The list was not promoted by Pres N 01:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC) [1]. reply
Whelp, the World Fantasy Award for Best Artist FLC closed, so time to move down the line to the 7th World Fantasy Award list, and #33 overall in our perpetual FLC series. I don't like this award. Not that it isn't fine in concept- a catchall award for professionals not covered by the written or artist categories (your editors, publishers, etc.). No, my issue starts with the name (An mdash? Really?) and ends with the utter lack of consistency in the stated reasons- a given person may be nominated one year as "for editing Magazine X", and the next as "for Magazine X". Ugh. Not to mention that a few times companies were nominated instead of individuals- that's just nonsense. I've faithfully transcribed what was awarded, though, so here it all is. As always, this list should look very familiar, since it keeps the standard award list formatting of my other FLs, and comments from prior FLCs have been brought forward here. Thanks all for reviewing! -- Pres N 18:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Resolved comments from Harrias |
---|
;Comments from
Harrias
talk
|
All in all, a very good list (though what else could we expect!) Is there any chance you could take a look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of women's international cricket hat-tricks/archive1, though I appreciate that the subject matter is not your norm!! Harrias talk 11:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Not sure if this violates a rule, but as an FLC delegate (which I wasn't when I nominated this) I'm going to have to close this due to lack of activity. No inspirational message for myself, though. -- Pres N 01:21, 24 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was not promoted by Pres N 01:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC) [2]. reply
I am nominating this for Featured List status because I believe it meets all of the FLC criteria. The list consists of all attractions from the Universal Orlando Resort. The first nomination was closed due to a lack of reviewers. Dom497 ( talk) 23:05, 24 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man ( talk) 10:37, 7 May 2015 (UTC) reply |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man ( talk) 12:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC) reply
|
Here is a list of suggestions, based on my list-creating experience:
– Dream out loud ( talk) 19:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC) reply
This nomination has hit the two-month mark without enough activity, so I'm going to have to unfortunately close it. You're in good company- I'm also going to have to close my own nomination just above you for the same reason. No prejudice against renomination; maybe we should review each other's nominations if you nominate again. -- Pres N 01:20, 24 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was not promoted by Pres N 01:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC) [3]. reply
I am nominating this for featured list because... I believe it passes the criteria for FL. It is follows the same structure, format and purpose as previous nominations of mine ( Leona lewis, Adele, Emeli Sandé). I think that this one for Grande has a good section of prose/lead which covers her start in the music industry up to now. It is very comprehensive, and the table includes all songs from both albums and the EP, as well as guest appearances where writers can be sourced. It has a very clear structure and is visually appealing. It's very easy to use and navigate. The history of the article is very stable and only consists of me editing it. There not edit disputes or wars. — ₳aron 16:28, 8 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Support – Excellent work. Just one minor point:
"Her music career started when she contributed to the soundtrack albums for the American TV sitcom, Victorious, in which she also starred". -- FrankBoy (Buzz) 19:23, 10 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Resolved comments from Tomica |
---|
Resvolved comments from Tomica
|
Resolved comments from Harrias |
---|
*
For the record, I just downloaded a screen reader and ran it through this article, and the collapsed cell isn't an issue for it, it presents the data as if it were visible. So for a blind user, this page is actually more accessible than it is for a non-blind reader. (To download this screen reader I Googled "screen reader". It's a tough concept to handle, I realise.) And okay, I'll put this simply. Uncollapse everything. The reason
Tomica just gave is a perfect example of why they should not be collapsed. Ricky Martin has recorded 150+ songs. So if I wanted to see all the writers, I'd have to uncollapse 150+ cells. But, as
The Rambling Man points out, that is all beside the point, as
WP:COLLAPSE, which is part of the MOS, which all Featured lists have to adhere to, is specific on this point, and the cells can't be collapsed for this to be considered for Featured status.
Harrias
talk
11:01, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
reply
|
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man ( talk) 21:30, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply |
---|
Comment I'm not convinced many of those just adding a "support" have actually read this list in any detail.
Oppose for now, will complete the review later. The Rambling Man ( talk) 08:47, 5 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Further
The Rambling Man ( talk) 12:23, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply And by the way, it's about time you started to show some gratitude to the people that actually bother to look at your list. The quick supports for this nomination are really worrying, they undermine the process entirely because they supported a list which was in no way ready to be featured. I'm glad we have good FL directors and delegates who will overlook such tit-for-tat "supports". Some of us take a lot of pride in keeping quality to a maximum here, and your negative, shouty, responses along with a sense of real indignation when you're asked to comply with the standards required of a featured list will make it unlikely that I will ever help you in the future. Having said that, I will certainly ensure we uphold the quality expected here by opposing anything that you submit if you continue react in such a negative fashion to critical reviews. The Rambling Man ( talk) 19:22, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Conclusion there seems to be a cabal of editors who simply support each other's (very similar) lists here. The fact that this list had numerous supports all the way back to late-March is troubling. I'm not convinced at all that any of those reviewers are aware of the requirements for FL. I will take this issue up with the directors and will focus on those reviews with all these early "support"s. The Rambling Man ( talk) 21:22, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply
|
Looking through this list prior to closing; some issues listed below. The sheer quantity of these (non-trivial) structural issues makes me feel that this list is not ready for promotion and backs up what other editors have been saying about drive-by supports:
Rather than continue to thread the comments above, listing here issues that are still outstanding:
Alright, I've about hit the limit of what I'm willing to put up with here. You said you're leaving China tomorrow so we'll see once you get back home, but at this point this nomination has been going on for almost 2.5 months. You have one oppose that you simply badgered off the page, a couple other abstains from people you never quite convinced but managed to get them to drop their oppose, and several supports from people who clearly did not critically read the list, given the number of objective (rather than subjective) problems I found with the list after them. We're down to the final four issues, for which you continue to either not read what I actually am saying, claim you cannot do from China, or just outright refuse to do even though you use the opposite logic when it suits you. I'm giving this list until Friday and will not comment here again before then; if I feel it is up to snuff then I will promote it or else I will not, but either way I'm ending the nomination. -- Pres N 02:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC) reply
Okay, final decision time- it's Saturday, since I was busy yesterday. There's a consistent theme in this nomination, which I've now managed to identify- you ask (sometimes demand) that reviewers give you exact instructions for what to change, and get noticeably angry/upset when they instead identify problems and leave them for you to fix as you will. It's why Crisco left his oppose standing and left the nomination, and why you and I kept going in circles. Anyways, in addition to Crisco and Harrias' opposes (though you noted that you've responded to Harrias' comments:
Look, it's not actually my responsibility to go this in depth, but please please actually read what I'm writing here: at FLC nominations you have to actually fix the problems raised. Reviews are not simply checklists of edits to make; they can also be notes of the underlying issues that you need to fix, which are left up to the nominating editor's discretion to find their own way to solve. Can't use Google in China? Maybe ask someone else at WP:MUSIC to find you a source, or just ask me to wait 4 days for you to leave the country. Don't tell me that you're just not going to do it, implying it's my problem for asking. Someone says that the prose needs a copyedit? Then find a way to fix it, but demanding a point-by-point listing of every problem and treating that as a checklist of edits to make or not make (i.e. if they don't list it then it isn't a problem) isn't the way to go about it. In this nomination alone you've managed to annoy two of the delegates (me and Crisco), which is 2 out of the 4 people who can promote nominations and therefore look at every one. Badgering reviewers to give you point-by-point grammar checks or to simply oppose is not a winning strategy- FLCs don't get promoted on a straight vote-counting basis.
I'm closing this nomination as unsuccessful; no prejudice against re-nominating. Please, however, tell WP:MUSIC that instant support votes on FLC nominations which then later get longer, substantive reviews are not helpful. I basically can't treat any of the initial supports on this nomination as valid, because so many issues were found after they reviewed that they should have caught at least some of. -- Pres N 01:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was withdrawn by SchroCat 07:35, 17 May 2015 [4].
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it already meets the featured list criteria and is written with the list of current Indian chief ministers as a model. I am the main contributor to this list as well as its corresponding Chinese Wikipedia article, also undergoing FL candidacy. Feel free to list your opinions on this nomination page and I will gladly try my best to address all of them. HYH.124 ( talk) 14:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC) reply
Sorry this is out of order, but Fujian Province is most definitely not part of Republic of China as you stated above, but part of China (People's Republic of China). Also the consensus on wikipedia has been to name the country Taiwan, and you can read the consensus here: Talk:Taiwan/Archive_23#Why_is_this_article_not_called_.22Republic_of_China.22.3F, which links to previous discussions if you want a history of the decision. I don't dispute that "Republic of China" is the official name, but we must go with the consensus on wikipedia, and also in the English world Taiwan is far more popular in common usage. Mattximus ( talk) 12:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Hwy43 and Mattximus: I moved the article name to suit Mattximus' needs. Also the sex column on the list is removed. I don't mind further moving it to "mayors and magistrates" if any of you further insists. I will just sit back and laugh. HYH.124 ( talk) 07:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC) reply
I shall carry out works to the article and re-nominate it when time is right. I am now withdrawing this nomination. HYH.124 ( talk) 06:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was withdrawn by Crisco 1492 07:58, 13 May 2015 [5].
I am nominating this for featured list because it has been extensively cited and I think represents a comprehensive account of its subject. Serendi pod ous 13:26, 23 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments from Rodw
As a non astronomer I clicked on this nomination not really having and idea of what I would find (or how it could be a list) - which might be an issue about the title - but I think I've got the idea now. I found it interesting but have a few comments:
I don't feel qualified to comment on whether the sources are RS.— Rod talk 16:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments from Mike Peel
This is a rather unusual list! Here's some comments/suggestions from me. I am a professional astronomer, but this topic doesn't really fall under my research area.
I have more comments, but that's probably enough for now! Thanks. Mike Peel ( talk) 20:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments a really neat list that I like very much. Here are some pointers:
Nergaal ( talk) 17:00, 30 April 2015 (UTC) reply
I may have to withdraw this; I severely underestimated what it would require. Still, Thanks for guiding me on to what is required. Serendi pod ous 18:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was archived by Crisco 1492 08:28, 7 May 2015 [9].
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it fulfills the criteria. There were some unreferenced teams, which I have fixed. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি ( talk) 07:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Question to the nominator – I'm not sure if your are a major contributor to this list. Leaving that aside, did you go through the criteria and ensure that this list meets the prime requirements of an FL. Also, are you aware of WP:PR? — Vensatry (ping) 18:51, 28 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Comment:Looks good. I've added rowscopes, column scopes and made all columns the same width. Black hole78 talk | contrib 06:53, 6 April 2015 (UTC) reply
This list is moving in the right direction, for sure. Harrias talk 19:04, 19 April 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was archived by Crisco 1492 08:28, 7 May 2015 [10].
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe I have worked hard on it and it satisfies most of the criteria. All About That Bass ( A word?? / Stalking not allowed...) 17:37, 2 May 2015 (UTC) reply
|
Resolved comments from
Azealia911
|
---|
*Quick comment: |
Resolved comments from Seattle ( talk) 19:19, 5 May 2015 (UTC) reply |
---|
Comments
|
The list was withdrawn by SchroCat 09:47, 5 May 2015 [12].
So, part of The Boat Race mega-work. This has been spun off from the main Boat Race article as it took up an awful lot of space and was better placed as an individual article. I've added in a bunch of factoids and prose lead and some nice images from "over the years". Of course, I will be 100% dedicated to resolving each and every issue levelled against the list, I look forward to hearing from the community. As always, I thank each and every one of you for your time invested and energy spent in this process. The Rambling Man ( talk) 18:31, 1 May 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments from Rodw A nice looking list but a few questions/comments:
The new section on "Unofficial wartime races" which is referenced to The Times (Refs 15-18) however these are showing a CS1 error "|accessdate= requires |url=" either a link to web site (even if behind a paywall) should be added or the accessdate removed. They may be in
BNA if you have access (if not some free accounts are available).—
Rod
talk
09:15, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
reply
Oppose overall, based largely on 5(b) concerns.
Seattle (
talk)
05:39, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
reply
The list was withdrawn by Crisco 1492 13:44, 2 May 2015 [13].
This lists was created and written as an article under the name Adolf Hitler's adjutants. During the GA-review and FL-review, it was decided to be a list by consensus and the title was change to List of Adolf Hitler's adjutants. Then, after suggestions on the previously mentioned review pages, the article was renamed yet again, this time to List of Adolf Hitler's personal staff and now includes adjutants, cooks, secretaries, chauffeurs, aide-de-camps, valets, dentists, surgeons, physicians, and so on. Please contribute with comments for improvements or throw in an oppose or support vote. Best regards, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 22:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC) reply
CommentsOppose by
MisterBee1966 (
talk)
08:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
reply
As of this moment, it looks like the fate of this candidate comes down to whoever votes next. I will leave a message on the military wikiproject and ask some people to vote here. Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 22:35, 18 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Someone with more copyright knowledge please check these images so they can be used in the table. Nergaal ( talk) 17:31, 30 April 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was not promoted by Pres N 01:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC) [1]. reply
Whelp, the World Fantasy Award for Best Artist FLC closed, so time to move down the line to the 7th World Fantasy Award list, and #33 overall in our perpetual FLC series. I don't like this award. Not that it isn't fine in concept- a catchall award for professionals not covered by the written or artist categories (your editors, publishers, etc.). No, my issue starts with the name (An mdash? Really?) and ends with the utter lack of consistency in the stated reasons- a given person may be nominated one year as "for editing Magazine X", and the next as "for Magazine X". Ugh. Not to mention that a few times companies were nominated instead of individuals- that's just nonsense. I've faithfully transcribed what was awarded, though, so here it all is. As always, this list should look very familiar, since it keeps the standard award list formatting of my other FLs, and comments from prior FLCs have been brought forward here. Thanks all for reviewing! -- Pres N 18:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Resolved comments from Harrias |
---|
;Comments from
Harrias
talk
|
All in all, a very good list (though what else could we expect!) Is there any chance you could take a look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of women's international cricket hat-tricks/archive1, though I appreciate that the subject matter is not your norm!! Harrias talk 11:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Not sure if this violates a rule, but as an FLC delegate (which I wasn't when I nominated this) I'm going to have to close this due to lack of activity. No inspirational message for myself, though. -- Pres N 01:21, 24 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was not promoted by Pres N 01:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC) [2]. reply
I am nominating this for Featured List status because I believe it meets all of the FLC criteria. The list consists of all attractions from the Universal Orlando Resort. The first nomination was closed due to a lack of reviewers. Dom497 ( talk) 23:05, 24 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man ( talk) 10:37, 7 May 2015 (UTC) reply |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man ( talk) 12:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC) reply
|
Here is a list of suggestions, based on my list-creating experience:
– Dream out loud ( talk) 19:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC) reply
This nomination has hit the two-month mark without enough activity, so I'm going to have to unfortunately close it. You're in good company- I'm also going to have to close my own nomination just above you for the same reason. No prejudice against renomination; maybe we should review each other's nominations if you nominate again. -- Pres N 01:20, 24 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was not promoted by Pres N 01:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC) [3]. reply
I am nominating this for featured list because... I believe it passes the criteria for FL. It is follows the same structure, format and purpose as previous nominations of mine ( Leona lewis, Adele, Emeli Sandé). I think that this one for Grande has a good section of prose/lead which covers her start in the music industry up to now. It is very comprehensive, and the table includes all songs from both albums and the EP, as well as guest appearances where writers can be sourced. It has a very clear structure and is visually appealing. It's very easy to use and navigate. The history of the article is very stable and only consists of me editing it. There not edit disputes or wars. — ₳aron 16:28, 8 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Support – Excellent work. Just one minor point:
"Her music career started when she contributed to the soundtrack albums for the American TV sitcom, Victorious, in which she also starred". -- FrankBoy (Buzz) 19:23, 10 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Resolved comments from Tomica |
---|
Resvolved comments from Tomica
|
Resolved comments from Harrias |
---|
*
For the record, I just downloaded a screen reader and ran it through this article, and the collapsed cell isn't an issue for it, it presents the data as if it were visible. So for a blind user, this page is actually more accessible than it is for a non-blind reader. (To download this screen reader I Googled "screen reader". It's a tough concept to handle, I realise.) And okay, I'll put this simply. Uncollapse everything. The reason
Tomica just gave is a perfect example of why they should not be collapsed. Ricky Martin has recorded 150+ songs. So if I wanted to see all the writers, I'd have to uncollapse 150+ cells. But, as
The Rambling Man points out, that is all beside the point, as
WP:COLLAPSE, which is part of the MOS, which all Featured lists have to adhere to, is specific on this point, and the cells can't be collapsed for this to be considered for Featured status.
Harrias
talk
11:01, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
reply
|
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man ( talk) 21:30, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply |
---|
Comment I'm not convinced many of those just adding a "support" have actually read this list in any detail.
Oppose for now, will complete the review later. The Rambling Man ( talk) 08:47, 5 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Further
The Rambling Man ( talk) 12:23, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply And by the way, it's about time you started to show some gratitude to the people that actually bother to look at your list. The quick supports for this nomination are really worrying, they undermine the process entirely because they supported a list which was in no way ready to be featured. I'm glad we have good FL directors and delegates who will overlook such tit-for-tat "supports". Some of us take a lot of pride in keeping quality to a maximum here, and your negative, shouty, responses along with a sense of real indignation when you're asked to comply with the standards required of a featured list will make it unlikely that I will ever help you in the future. Having said that, I will certainly ensure we uphold the quality expected here by opposing anything that you submit if you continue react in such a negative fashion to critical reviews. The Rambling Man ( talk) 19:22, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Conclusion there seems to be a cabal of editors who simply support each other's (very similar) lists here. The fact that this list had numerous supports all the way back to late-March is troubling. I'm not convinced at all that any of those reviewers are aware of the requirements for FL. I will take this issue up with the directors and will focus on those reviews with all these early "support"s. The Rambling Man ( talk) 21:22, 26 April 2015 (UTC) reply
|
Looking through this list prior to closing; some issues listed below. The sheer quantity of these (non-trivial) structural issues makes me feel that this list is not ready for promotion and backs up what other editors have been saying about drive-by supports:
Rather than continue to thread the comments above, listing here issues that are still outstanding:
Alright, I've about hit the limit of what I'm willing to put up with here. You said you're leaving China tomorrow so we'll see once you get back home, but at this point this nomination has been going on for almost 2.5 months. You have one oppose that you simply badgered off the page, a couple other abstains from people you never quite convinced but managed to get them to drop their oppose, and several supports from people who clearly did not critically read the list, given the number of objective (rather than subjective) problems I found with the list after them. We're down to the final four issues, for which you continue to either not read what I actually am saying, claim you cannot do from China, or just outright refuse to do even though you use the opposite logic when it suits you. I'm giving this list until Friday and will not comment here again before then; if I feel it is up to snuff then I will promote it or else I will not, but either way I'm ending the nomination. -- Pres N 02:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC) reply
Okay, final decision time- it's Saturday, since I was busy yesterday. There's a consistent theme in this nomination, which I've now managed to identify- you ask (sometimes demand) that reviewers give you exact instructions for what to change, and get noticeably angry/upset when they instead identify problems and leave them for you to fix as you will. It's why Crisco left his oppose standing and left the nomination, and why you and I kept going in circles. Anyways, in addition to Crisco and Harrias' opposes (though you noted that you've responded to Harrias' comments:
Look, it's not actually my responsibility to go this in depth, but please please actually read what I'm writing here: at FLC nominations you have to actually fix the problems raised. Reviews are not simply checklists of edits to make; they can also be notes of the underlying issues that you need to fix, which are left up to the nominating editor's discretion to find their own way to solve. Can't use Google in China? Maybe ask someone else at WP:MUSIC to find you a source, or just ask me to wait 4 days for you to leave the country. Don't tell me that you're just not going to do it, implying it's my problem for asking. Someone says that the prose needs a copyedit? Then find a way to fix it, but demanding a point-by-point listing of every problem and treating that as a checklist of edits to make or not make (i.e. if they don't list it then it isn't a problem) isn't the way to go about it. In this nomination alone you've managed to annoy two of the delegates (me and Crisco), which is 2 out of the 4 people who can promote nominations and therefore look at every one. Badgering reviewers to give you point-by-point grammar checks or to simply oppose is not a winning strategy- FLCs don't get promoted on a straight vote-counting basis.
I'm closing this nomination as unsuccessful; no prejudice against re-nominating. Please, however, tell WP:MUSIC that instant support votes on FLC nominations which then later get longer, substantive reviews are not helpful. I basically can't treat any of the initial supports on this nomination as valid, because so many issues were found after they reviewed that they should have caught at least some of. -- Pres N 01:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was withdrawn by SchroCat 07:35, 17 May 2015 [4].
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it already meets the featured list criteria and is written with the list of current Indian chief ministers as a model. I am the main contributor to this list as well as its corresponding Chinese Wikipedia article, also undergoing FL candidacy. Feel free to list your opinions on this nomination page and I will gladly try my best to address all of them. HYH.124 ( talk) 14:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC) reply
Sorry this is out of order, but Fujian Province is most definitely not part of Republic of China as you stated above, but part of China (People's Republic of China). Also the consensus on wikipedia has been to name the country Taiwan, and you can read the consensus here: Talk:Taiwan/Archive_23#Why_is_this_article_not_called_.22Republic_of_China.22.3F, which links to previous discussions if you want a history of the decision. I don't dispute that "Republic of China" is the official name, but we must go with the consensus on wikipedia, and also in the English world Taiwan is far more popular in common usage. Mattximus ( talk) 12:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Hwy43 and Mattximus: I moved the article name to suit Mattximus' needs. Also the sex column on the list is removed. I don't mind further moving it to "mayors and magistrates" if any of you further insists. I will just sit back and laugh. HYH.124 ( talk) 07:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC) reply
I shall carry out works to the article and re-nominate it when time is right. I am now withdrawing this nomination. HYH.124 ( talk) 06:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was withdrawn by Crisco 1492 07:58, 13 May 2015 [5].
I am nominating this for featured list because it has been extensively cited and I think represents a comprehensive account of its subject. Serendi pod ous 13:26, 23 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments from Rodw
As a non astronomer I clicked on this nomination not really having and idea of what I would find (or how it could be a list) - which might be an issue about the title - but I think I've got the idea now. I found it interesting but have a few comments:
I don't feel qualified to comment on whether the sources are RS.— Rod talk 16:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments from Mike Peel
This is a rather unusual list! Here's some comments/suggestions from me. I am a professional astronomer, but this topic doesn't really fall under my research area.
I have more comments, but that's probably enough for now! Thanks. Mike Peel ( talk) 20:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments a really neat list that I like very much. Here are some pointers:
Nergaal ( talk) 17:00, 30 April 2015 (UTC) reply
I may have to withdraw this; I severely underestimated what it would require. Still, Thanks for guiding me on to what is required. Serendi pod ous 18:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was archived by Crisco 1492 08:28, 7 May 2015 [9].
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it fulfills the criteria. There were some unreferenced teams, which I have fixed. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি ( talk) 07:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Question to the nominator – I'm not sure if your are a major contributor to this list. Leaving that aside, did you go through the criteria and ensure that this list meets the prime requirements of an FL. Also, are you aware of WP:PR? — Vensatry (ping) 18:51, 28 March 2015 (UTC) reply
Comment:Looks good. I've added rowscopes, column scopes and made all columns the same width. Black hole78 talk | contrib 06:53, 6 April 2015 (UTC) reply
This list is moving in the right direction, for sure. Harrias talk 19:04, 19 April 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was archived by Crisco 1492 08:28, 7 May 2015 [10].
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe I have worked hard on it and it satisfies most of the criteria. All About That Bass ( A word?? / Stalking not allowed...) 17:37, 2 May 2015 (UTC) reply
|
Resolved comments from
Azealia911
|
---|
*Quick comment: |
Resolved comments from Seattle ( talk) 19:19, 5 May 2015 (UTC) reply |
---|
Comments
|
The list was withdrawn by SchroCat 09:47, 5 May 2015 [12].
So, part of The Boat Race mega-work. This has been spun off from the main Boat Race article as it took up an awful lot of space and was better placed as an individual article. I've added in a bunch of factoids and prose lead and some nice images from "over the years". Of course, I will be 100% dedicated to resolving each and every issue levelled against the list, I look forward to hearing from the community. As always, I thank each and every one of you for your time invested and energy spent in this process. The Rambling Man ( talk) 18:31, 1 May 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments from Rodw A nice looking list but a few questions/comments:
The new section on "Unofficial wartime races" which is referenced to The Times (Refs 15-18) however these are showing a CS1 error "|accessdate= requires |url=" either a link to web site (even if behind a paywall) should be added or the accessdate removed. They may be in
BNA if you have access (if not some free accounts are available).—
Rod
talk
09:15, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
reply
Oppose overall, based largely on 5(b) concerns.
Seattle (
talk)
05:39, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
reply
The list was withdrawn by Crisco 1492 13:44, 2 May 2015 [13].
This lists was created and written as an article under the name Adolf Hitler's adjutants. During the GA-review and FL-review, it was decided to be a list by consensus and the title was change to List of Adolf Hitler's adjutants. Then, after suggestions on the previously mentioned review pages, the article was renamed yet again, this time to List of Adolf Hitler's personal staff and now includes adjutants, cooks, secretaries, chauffeurs, aide-de-camps, valets, dentists, surgeons, physicians, and so on. Please contribute with comments for improvements or throw in an oppose or support vote. Best regards, Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 22:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC) reply
CommentsOppose by
MisterBee1966 (
talk)
08:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
reply
As of this moment, it looks like the fate of this candidate comes down to whoever votes next. I will leave a message on the military wikiproject and ask some people to vote here. Jonas Vinther • ( speak to me!) 22:35, 18 April 2015 (UTC) reply
Someone with more copyright knowledge please check these images so they can be used in the table. Nergaal ( talk) 17:31, 30 April 2015 (UTC) reply