Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/log/January 2008

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: Open 15 days, significant problems not addressed. Delist -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This list no longer meets the featured list requirements after having changed dramatically since its promotion in 2005. In particular, it is tagged for referencing issues (FL qualification 1c) and it completely fails qualification 1f regarding being well construction. Its lead is not in compliance with WP:LEAD and is missing much info (FL qualification 2), and it has no images at all (FL qualification #3 - could have at least a DVD image like most episode lists). Collectonian (talk) 04:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist And I'm starting to think that we should do an FL pass sort of thing, like the GA folks are doing right now, because some of these older FLs have fallen into real neglect and unfortunately not enough people notice it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 04:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist. All link articles were aggressively blanked. No longer featured. All featured lists that had its linked articles blanked should be delisted. -- Cat ^chi? 10:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

  I have redirectified the entire content, let's get this over with. -- Cat ^chi? 10:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

  WP:POINT plus another for the character list redirect. --Jack Merridew 10:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  More like WP:OWN, you do not own these articles. -- Cat ^chi? 10:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delist - does not seem to meet FL requirements at this point (ya, pun noted). nb: redirects undone. --Jack Merridew 10:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist as above Eusebeus (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist per above. Drewcifer (talk) 14:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: Open 18 days, significant problems not addressed. Delist -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nominate for de-listing. 2001 NFL Draft and 2007 NFL Draft have every single trades referenced, which it should be. I'd like to see that kind of treatment given to this article as well, And until this is done this list should removed from featured list until then. I have also put other drafts for removal. This page only has four references. and none for the draft trades. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gman124 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 3 January 2008

• there no references for the draft trades, and there also isn't any references for notable undrafted plyaers.Gman124 (talk) 01:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Violates WP:WIAFL 1(c)Gman124 (talk) 01:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist per nom.--Crzycheetah 00:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: Open 18 days, significant problems not addressed. Delist -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nominate for de-listing. 2001 NFL Draft and 2007 NFL Draft have every single trades referenced, which it should be. I'd like to see that kind of treatment given to this article as well, And until this is done this list should removed from featured list until then. I have also put other drafts for removal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gman124 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 3 January 2008

• Violates WP:WIAFL 1(c)Gman124 (talk) 01:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist per nom.--Crzycheetah 00:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: Open 18 days, significant problems not addressed. Delist -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nominate for de-listing. 2001 NFL Draft and 2007 NFL Draft have every single trades referenced, which it should be. I'd like to see that kind of treatment given to this article as well (also to 2003-2006) drafts as well, And until this is done this list should removed from featured list until then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gman124 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 3 January 2008

• Violates WP:WIAFL 1(c)Gman124 (talk) 01:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist per nom.--Crzycheetah 00:38, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: Open 15 days, significant problems not addressed. Delist -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nominate for de-listing. 2001 NFL Draft and 2007 NFL Draft have every single trades referenced, which it should be. I'd like to see that kind of treatment given to this article as well, And until this is done this list should removed from featured list until then. I have also put other drafts for removal.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gman124 (talk • contribs) 3 January 2008

• Violates WP:WIAFL 1(c)Gman124 (talk) 01:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The items in the "Miscellaneous" section also need citations or should be removed. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't disagree, but I wonder if, instead of de-listing, cleaning up and sourcing, then re-listing - maybe we can just skip all that? Clean it up and source it? Same with the other five lists? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 02:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I support SatyrTN suggestion that the minor Miscellaneous section be tagged as unsourced.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The section really ought to go because a lot of it is trivial and unsourced and does not belong in a featured quality article. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist There has been no sign that the concerns are being addressed on the article. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist per WP:WIAFL's 1(c). Plus, WP:NFL was notified of these nominations for removal, but no one stepped up to just "clean it up and source it". If anyone wants to "clean it up and source it", then he may have one week to do so. As it appears now, though, having an unsourced list as a FL does not do any good to Wikipedia.--Crzycheetah 20:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist, unfortunately, this and the other four. Ideally this summer I will have ample time to go back and handle all the problems of the five. Until then.. :( Wizardman 19:29, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: Open 15 days, significant problems not addressed. Delist -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nominate for de-listing. 2001 NFL Draft and 2007 NFL Draft have every single trades referenced, which it should be. I'd like to see that kind of treatment given to this article as well, And until this is done this list should removed from featured list until then. I have also put other drafts for removal. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gman124 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 3 January 2008

• Violates WP:WIAFL 1(c) Gman124 (talk) 01:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist Most if not all of the external links and refs are dead and need to be updated.--Crzycheetah 00:36, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]