neelix, maybe your concern can be better addressed by moving this article to "List of FBI Ten..." and rewriting the "FBI Ten Most Wanted" as a prose-based article that goes into the significance of the list, its history, opinions about it, its impact etc etc?
2. Tezero and 70.50, "stability" means that there shouldn't be constant edit wars going on. Not that the article should remain the same always. Otherwise, very useful lists like List of current Canadian first ministers or List of current Indian chief ministers should also not be featured, which is absurd. Further, even going by your criteria, the list was last updated in June, and before that in 2009. So the idea that it is in "constant flux" is incorrect.—indopug (talk) 16:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had considered the kind of move you recommend, but I think it superfluous to have a stand-alone list of the currently listed fugitives; such a list would need to be included on the main article in order for that article to be complete anyhow, and we already have lists of previously listed fugitives by year and decade. If any users are interested in getting a list up to featured status that is related to the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives, I would recommend one of the year-specific lists, such as FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives by year, 1950 (which should probably be moved to 1950 FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives or similar). Neelix (talk) 22:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist I would agree with Indopug that this should be moved to a FBI Ten Most Wanted article, but that's not the remit of FLRC. That would need to go via WP:RM or similar. But only after that would we be able to determine if a "current" list was worthy of FLC. I imagine that there is a huge amount of information regarding notable past "most wanted" criminals, so an article is the first step to solving that. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:17, 12 February 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 delisted by Crisco 1492 12:21, 18 February 2014‎ [2].

No longer covers all aspects of the episode list. Since its promotion, two additional adaptions have been added to the list without new sourcing. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 23:22, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist seems well out of date, per the final sentence of the lead "Five more DVD compilations, each containing two episodes are slated for release between January 21, 2009 and May 20, 2009"... The Rambling Man (talk) 11:05, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist - Lead is several years out of date, with no mention of post-2009 releases. Huge difference in size of episode summaries between 2008 and 2013 releases. General source only covers 2008 episodes, not anything past then. No attempt made to clean up list during FLRC. Dana boomer (talk) 18:44, 14 January 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 delisted by Crisco 1492 12:21, 18 February 2014‎ [3].

Notified: czar, WikiProject Video games

I am nominating this for featured list removal because of its heavy use on unreliable sources and WP:ACCESS issues. Per WP:VG/RS, GameFAQs is not a reliable source because its database is entirely user-contributed with no editorial oversight, and this list is heavily dependent on GameFAQs. Also, the table has issues; color alone is not an issue, but there's no use of text to denote regional releasing (an accessibility issue to the colorblind) and is not compliant with MOS:DTT. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 22:35, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – I removed the colors in response to the previous FLRC 5 years ago to address the issue, but another user has added them back in since → [4]. --MuZemike 00:50, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist. I know this came up at WT:VG recently (related). I suppose it's theoretically possible to source the list from print sources, but it's going to take a whole lot to rescue. The article should be delisted until it's sourced from a place agreed to be reliable. This article wouldn't pass a FAC today on the basis of the GameFAQs refs. Ping me if circumstances change, because I would try to help.  czar ♔ 06:58, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist - Huge reliance on unreliable sources, as well as access issues. No attempts made to improve list during FLRC. Dana boomer (talk) 18:40, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• "Delist' unreliable sources per the project, list needs some work per ACCESS as noted. Not good enough right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:14, 12 February 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.