The list was kept by Pres N 17:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC). reply
This FL was promoted in 2007. Since then, it has suffered from a lot of IP vandalism (due to the similarity of "cetacean" and "citation"). Note that the user who brought this to FL,
Chris huh (
talk ·
contribs), is long-term inactive. Looking at
WP:WIAFL, this list violates many of the criteria:
1. it does not feature professional standards of writing.
2. the lead section is quite short.
3. the citation needed (or, more accurately, "cetacean needed") tags need to be addressed, and many list items are unsourced.
4. from a quick glance this is fine.
5. more images are needed.
6. the edit warring means that the list cannot be considered stable.
sst✈
discuss
18:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
reply
I'll get to expanding the lead. As for the images, I'd say that's fine; I don't understand what more images would have to be added. The "citation needed" templates are calling for citations for pretty basic stuff, so that'll be easy for me to fix. I'll just replace all the "cetacean needed" tags with unknown (since they're all referring to a lack of information which remains to be unknown). I'll try to fix right now. Dunkleosteus77 (push to talk) 23:56, 13 November 2015 (UTC) reply
I've fixed the ones I've list above, but what do you mean this list does not feature a professional standard of writing? What sections need to be improved? Also, could you review the new lead, I'm not sure if it suits the article? Dunkleosteus77 (push to talk) 01:28, 14 November 2015 (UTC) reply
Does anything else need to be addressed? Dunkleosteus77 (push to talk) 15:13, 14 November 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Dunkleosteus77: Apologies for not coming back to this sooner. One dead ref needs to be addressed, please format citations consistently (I see bare URLs and one missing or empty |title=), and images need alt texts. Thanks for your prompt response, and take your time. sst✈ discuss 15:48, 16 November 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Dunkleosteus77:@ SSTflyer: I'd like to KEEP this as FL, please let me know how to help. I can get a team of cetacean biologist working on this in December but not within the timeline of 14 day review ShaneGero ( talk) 07:57, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply
Closing this nomination as Keep; problems cleared up, nominator happy, no other concerns raised. -- Pres N 17:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was removed by Pres N 17:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC). reply
While reading some FL-related talk pages, I came across a link to the old FLC task force, where I found this list. It fails to meet the modern FL criteria in many ways:
Closing this nomination as Delist; no major work done and consensus to delist. -- Pres N 17:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was removed by Pres N 17:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC). reply
I am nominating this for featured list removal because there are not nearly enough in-text citations to be up to par with FL requirements. There are only 9 total, and much more would be needed for a list containing dozens of works and any accolades received. The lead also needs work; things like "the eight-season" and "He has starred in western, action, comedy, and drama films" simply are unnecessary and don't really read well. Additionally, details on whether he was a lead or secondary role within films are better suited for their respective articles rather than here. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 04:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply
Closing this nomination as Delist; no major work done and consensus to delist. -- Pres N 17:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was delisted by Giants2008 23:05, 8 November 2015 [1].
Nominating this FL for removal due to the large amount of references lacking in specific areas. Seems to be a victim of not keeping up with rising standards since its promotion back in 2008. I've applied reference tags where necessary, but to sum up:
Was unsure who to notify, as the main contributors all stopped maintaining the article as late as 2011. Azealia911 talk 20:08, 29 September 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was delisted by Giants2008 23:05, 8 November 2015 [2].
I think this looks like being a victim of the rise in standards over the years. We insist on having citations for the tables now - and neither the film or televison table is supported by reliable sources. - SchroCat ( talk) 11:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was kept by Pres N 17:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC). reply
This FL was promoted in 2007. Since then, it has suffered from a lot of IP vandalism (due to the similarity of "cetacean" and "citation"). Note that the user who brought this to FL,
Chris huh (
talk ·
contribs), is long-term inactive. Looking at
WP:WIAFL, this list violates many of the criteria:
1. it does not feature professional standards of writing.
2. the lead section is quite short.
3. the citation needed (or, more accurately, "cetacean needed") tags need to be addressed, and many list items are unsourced.
4. from a quick glance this is fine.
5. more images are needed.
6. the edit warring means that the list cannot be considered stable.
sst✈
discuss
18:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
reply
I'll get to expanding the lead. As for the images, I'd say that's fine; I don't understand what more images would have to be added. The "citation needed" templates are calling for citations for pretty basic stuff, so that'll be easy for me to fix. I'll just replace all the "cetacean needed" tags with unknown (since they're all referring to a lack of information which remains to be unknown). I'll try to fix right now. Dunkleosteus77 (push to talk) 23:56, 13 November 2015 (UTC) reply
I've fixed the ones I've list above, but what do you mean this list does not feature a professional standard of writing? What sections need to be improved? Also, could you review the new lead, I'm not sure if it suits the article? Dunkleosteus77 (push to talk) 01:28, 14 November 2015 (UTC) reply
Does anything else need to be addressed? Dunkleosteus77 (push to talk) 15:13, 14 November 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Dunkleosteus77: Apologies for not coming back to this sooner. One dead ref needs to be addressed, please format citations consistently (I see bare URLs and one missing or empty |title=), and images need alt texts. Thanks for your prompt response, and take your time. sst✈ discuss 15:48, 16 November 2015 (UTC) reply
@ Dunkleosteus77:@ SSTflyer: I'd like to KEEP this as FL, please let me know how to help. I can get a team of cetacean biologist working on this in December but not within the timeline of 14 day review ShaneGero ( talk) 07:57, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply
Closing this nomination as Keep; problems cleared up, nominator happy, no other concerns raised. -- Pres N 17:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was removed by Pres N 17:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC). reply
While reading some FL-related talk pages, I came across a link to the old FLC task force, where I found this list. It fails to meet the modern FL criteria in many ways:
Closing this nomination as Delist; no major work done and consensus to delist. -- Pres N 17:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was removed by Pres N 17:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC). reply
I am nominating this for featured list removal because there are not nearly enough in-text citations to be up to par with FL requirements. There are only 9 total, and much more would be needed for a list containing dozens of works and any accolades received. The lead also needs work; things like "the eight-season" and "He has starred in western, action, comedy, and drama films" simply are unnecessary and don't really read well. Additionally, details on whether he was a lead or secondary role within films are better suited for their respective articles rather than here. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 04:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply
Closing this nomination as Delist; no major work done and consensus to delist. -- Pres N 17:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was delisted by Giants2008 23:05, 8 November 2015 [1].
Nominating this FL for removal due to the large amount of references lacking in specific areas. Seems to be a victim of not keeping up with rising standards since its promotion back in 2008. I've applied reference tags where necessary, but to sum up:
Was unsure who to notify, as the main contributors all stopped maintaining the article as late as 2011. Azealia911 talk 20:08, 29 September 2015 (UTC) reply
The list was delisted by Giants2008 23:05, 8 November 2015 [2].
I think this looks like being a victim of the rise in standards over the years. We insist on having citations for the tables now - and neither the film or televison table is supported by reliable sources. - SchroCat ( talk) 11:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC) reply