Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:FLC)

Nominating featured lists in Wikipedia

This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Welcome to featured list candidates! Here, we determine which lists are of a good enough quality to be featured lists (FLs). Featured lists exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and must satisfy the featured list criteria.

Before nominating a list, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at peer review. This process is not a substitute for peer review. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the featured list candidate (FLC) process. Those who are not significant contributors to the list should consult regular editors of the list before nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly.

A list should not be listed at featured list candidates and another review process at the same time. Nominators should not add a second featured list nomination until the first has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed.

The featured list director, Giants2008, or his delegates, PresN and Hey man im josh, determine the timing of the process for each nomination. Each nomination will typically last at least twenty days, but may last longer if changes are ongoing or insufficient discussion or analysis has occurred. For a nomination to be promoted to FL status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. The directors determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the director who considers a nomination and its reviews:

  • actionable objections have not been resolved in a timely manner; or
  • consensus for promotion has not been reached after significant time; or
  • reviewers are unable to judge whether the criteria have been met.

It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the process focuses on finding and resolving problems in relation to the criteria, rather than asserting the positives. Declarations of support are not as important as finding and resolving issues, and the process is not simply vote-counting.

Once the director or a delegate has decided to close a nomination, they will do so on the nominations page. A bot will update the list talk page after the list is promoted or the nomination archived, typically within the day, and the {{FLC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates or adds the {{Article history}} template. If a nomination is archived, the nominator should take adequate time to resolve issues before re-nominating.

Purge the cache to refresh this page – Table of contents – Closing instructions

Shortcut

Featured content:

Featured list tools:

Nomination procedure
  1. Before nominating a list, ensure that it meets all of the FL criteria and that any peer reviews are closed and archived. It is recommended that the list have no other open discussions.
  2. Place {{subst:FLC}} on the talk page of the nominated list.
  3. From the FLC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please leave a post on the FLC talk page for assistance.
  4. Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~ and save the page.
  5. Finally, place {{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/name of nominated list/archiveNumber}} at the top of the list of nominees on this page by first copying the above, clicking "edit" on the top of this page, and then pasting, making sure to add the name of the nominated list. When adding a candidate, mention the name of the list in the edit summary.
Reviewing procedure

Please read a nominated list fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.

  • To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the list nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole FLC page).
  • To support a nomination, write * '''Support''', followed by your reason(s). If you have been a significant contributor to the list before its nomination, please indicate this. Supports are weighted more strongly if they are given alongside justifications that indicate that the list was fully reviewed; a nomination is not just a straight vote.
  • To oppose a nomination, write * '''Oppose''', followed by your reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, the director may ignore it. Please focus your attention on substantive issues or inconsistencies, rather than personal style preferences. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed, and nominators are encouraged to use {{reply to}} or other templates to notify reviewers when replying. To withdraw an objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>), rather than removing it.
  • If a nominator feels that an oppose vote has been addressed, they should say so, rather than striking out the reviewer's text. Nominators should not cap, alter, strike, or add graphics to comments from other editors; replies are added below the signature on the reviewer's commentary. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page.
  • Graphics (such as {{done}} and {{not done}}) are discouraged, as they slow down the page load time.
  • To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write * '''Comment''' followed by your advice.
Nominations urgently needing reviews

The following lists were nominated almost 2 months ago and have had their review time extended because objections are still being addressed, the nomination has not received enough reviews, or insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met. If you have not yet reviewed them, please take the time to do so:

Source reviews needed

The following lists were nominated for removal more than 14 days ago:

Nominations

[edit]

List of Ming dynasty era names

[edit]
Nominator(s): Min968 (talk) 06:48, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I find it quite good, although most of the materials I used are in Chinese, and there is relatively little information on this topic in English. Min968 (talk) 06:48, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

[edit]
  • Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
  • Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell; most of yours have them but a couple are missing.
  • Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | scope=row style="text-align:center"|'''[[Hongwu]]''' becomes ! scope=row style="text-align:center"|'''[[Hongwu]]'''. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
  • Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 12:51, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flo Milli discography

[edit]
Nominator(s): Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 07:15, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on this article, I had previously FLC'd it but withdrew as I had forgotten about the FLC got too busy with real life stuff but at the spur of the moment I am now reopening it. I've added all sourcing from my previous source review and fixed some other sourcing issues. For whoever does the source review, I am waiting on a source for "Clap Sum" to be approved as of 1/30/2025 It’s been dealt with. Thanks, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 07:15, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Station 19 episodes

[edit]
Nominator(s): TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey everyone, I'm back with another episode list, this one for the Grey's spin-off series Station 19. This is a series that I absolutely adore both for its connection to Grey's Anatomy as well as its storytelling and representation. After an expansion of the lead and a cleanup of templates and sources, I believe that this list is more than comprehensive enough to be added to be featured quality. TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OlifanofmrTennant

[edit]
Production codes unsources. You can usually find them on the WGA website.
I understand that the ratings graph can only hold up to 100 episodes, but why are the ratings tables split?
Season headings need prose
"Station 19 is an American action and procedural drama created by Stacy McKee and based on Grey's Anatomy" As in an adaptation? Clarify that its a spin off
"who had since been cast in the spin-off as a series regular" wording seems off here
Private Practice has the years it aired next to it while Grey's Anatomy doenst. Any reason for this?
Several sources need archiving

That's all I got ping me when done. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:22, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "based on Grey's Anatomy," - I don't think it's really "based on" it, as that would suggest it is a remake of Grey's
  • "were also held as mid-seasons replacements" => "were also held as mid-season replacements"
  • "Its premise was first introduced trough" - last word is spelt wrong
  • "Stefania Spampinato also stars as Dr. Carina DeLuca, who was also first introduced in Grey's Anatomy" - I would move this to before "the remainder". it feels a bit odd to list the rest of the initial cast, then mention people who joined later, and then randomly mention Spampinato
  • "Rhimes production company." => "Rhimes' production company."
  • "Rhimes as showrunners, the two had also been co-showrunners on Grey's Anatomy" - comma should be a semi-colon
  • "Vernoff was also overseeing production Grey's Anatomy" => "Vernoff was also overseeing production of Grey's Anatomy"
  • That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:25, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of constituencies of the Sikkim Legislative Assembly

[edit]
Nominator(s): 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 14:50, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Entire list has been re-written, I feel it meets the FL-criteria now. -25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 14:50, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
MPGuy2824
  • The ref for the electorate column is just the constituency map/list and doesn't mention the voters per constituency at all.
  • Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
 Done
  • Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. ! Year becomes !scope=col | Year. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.
 Done
  • Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | 1987 becomes !scope=row | 1987 (on its own line). If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
 Fixed
  • Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
  • I would move the reservation color to the reservation column.
 Done
  • The history section doesn't mention anything after 1974.
plus Added more contents to it.
  • A lot of refs are missing their archive links.
  • Very few things in the lead are referenced.
 Fixed
  • "The Scheduled Tribes have been granted a reservation of 12 seats in the assembly" and "12 constituencies are reserved for people of the Bhutia-Lepcha (BL) community." are somewhat duplicated sentences. The same applies to the sentences about the Scheduled Castes. Also it needs to be explained why Bhutia-Lepcha (BL) is the same as Scheduled Tribes.
 Fixed I apologies for the confusion.

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 16:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of North Korean propaganda slogans

[edit]
Nominator(s): OpalYosutebito (talk) 14:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because... I believe it has the potential to be a featured list, as the list itself, as well as the prose and lead, have been extensively organized and expanded upon compared to what it once was. However, I'm still open to suggestions on how to further improve the article. - OpalYosutebito (talk) 14:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: added to WP:FLC on January 27. --PresN 12:37, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Royiswariii Comment

  • Image Review
File:Propaganda North Korea.jpg - CC-BY 2.0
The image are passed and related on the article, just add a alternative text.
I suggest to translate the sources into english.

That's all for me ROY is WAR Talk! 02:05, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tornadoes in Oklahoma

[edit]
Nominator(s): EF5 01:46, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm back with another mega-list after the 300k-byte List of artwork at the United States Capitol complex failed; I decided that wasn't worth pursuing. This is a combination of several lists: A list of every (E)F3+ tornado in Oklahoma history (if I included every one, it'd be too long for a single article, so this is logically as complete as it'll get); A list of every tornado in Oklahoma by county; A list of other exceptional tornado events; A list of worst tornado years for Oklahoma; and I'm planning on adding more lists if I can come up with them. Following most of the mini-lists are a few blurbs of events that took place during that time period, obviously with images. I'm hoping this format can become the standard for "Tornadoes in ____" listicles. The main concerns I personally have are related to sourcing; I'd also like feedback on the general format, as this style has never been tried before. EF5 01:46, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OlifanofmrTennat

[edit]

I'll have a review up soon, always enjoy seeing Oklahoma on FLC. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 08:44, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Link Tornado in the first mention in the lead as its the main subject of the page and delink it in the body per MOS:OVERLINK
Done. EF5 13:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In "The majority of casualties took place along the tornado's track through Texas." link Texas
Done. EF5 13:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In "Tornadoes formed on that day across several Plains states including Missouri, Oklahoma, and Kansas." link plains and Kansas as it is their first mentions
Done. EF5 13:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The town of Udall was especially hard" -> "The town of Udall, Kansas was especially hard" as its in Kansas and the article is about Oklahoma
Done. EF5 13:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... hit Moore, Oklahoma.in which ..." remove the period between Oklahoma and in
Done. EF5 13:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the sections "1925-1949", "1950-1974" "March 20, 1948", "May 3, 1999", Oklahoma is linked on the second mention, alternatively I don't know if linking Oklahoma is necessary.
Done. EF5 13:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's all I got ping when done. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant: How's it look? EF5 13:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 14:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review from Octave

[edit]

I intend to review this soon for sourcing, including spot-checks. Please give me a holler if I don't post a review within a few days. Best, UpTheOctave! • 8va? 17:34, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

[edit]
  • Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. !Date becomes !scope=col | Date. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.
  • Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 12:48, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of emperors of the Ming dynasty

[edit]
Nominator(s): Min968 (talk) 11:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After the first failure, I made some adjustments. Min968 (talk) 11:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

History6042's Review

[edit]
  • All images need alt text, but currently none of them have them outside of the tables.
  • In the Hongwu Emperor's life details section, there should be a period after natural causes.
  • "including the Porcelain Tower of Nanjing, Yongle Encyclopedia and the Ming treasure voyages." You should remove the the in front of Ming treasure voyages.
  • "Focused primarily on domestic affairs. Died of natural causes" needs a period.
  • "Also a noted painter. Died of natural causes" needs a period.
  • "and allow the influence of eunuchs to grow." should be "and allowed the influence of eunuchs to grow."
  • "Suppress the Rebellion of Cao Qin" should be "Suppressed the Rebellion of Cao Qin".
  • "and abolish the practice" should be "and abolished the practice".
  • In the Emperor Yingzong (second reign) section, there needs to be a period after natural causes.
  • "Died of natural causes" in the Chenghua Emperor section needs a period.
  • "Died of natural causes" in the Hongzhi Emperor section needs a period.
  • "possibly due to alchemical elixir poisoning" needs a period.
  • "Died of natural causes" in the Longqing Emperor section needs a period.
  • "Died of natural causes" in the Wanli Emperor section needs a period.
  • "possibly murdered by poison" needs a period.
  • "Died from an unknown illness" needs a period.
  • "Executed by the Qing dynasty" needs a period.
  • "Surrendered to the Qing dynasty, later executed" needs a period.
  • Both instances of "Captured and killed by the Qing forces" need a period. I also don't think that the the is necessary in either.
  • "Committed suicide after being captured by the Qing forces" needs a period. I also don't think that the the is necessary.
  • "Died of natural causes" in the Zhu Yihai section needs a period.
  • If those are all fixed then I support on grammar, prose, and imagery. History6042😊 (Contact me) 19:40, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Inkigayo Chart winners (2021)

[edit]
Nominator(s): -- EN-Jungwon 06:51, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the seventh list in this series that I am nominating. The format is similar to the previous six that have been promoted to featured status. Looking forward to your comments. -- EN-Jungwon 06:51, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "Aespa (pictured) received their first ever music show win with their Inkigayo trophy " - there's a duplicated word there
  • "The chart measured" => "In 2021, the chart measured"
  • "18 music acts received an award trophy for this feat" - I don't think the word "music" is needed as no other type of act can top the chart
  • Twice and Aespa are both linked multiple times in the lead
  • "The single spent three non consecutive weeks at number one and achieved a triple crown." - assuming this refers to "Savage", change it to "The lattersingle spent three non consecutive weeks at number one and achieved a triple crown."
  • "The single also spent three non consecutive weeks at number one " => "The single spent three non-consecutive weeks at number one "
  • "Other first time number one artist include "Stray Kids"" => "Other first-time number one artist included Stray Kids" (no need for quote marks round the group name)
  • Where it's used as an adjective eg in "a number one single", "a number one artist", etc, it needs a hyphen. Not when it's used as a noun though eg "they had their first number one"
  • "IU (pictured) earned three Inkigayo Triple Crowns in 2021 for her singles "Celebrity", "Lilac," and "Strawberry Moon," respectively." - "(pictured)" isn't needed as it's obvious that she is the person pictured, and you also don't need the word "respectively"
  • Other photo captions where just one act is shown also don't need "(pictured)"
  • That's what I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:09, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ChrisTheDude, I have made the changes you have suggested. I'm unsure of the eight point you made about the hyphens. Could you please clarify that for me. Thanks for the review. -- EN-Jungwon 09:06, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthewrb

[edit]
  • Question: Is there a way to move the leade image with the imagemap into the infobox? It's very odd to have an image right below an infobox. If not, no worries.
  • The artist (G)I-dle should sort based on the G and not the parenthesis.
  • The alt text needs to be expanded. Per MOS:ALT, the alt text should describe the image for visually impaired users, and the alt text in this list doesn't do that.

Mostly minor nitpics, this is a good list. ~ Matthewrb Let's connect · Here to help 22:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Matthewrb I've fixed the sorting and expanded the alt text. I tried to move the whole imagemap into the infobox but there seems to be issues with setting the image size. I tried using the |image_size parameter but the image size doesn't change at all. From my testing, the only way to make it work is to remove the imagemap. Thanks for the review. -- EN-Jungwon 09:15, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, it was a question and shouldn't block this nomination. Support ~ Matthewrb Let's connect · Here to help 15:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

World Women's Billiards Championship

[edit]
Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first 15 or so years of this tournament attracted a lost of press coverage, but more recent sources are much harder to find. This is in a similar format to List of UK Open Billiards Championship winners. As ever, all improvement suggestions are welcome and I can provide relevant extracts from offline sources to reviewers. Thank you. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review and some comments

[edit]

Question- given that the PD images are PD only bcs the authors aren't known- how deep was your check?

I didn't find the PD images in an online search, or at either paimages.co.uk or alamy.com. None of the images has any credit attached where they were published. If there are any other steps I shoudl take, please let me know. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:11, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, what I meant was one seems to be from a magazine, and two from a newspaper, so did you check properly to find a name- bcs like in the case of magazines, it could be at the end of it or something too, along with that of every other image in said magazine(just want to make sure, as sometimes the attributed author can be specified in unusual places. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 13:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, I did. It would be unusual for a UK newspaper to have picture credits somewhere other than close to the image, and I couldn't find any for those. The Billiard Player almost never included picture credits, and there was none for the image used here. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

General comments:

  • Why are the early tournaments all(except 1934) ending in a 1000-something? A specific format?
  • Woww, years where the event was held but the score and opponent isn't known-is the coverage that bad?
  • Some prose about how points work, or the specific formats might be good? (And some about billiards too, unless that seems unnecessarily detailed to you)

BennyOnTheLoose, that's the end of my review. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, DoctorWhoFan91. Let me know if you have any further comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm satisfied with the changes, a support from me. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 13:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "In 1930, British cue sports company Burroughes and Watts" => "In 1930, the British cue sports company Burroughes and Watts"
  • "The first rounds would be played at regional venues" - of the professional version, presumably? The last thing you mentioned was the amateur version so there is ambiguity here
  • Thelma Carpenter's name is spelt wrong on the second mention
  • "before turning professional and going on to compete in the Women's Professional Billiards Championship." - I am confused now as to which competition this list is actually talking about. The very first sentence talks about the Professional Championship, so I assumed it was that. But now I think maybe it's actually the amateur version? I note also that you don't clarify when whichever tournament it is became the "World Championship"
  • If Women's Professional Billiards Championship does indeed need to be mentioned in the lead twice, it doesn't need to be linked twice
  • "Vera Seals, a receptionist from Chesterfield that had learnt the game" => "Vera Seals, a receptionist from Chesterfield who had learnt the game"
  • Can you add a few words to clarify who Joe Davis actually was?
  • "Maureen Baynton (Née Barrett)" - no need for capital N
  • First image caption doesn't need a full stop
  • Second image caption doesn't need a comma after (left to right) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:35, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
MPGuy2824
  • Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | 1987 becomes !scope=row | 1987 (on its own line). Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
  • The ref column should be unsortable.
  • The Final score column sorts in a weird way (in descending order 700, then 200, then 1000). Please fix.
  • I think it would better if the "Not held" cell is centered wherever it occurs.
  • The images in the lead need alt texts. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 16:00, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Row scopes on primary column This applies to the "Wins by player" table as well. The Player name cell would be good for this. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:10, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, MPGuy2824. Please let me know if anything else is required. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Support on accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 18:50, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of municipalities in Washington

[edit]
Nominator(s): SounderBruce 06:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One of my bucket list items is to visit all 281 cities and towns in my home state of Washington, so I thought it was high time to improve the massive list before I reach the 100% mark (which is only a few road trips away from being accomplished). This list follows the format set at other recent lists of municipalities, especially those from Mattximus, and I believe it is ready for review. SounderBruce 06:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
MPGuy2824
  • Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. You've added the scopes but the line needs to start with a "!" not a "|".
    • Fixed.
  • Some of the number columns are right aligned, but not all. All the ones which have a varying number of digits should be right aligned. The year column can be left as is.
    • Fixed for the center-aligned columns.
  • The order of precedence seems to be first-class city > second-class city > code city > town. It would be great to have that column sort in this way. I'm not sure where the unclassified city would fit in there.
    • The current sorting uses the most common order that these classifications are listed in (code city, 1st class, 2nd class, unclassified, town) by the government and MRSC.
  • Many of the refs are missing archive links. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:19, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - I did a mini-review prior to nomination and all my recommendations were made. I believe this list is at the featured level. I can find only one issue. There is a paragraph on mayor and manager and a mention in the lead, but no mention in the table. I wonder if there is a way to incorporate this into the table without a new column because I like the table as is. If there are only those two, and only a few managers, could a note be made for those which says all others are mayor? Or is there another creative solution? It would be a shame to just remove that paragraph which is another option. Mattximus (talk) 22:50, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mattximus: I'm not sure if a new column would fit, nor would a separate notes system be warranted. I have added a sentence with the MRSC statistics, which show 227 mayor–council municipalities and 54 council–manager municipalities. MRSC also notes that the systems aren't fully separate, as some mayor–council cities have administrators who have powers similar to a city manager. SounderBruce 03:22, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well if nobody else has an issue with the mayor/manager being in the lead/text and not in the list, I will Support based on everything else which is excellent. Mattximus (talk) 21:37, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of nycterids

[edit]
Nominator(s): PresN 15:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mammal list #51 in our perpetual series and bat list #10: Nycteridae, or the slit-faced bats. With only 14 species, this is one more small step in our bat journey, just a few more small bats with oddly-shaped faces. Though at least we have a fierce-looking dude for our lead image. This is the last small list for bats, as we're almost done- just one more big list, one overhaul of the fruit bat FL to match the rest, and our final capstone list. As always, this list reflects formatting discussions from prior lists as well as the scientific consensus on the family. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 15:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824
ZooBlazer

Source review

  • All refs are reliable, with most from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
  • Consistent formatting
  • Spot checks
    • [2] - checks out
    • [6] - both uses are supported
    • [7] - ditto
    • [10] - all good
    • [13] - supports the info
    • [16] - supports the info
    • [18] - all good

Source review - passes so that's also a support. Nice job with the article! -- ZooBlazer 04:39, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jpeeling
  • The IUCN site lists 16 in the Nycteris genus, Nycteris madagascariensis and Nycteris vinsoni not appearing on this list, are they the "few extinct prehistoric nycterid species" mentioned or are there other reasons for their omission? JP (Talk) 12:44, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jpeeling: No, they should be there- they're not in the ASM, but they were in MSW3 so they should be included. Now added. --PresN 13:56, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kittie discography

[edit]
Nominator(s): Chchcheckit (talk) 09:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because... FA list. Aiming to (eventually) form a Kittie studio albums Good Topic (7 albums; need to finish 2 of them). Yeah. Expanded enough to cover all stuff now??? // Chchcheckit (talk) 09:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ngl: not sure if including sales table is useful given how incomplete it is. Chchcheckit (talk) 09:54, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • There seems to be some inconsistency in whether the band should be treated as singular or plural e.g. you have "In 1998, Kittie recorded its first demo" but shortly afterwards you have "The band released their debut album". I have to confess I can't fully get my head around North American usage in this regard (I am British and we always treat a band as plural no matter how the sentence is worded e.g. we say "Coldplay are releasing an album" not "Coldplay is releasing an album"), so maybe the above is valid..........?
  • "charted within the top forty of Billboard Active Rock Tracks chart" - this should be either "charted within the top forty of Billboard's Active Rock Tracks chart" or "charted within the top forty of the Billboard Active Rock Tracks chart". Both are valid but the current wording is not.
  • "The band's second album Oracle (2001) earned the band" - any way to avoid "The band...the band"....?
  • "was their lowest-charting album in the United States, debuted at number 178 on the Billboard 200" => "was their lowest-charting album in the United States, debuting at number 178 on the Billboard 200"
  • "The band recorded its fifth album, In the Black, in 2008" - the table says 2009
  • Why does only one video album have a ref against the title
  • Some music videos are unsourced -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • File:Kittie at the Opera House 2010.jpg - Creative Commons-Share Alike 3.0 and GNU Documentation License
  • The image and captions are relevant to the article, however, the image needs have alt text

That's my comments ROY is WAR Talk! 03:42, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What would i put in the "alt text" besides the caption? Idk // Chchcheckit (talk) 20:30, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Chchcheckit, you should use visual editor to easy to edit the alt text.
(e.g:File:Taylor Swift at the 2023 MTV Video Music Awards (3).png, the alt text is: "Swift glancing towards her left"). ROY is WAR Talk! 08:38, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
and it was necessarily to add alt text on all images per WP:ALT ROY is WAR Talk! 08:41, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of accolades received by Loki (TV series)

[edit]
Nominator(s): -- ZooBlazer 03:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I took a break from FLC, but I'm back with my second accolades article for an MCU TV series, this time for Loki, one of the few MCU series to get multiple seasons. -- ZooBlazer 03:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Staraction

[edit]
  • based on Marvel Comics featuring the character of the same name. -> based on the Marvel Comics television show featuring the character of the same name, potentially? I'm not very familiar with the article subject but I would imagine Marvel Comics is an adjective.
    Done
  • and two Writers Guild of America Award -> and two Writers Guild of America Awards
    Done
  • Loki was nominated for four Critics' Choice Television Awards and in genre awards, the series won one Critics' Choice Super Award and one Saturn Award, and was nominated for a Harvey Award, a Hugo Award, and a Dragon Award. -> Loki was nominated for four Critics' Choice Television Awards and in genre awards, a Harvey Award, a Hugo Award, and a Dragon Award, and won one Critics' Choice Super Award. potentially? As it stands the sentence feels overly long.
    I did a mix of what you did, and also just ended up splitting it into 2 sentences.
  • The image provided is under a compatible license, has proper alt text and captioning, and is relevant to the article.
  • Sources used look reliable, and it looks like citations use CS1 and M D, Y formatting throughout although another source review is needed, at least for WP:HIGHQUALITY, since I'm not familiar with source quality for films. (This is also my first ever source review, so someone should probably go through and make sure I'm not missing something!)
  • Source spot check of eight refs, randomly selected:
  • Ref 13 checks out.
  • Ref 37 checks out.
  • Ref 7 checks out.
  • Ref 40 checks out. Although, this source potentially is better since it includes the date of the ceremony as well?
  • The date of the article in this case matches the ceremony date.
  • Ref 29 checks out. Although, this source from the same publisher potentially is better since it clarifies that Loki did not win and includes the date of the ceremony. I'm also unsure about the high quality-ness of Comics Beat, which looks to be a blog (but again, I'm not familiar with sources for this subject). Perhaps you could use the winners and nominees pages for that year instead? Let me know your thoughts.
  • I'm not a main editor of accolades articles, but it seems that if the award is not won, then the ref remains the nomination ref.
  • Ref 47 checks out.
  • Ref 23 checks out.
  • Ref 10 checks out.

Well done @ZooBlazer; let me know once you've gone through my feedback, and if you disagree or would like to discuss any of it! Staraction (talk | contribs) 05:19, 21 January 2025 (UTC) (please ping on reply)[reply]

@Staraction Thanks for the review! I think I replied to everything above. -- ZooBlazer 06:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good; support on images and prose, and the source review parts that I did. Staraction (talk | contribs) 16:02, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sgubaldo

[edit]

Putting myself down. Sgubaldo (talk) 17:58, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • You seem to be missing some awards; From a quick skim of this IMDB page, I found one more Hugo Award, one more World Soundtrack Award, one more Set Decorators Society Award, one International Film Music Critics Award, two more Hollywood Professional Association Awards. I'd go through and see if there's anything else missing.
  • In the table, the scope for header cells which cover more than one row should be "rowgroup", not "row".
  • Could you center the references (e.g. style="text-align:center;" | <ref name="ArtDirectorsAwards2022"> or just align="center" | <ref name="ArtDirectorsAwards2022">)?
  • All movie titles/tv show titles in the references should be italicised as far as I'm aware; see the fourth bullet point of MOS:CONFORMTITLE.
  • Ref. 32 missing wikilink to HMMA.
  • Ref. 20's website has changed the way they presented the content. Either remove url-status=live or change title, etc.
  • Ditto with Ref. 43.
  • 2024 Golden Reel Categories categories missing wikilink in the table.

I don't have any prose concerns. Sgubaldo (talk) 19:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sgubaldo Thanks for the helpful comments. I think I've addressed everything. Let me know if something else needs dealt with. -- ZooBlazer 23:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two more:
  • You've repeated the same HPAA ceremony date twice.
  • The people's names in the "recipient(s)" column should sort based on surname, not forename (the surname of the first person listed if there's more than one). Sgubaldo (talk) 00:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sgubaldo Both things should be addressed now. -- ZooBlazer 01:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just one final comment that Ref. 47 has the wrong date (July 16 instead of July 18 on the website), but I can support already. Sgubaldo (talk) 01:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Thank you for the support! -- ZooBlazer 01:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian Figure Skating Championships

[edit]
Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I have been attempting to streamline the figure skating national championship articles lately so they all appear uniform. The Ukrainian article has been fully audited and verified to sources. I have gone through and personally verified every entry. I believe I have properly formatted all of the sources in a uniform style. (This was an issue with my previous nomination a while back.) If anyone can suggest a bot or an automated method to archive the sources, please let me know. All of the tables are properly formatted and meet Wikipedia's MOS requirements. While I have made strong headway on many countries' respective articles, the Ukrainian article is one of only two which are fully complete and sourced through the present day (the other, BTW, is Estonia). Additionally, due to the current situation in Ukraine, I believe this subject may be of heightened interest. Please let me know if there are any questions or concerns, or if you have any suggestions on how to improve this article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Comments

[edit]

List of Hot Adult Contemporary number ones of 1984

[edit]
Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With the 1982 list having just been promoted and the 1983 list having significant support, here's the 1984 list. In this particular year, two of the guys behind one of the most famous heavy rock songs of all time made their first appearance on a chart historically more used to the likes of Barry Manilow and the Carpenters and went all the way to number one. Feedback as always will be most gratefully received and swiftly acted upon! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
MPGuy2824

Hey man im josh

[edit]

Source review: Passed

  • Reliable enough for the information being cited
  • Consistent date formatting
  • Consistent and proper reference formatting
  • Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
  • Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for

I got nothing. Great stuff Chris. Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:19, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OlifanofmrTennant

[edit]
Table has row scopes
Table has column scopes
Table has a screen reader only caption
All four images have proper alt text
Everything sorts properly
Several refs are missing archive urls
Ref 6 needs the "|url-access=subscription" parameter
Sources are consistantly linked
All but ref 4 are consistently using the MDY format
Probably use the "Use MDY dates" template.
Spot checked 15 sources and everything lined up.
In the Stevie Wonder image shouldnt Academy Award be linked?
That's all I got ping when done. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant: - date and access parameter fixed. I have run the IABot on this article five or six times and some of the refs it simply refuses to archive, no idea why -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:31, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah sometimes IAbot just doesn’t work. Try manually archiving the refs but I won’t hold on that Support Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 08:46, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ZooBlazer

[edit]

I was going to try to be nitpicky just to find some sort of issue, but everything looks good already. Well done yet again with this series of lists! Support. -- ZooBlazer 07:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Magnum P.I. (2018 TV series) episodes

[edit]
Nominator(s): TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:53, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Magnum P.I. is the 2018 reboot of the well-known 1980–1988 televisions series of the same name. While I haven't seen the original, I first became interest in the reboot after it was developed by the same person who oversaw the 2010 reboot of Hawaii Five-O, one of my favorite television series. Anyways, I have been (very slowly) working my way towards a GT for the rebooted Magnum and so comes another stop at FLC. This is the list of episodes page for the series and is complete with a full list of the five seasons and a lead with an overview of the program. TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:53, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
ChrisTheDude
  • "The remainder of the cast is made up by" =>"The remainder of the cast is made up of"
  • "Season three was delayed as a result of the COVID-19 impact on television." - this doesn't read very naturally. Maybe just "Season three was delayed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic"
  • "Despite being a top-25 rated series, CBS cancelled it six days later" => "Despite it being a top-25 rated series, CBS cancelled it six days later" (current structure indicates that CBS itself was a top-25 show)
  • "NBC picked the program up for an additional 20-episodes" - no reason for that hyphen there
  • " the performers contracts" => " the performers' contracts"
  • "Magnum P.I. shares a fictional universe with the 2010 reboot of Hawaii Five-O, and the 2016 reboot of MacGyver; the former of which, Magnum P.I. had a crossover event with in 2020" => "Magnum P.I. shares a fictional universe with the 2010 reboot of Hawaii Five-O, and the 2016 reboot of MacGyver; Magnum P.I. had a crossover event with the former in 2020"
  • That's what I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OlifanofmrTennat
Checked 25 sources any everything checked out
Date formatting is consistent on the main article
The transcluded portions of the season articles are also consistant
Sources in the lead are consistantly linked while sources on the tables aren't
That's all I got Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 10:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
MPGuy2824
Jpeeling
  • It appears episode 11 and 13 of series 1 are in the wrong order.
  • TV viewers figures picked from the 'Programming Insider' source are inconsistent with the figure used, episodes 87, 88 and 92 use the 'Live + Same Day ratings' which looks to be in in-keeping with prior sources, episodes 93 to 96 use the first first hour figures instead and episodes 89 to 91 use a figure that doesn't match either.
  • Series 2, episode 1 is listed as "Payback is for Beginners" but appears to be titled "Payback for Beginners" on some sources, can this be checked
  • Inconsistency points - Alexandra La Roche or Alexandra LaRoche, Ruba Nadda or Rubba Nada

JP (Talk) 13:47, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpeeling: I've fixed the first two points. I couldn't find an official source on point three (it's actually listed both ways depending on the source), so I added it as an alternative title.
Alexandra LaRoche/La Roche and Ruba Nadda/Nada are based on the press releases for the episodes (for Alexandra: this one uses La Roche, but this one uses LaRoche; for Ruba: this one and this one use Nada, but this one and this one use Nadda). When there's a discrepancy like this, we typically go with what's credited on-screen, but unfortunately the series isn't streaming right now, so I can't personally verify. TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of World Heritage Sites in Mongolia

[edit]
Nominator(s): Tone 21:07, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mongolia has 6 World Heritage Sites and 11 sites on its tentative list. Standard style. The nomination for Japan is already seeing some support so I am adding a new one. Tone 21:07, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]
  • All citations are appropriately formatted in a consistent manner.
  • All citations are also from UNESCO; would appreciate some source diversity here, especially some third-party coverage. The list could benefit from using these in the lead to provide context for the listed and tentative sites, as well as Mongolia's own thoughts on the honors (if possible).

Would like to see more sources to help round out this list. SounderBruce 04:23, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The issue I am having with non-UNESCO sources is that they are typically directly derived, thus not providing any added value, or are tourist sites or blogs which again are not particular helpful. I quick-checked national ministry of culture, that would be a good source, but I didn't find anything. I am, of course, open to suggestions. Tone 08:34, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tone, you may find additional sourcing in Christopher Atwood's Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire (2004), which you can find here. It provides detail on all the World Heritage sites (albeit some under different names) and some of the tentative list. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:42, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • File:Mongolia location map 2.svg - Public Domain
  • File:Uvs-Nuur Hollow, Mongolia, Russia, Landsat-7 CROP.jpg - Public Domain, probably use a more exact source link
  • File:Orchon-mongolei.JPG - CC BY-SA 2.0
  • File:Petroglyphic Complexes of the Altai, Mongolia.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
  • File:Burkhan Khaldun mount3.jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0
  • File:White-naped crane arp.jpg - Public Domain
  • File:Deer stones.jpg - Free Art License
  • File:Wild camel Mongolia.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
  • File:'Fighting dinosaurs'Tugrugeen Shireh, Gobi Desert, 1971.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0, would there be any source to this?
  • File:The book of antelopes (1894) Gazella gutturosa.png - Public Domain
  • File:Amarbayasgalant monastery temple 01.JPG - Public Domain
  • File:Mongolia 104.JPG - CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Khavtsgait Petroglyphs 11.jpg - CC0
  • File:Tavan Bogd Mountain.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Otgon tenger uul 2009.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
  • All images are relevant to the article and have alt text.

List of Academic All-America Team Members of the Year

[edit]
Nominator(s): TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because following the successful promotions at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Football Academic All-America Team Members of the Year/archive2 in July, Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Women's Basketball Academic All-America Team Members of the Year/archive1 in November and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Men's Basketball Academic All-America Team Members of the Year/archive1 today, I think this is a good candidate. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
MPGuy2824

List of Kristen Bell performances

[edit]
Nominator(s): Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:36, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Worked on this a while back then I never finished it because I forgot to... so i've finished it and believe that it should pass FLC Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:36, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh

[edit]

This review is based on this version of the article.

Source review: Passed

  • Reliable enough for the information being cited
  • Consistent date formatting
  • Consistent and proper reference formatting
  • Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
  • Spot checks on sources match what they are being cited for

Feedback:

  • Table needs column scopes Done
  • Table needs a title for accessibility Done
  • You used row=scope instead of scope=row, which needs to be fixed Done
  • When the rowspan is 2 or more, you should use rowgroup as the scope instead Done
  • There's a couple instances, such as 2005 and 2010 in the film table, where there's efforts to set the scope twice Done
  • Gossip girl row under television says 21–2023, I assume this was meant to be 2021–2023 Done
  • Image needs alt text Done
  • Ref 2 – Needs publish date Done
  • Ref 2 – Says it was published by Jen Juneau, not Jim Done
  • Refs 6, 11, 64, 75, and 77 – Change to TV Guide instead of TVGuide, to match the target Done
  • Ref 20 – Add Associated Press as the agency Done
  • Ref 20 – Add publish date Done
  • Refs 23, 52, 53, 59, 63, 70 – "ScreenRant" -> "Screen Rant" to match the target Done
  • Ref 29, 31, 67, 115 – (The New York Times sources)Add the url-access parameter to note that this story is accessed in full with a subscription by adding |url-access=subscription Done
  • Refs 38 and 88 – "The Los Angeles Times" -> "Los Angeles Times" to match the target Done
  • Ref 40 – "The Independtf" -> "The Independent" Done
  • Ref 46 – Add url-access parameter (The Atlantic) Done
  • Refs 82, 121, 122 – (Rolling Stone)
    • What about them? Done

That's what I've got to start and I'll have more feedback after this has been addressed. Please ping me when the above has been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hey man im josh: Done with everything except the last one Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh sorry, the last one was meant to indicate it also needed the url-access parameter @OlifanofmrTennant. I'll try to go through for more feedback today.. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:44, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the delay in getting back to this.
  • You were missing a number of scopes still, but the cells were led with an exclamation point, making the first cell in a row grey, which sometimes makes people mistakenly think a scope has been defined
  • Some of the scopes were row when they should have been rowgroup, fixed
  • There were duplicate exclamation points in a spot
  • There were duplicate scope definitions in the same spot
  • I fixed the above issues, but please try to more diligent and careful about the scopes in future noms
The rest of the review is based on this version of the page.
  • Refs 5 and 72 – One uses "E!" and the other uses "E! Online" Done
  • Ref 34 and 41 – Cinema Blend appears to be showing up in my source highlighter as not reliable, any thoughts on its reliability?
  • Cinemablend is published by Future plc, this FAQ breifly touches on their editorial policy and a little more detail can be found on their about page.
  • Ref 35 – Author is listed as Joseph C. Lin instead of Joseph Lin. Typically we'd want to use whatever they list themselves as instead of cutting it short, since some authors do opt to include a middle initial for various reasons. Done
  • Ref 38 and 88 – Mark as a subscription required (Los Angeles Times) Done'
  • Ref 40 – Needs author and publish date
  • Ref 43 – Add publish date Done
  • Ref 45 – Add publish date Done
  • Ref 48 – Needs a publish date Done
  • Ref 55 – Add author Done
  • Ref 56 – Add publish date Done
  • Ref 60 – Add author and publish date Done
  • Ref 73 – Add author Done
  • Ref 81 – Add publish date Done
  • Ref 87 – Add publish date Done
  • Ref 90 – Add author Done
  • Ref 92 – Change "TIME" to "Time" - match target / be consistent withref 35 Done
  • Ref 92 – Add author Done
  • Ref 103 – Mark as subscription required (The Boston Globe) Done
  • Ref 107 – Add publish date Done
That should be the gist of what I got (ping me when done). Hey man im josh (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hey man im josh: done also to explain the first half, I didn't alter the table manually to use scopes I used the find and replace tool. Didn't think it would have such a poor result so I will not be using it going forward Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • Comment - not sure what is expected on this type of list but a bit concerned regarding the role column generally lacking sourcing. The table lists full name of the roles, when many of the references identify the first name of her character only which might be as much as you could expect, however some references don't list a character name at all - 'Safety Not Guaranteed', 'Stuck in Love', 'The Boss' and 'CHiPs' for example, can alternative sources be found? The reference used for 'Big Mouth' only mentions her role in 'Central Park'. The reference used for 'Gracie's Choice' doesn't even mention that film at all, except for in the comments, so can't identify if Gracie Thompsom is a typo. JP (Talk) 14:00, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Replaced the Gracie's choice citation but as for the role, in my experience, all you need is a source confirming the actor appeared in the film, the role is confirmed by the movie/show. Similar to how you Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:22, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jpeeling: forgot to ping Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 21:54, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TheDoctorWho

[edit]
  • "and appeared in a Broadway revival of The Crucible the following year" - what is the following year? An initial year is never stated. Done
  • "appeared in a Broadway" -> "appearing in a broadway" Done
  • "lead role of Eleanor Shellstrop on the critically acclaimed NBC comedy series" - 'critically acclaimed' is loaded language and requires multiple high quality sources to support it. While I don't disagree, such sources aren't attached to the statement, you either need to remove them or add sources. MOS:ACCLAIMED/WP:PUFFERY. Done
  • Can I ask about the reliability of Moviefone? It appears that they once referred to their authors as "bloggers" ([1]) and Monika isn't listed there at that time.
    • The bloggers labeled appears to be a branding thing, I'll see if its replaceable.
  • There's quite a few listings in the television section that specify a number of episodes. WP:FILMOGRAPHY requires many of these to be directly sourced - "Do not list the number of episodes if the role is a starring or major recurring role unless it is sourced. If the role does not cover the entire run of a television program, list the seasons involved instead." - can I ask if this advice is followed? Done
  • Why is the role field empty for The Tiny Chef Show? Added
  • The role in A Man on the Inside is uncredited per the source - any reason why uncredited roles are noted in some places and not others?
    • As far as I'm aware all roles that are un-credited are listed as such, I didnt create the table only sourced it. I don't really want to check the credits of 100 or so different projects
  • It appears that there are some web sources that are still live that haven't been archived. Done
  • There are also some MOS:CURLY quotes in reference titles
    • Which ones? I tried a script but nothing came up
  • And at least one incorrect date format.

I think that's all I have, great work!TheDoctorWho (talk) 23:19, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead an ran them, but this is my preferred dumb quote converter, this for dates. No worries about checking 100 credits, but I would at least go ahead and add the uncredited mention to the single credit I mentioned. I can see you've already run IA Bot and I know it's been a little pesky lately, so I'm satisfied with that as well If they the "bloggers" is a branding thing, it's not an issue, I just wanted to check. Just the "critically acclaimed" and filmography number of episodes to go before I pass the sources. TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:29, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1960 Winter Olympics medal table

[edit]
Nominator(s): Hey man im josh (talk) 18:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is Olympic medal table #7 for me (Winter Games nom #3), and it's the the shortest one I've worked on so far. There were no NOCs as a first time medalist or first time gold medalists, no stripped medals to mention, and only a single first time participant. It was a relatively run of the mill event, with high stakes of course. As always, I will do my best to respond to all comments as quickly as possible, and I appreciate any and all feedback that is given. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

Source review

[edit]
Dates are consistantly formatted
Everything is linked
Spotchecked all sources and everything lines up.
Support unrelated but "California, United States" violated MOS:GEOLINK I'm assuming this will be fixed so happy to support. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:05, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh boy am I grateful to have gotten a quick source review, thanks @OlifanofmrTennant! I've addressed the MOS:GEOLINK issue, which I appreciate you pointing out. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:33, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BP!

[edit]

Placeholder. If you have a moment or are willing to review my FAC Ethan Winters, I'll also appreciate it! Unfortunately, it is not flc. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 13:10, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • The 1960 Winter Olympics, officially known as the VIII Olympic Winter Games and also known as Squaw Valley 1960, were a winter multi-sport event held from February 18 to 28, 1960, at the Squaw Valley Resort (now known as Palisades Tahoe) in Squaw Valley (now known as Olympic Valley), California, United States. This seems to be a long ass sentence. Can you maybe reword/rephrase it?
  • Can you bundle those 4 citations together so that the article will look better?
  • Can you maybe capitalize the "D" from the surname "De Bruin"? 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 13:10, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • This seems to be a long ass sentence. Can you maybe reword/rephrase it? – Long as the sentence may be, it's following the standard format, and there's nothing technically wrong with it from my perspective.
    • Can you bundle those 4 citations together so that the article will look better? – I typically do not bundle citations unless there's five of them. My opinion is that this does not negatively affect the readability or make the article look worse.
    • Can you maybe capitalize the "D" from the surname "De Bruin"? – The source does not capitalize it, and if you look at De Bruin, you'll see it's a fairly common thing not to do so.
    I appreciate you taking a look over the article and providing a review @Boneless Pizza!. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:24, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Just following up to see if I've addressed all of your points or whether there's any outstanding issue(s) @Boneless Pizza!. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:44, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi. I don't see any other issues at the article now. So, I'll Support this nom. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 22:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ZooBlazer

[edit]
  • Image has alt text, appropriately licensed, and the caption fits the article. So I guess with just one image, the image review passes
  • Do you need all 4 of the first references together, or is it possible to cut it down one or two?
  • Not sure if it's something absolutely needed or not, but based on reviews of my lists in the past, I've been told to include |+ {{sronly|TEXT HERE}} for the tables, so maybe add that.

Overall the article looks good! My comments are mostly nitpicking. It's crazy how many more medals are awarded these days compared to this Olympics. -- ZooBlazer 22:00, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ZooBlazer: Thank you for the review! To address your points, I tried very hard to find the appropriate references to not use 4 refs on the lead sentence, but due to the name changes and the variety of information contained in the lead sentence, I was unable to. As for the suggested template, the purpose of that is to add a table title for screen readers. In that template, that heading is meant to only be displayed for screen readers. This is not necessary when there's already a title added to the table, but some people opt to hide a table title while others choose to include it. In this case, and in the case of most Olympic medal tables, it makes more sense to include the caption with the source as the top 10 entries for the table are often transcluded into the main Olympics article.
Never feel bad nitpicking any of my noms, it only serves to make them better and pushes me to consider various aspects of what I'm doing when I'm doing them! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:13, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All good then. Happy to support! -- ZooBlazer 17:36, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthewrb

[edit]

All of these are minor nitpicks, list looks good otherwise. ~ Matthewrb Let's connect · Here to help 21:41, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review @Matthewrb! It's my perspective that the official site link is better shared from the main article, which it is shared from. I also feel the same way about the commons category, since this is, in a sense/from my perspective, a subset/subtopic of the event. If there were a relevant sub topic of the commons category I think I'd be on board, such as Commons:Category:Sportspeople with 2024 Summer Olympics medals or Commons:Category:Podiums at the 2024 Summer Olympics. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:36, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, that does make sense. Since all of my concerns are addressed, I support this nomination. ~ Matthewrb Let's connect · Here to help 18:12, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of emballonurids

[edit]
Nominator(s): PresN 18:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mammal list #50 in our perpetual series is bat list #9: Emballonuridae, or the sheath-tailed bats. We're most of the way through bats now, and this family has a bit more size variation, from the size of your thumb to the size of your whole hand. Other than that, though, it's a bunch of similar-looking bats from around the world, and I don't have any particularly unique photos for this one. As always, this list reflects formatting discussions from prior lists as well as the scientific consensus on the family. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 18:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • Excellent work as ever! My only quibble is that A member of this family is called an emballonurid, a sheath-tailed bat, or a sac-winged bat kinda makes it sound as if any one of these bats can be called any one of those three things, but from the list it appears that some are sheath-tailed bats but are not sac-winged bats, some are not sheath-tailed bats but are sac-winged bats, and some (e.g. the ghost bats) are neither.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:45, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude: That is confusing; redid it as "Members of this family are called emballonurids, and include sheath-tailed bats, sac-winged bats, and tomb bats." --PresN 14:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:10, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jpeeling

[edit]
  • There appears to be a slight discrepancy as to whether there are 54 or 55 species, the prose states 55 but the table and conservation status summary only total 54, could you check this please. JP (Talk) 10:54, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jpeeling: There's 54, good catch, thank you. I had counted by searching for "Species table/row" rather than adding things up, and didn't notice that "Templates used in this preview" added one more. --PresN 13:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of other minor bits spotted:

  • In your table, the 'Yellow-bellied sheath-tailed bat' is listed as Australia only, but the UICN site lists Papua New Guinea, albeit with a tiny spot on the map
  • Missed that tiny spot, fixed.
  • For the 'Lesser dog-like bat', a map is not included in the table but there is one on the bat's page, any reason this was not included here?
  • Added
  • Portuguese Wikipedia has a page for Peropteryx pallidoptera (Pale-winged dog-like bat) with a picture, is this definitely the right bat and can it be used here?
  • Ah, and a map, the categories were messed up on commons so I didn't see them. Added.
  • There are a few images on Commons entitled Centronycteris centralis (Thomas's shaggy bat) and Paremballonura atrata (Peters's sheath-tailed bat), can any of these be used here?
  • Added
  • The maps on Wikipedia for the 'Lesser ghost bat' and 'Greater dog-like bat' do not appear to match with the UICN site exactly, I presume they may have updated theirs since those were created for Wikipedia, is there any way the Wikipedia ones could be updated?
  • There currently is not a project to update map images, many of which were made 10 years ago, but I do plan to find a way to generate new images directly from the IUCN this year.

JP (Talk) 16:50, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpeeling: Replied inline. --PresN 00:05, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh

[edit]
  • Source review: Passed
    • Reliable enough for the information being cited
    • Consistent date formatting
    • Consistent and proper reference formatting
    • Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
    • Spot checks on 11 sources match what they are being cited for

Looks good! Support Hey man im josh (talk) 18:06, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Billboard Adult Contemporary number ones of 1983

[edit]
Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:14, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With the 1981 list having just got promoted and the 1982 list having quite a bit of support, here's the 1983 list. A couple of these entries appear on lists I have previously promoted, as one was also a country number one and one was also a black/soul/R&B number one! Comments as ever will be most gratefully received and swiftly acted upon..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:14, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
MPGuy2824

Hey man im josh

[edit]

Source review: Passed

  • Reliable enough for the information being cited
  • Consistent date formatting
  • Consistent and proper reference formatting
  • Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
  • Spot checks on sources match what they are being cited for

Feedback:

  • Ref 6 – Mark as subscription needed

Support, as I'm sure you'll address that and I found nothing else to critique. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:14, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have done so :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NØ

[edit]

List of Billboard Latin Pop Albums number ones from the 1990s

[edit]
Nominator(s): Erick (talk) 23:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a while since I posted any FL nominees, sorry about that, been fighting my personal demons. Anyways, this is a continuation of List of Billboard Latin Pop Albums number ones from the 1980s. As always, I'm open to any address any issues brought up on this list! Erick (talk) 23:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History6042

[edit]
  • "has since became a sub chart" -> "has since become a sub chart"
  • "established on the same week" -> "established in the same week"
  • "requiring to have 70% of its content" -> "requiring it to have 70% of its content"
  • "Latin albums in the US" -> "Latin album in the US"
  • "Ricky Martin, Luis Miguel, dubbed" -> "Ricky Martin, and Luis Miguel, dubbed"
  • "credited for reviving mainstream interest" -> "credited with reviving mainstream interest"
  • History6042😊 (Contact me) 02:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @History6042 Fixed all that you addressed, thanks for the comments! Erick (talk) 02:53, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "The chart was published on a fortnightly basis" - when? Just in this decade? Or always?
  • "The methodology for the chart was amended on the week of July 10, 1993" => "The methodology for the chart was amended with the effect from the week of July 10, 1993"
  • "Additionally, the chart is now published weekly" => "At the same time, the chart began to be published weekly"
  • "has since become a sub char of Top Latin Albums " - when did this happen? Also "chart" is spelt wrong
  • "Billboard also imposed a linguistic rule of an album requiring it to have 70% of its content in Spanish" => "Billboard also imposed a linguistic rule requiring an album to have 70% of its content in Spanish"
  • "which had been in the top spot since the issue dated November 18, 1989." - source?
  • "Other female acts to reach number one on the chart include" => "Other female acts to reach number one on the chart in the 1990s included"
  • "Luis Miguel had the most number one album of the decade" => "Luis Miguel had the most number one albums of the decade"
  • "His album Romance (1991), was" - no reason for that comma
  • "spent 16 weeks on the apex of the chart" => "spent 16 weeks at the apex of the chart"
  • "also reached number-one" => "also reached number one"
  • " Macarena Non Stop (1996) by Los del Río, Macarena Mix (1995)" => " Macarena Non Stop (1996) by Los del Río and Macarena Mix (1995)"
  • "It would be the band's only number one album on the chart" - which band? You listed five in the last sentence.
  • "Three non predominately Spanish-language albums" => "Three predominately non-Spanish-language albums"
  • "Although Supernatural topped the chart on the week of July 3, 1999" => "Although Supernatural topped the chart in the week of July 3, 1999"
  • "Los del Río (pictured in 2009) acheive their only number one on the chart" => "Los del Río (pictured in 2009) achieved their only number one on the chart"
  • The top album on Billboard's year-end chart isn't necessarily the best-selling Latin pop album of the year. It's the best charting based on a methodology which allocates points based on its position each week. I would reword to "Indicates the number one on Billboard's year-end Latin pop albums chart"
  • The note should probably have a bullet point before it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude Thanks as always Chris! Let me know if I missed anything! Erick (talk) 19:37, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and has since become a sub char" - chart is still spelt wrong and "since" still doesn't specify when it became a sub-chart. Other than that, all looks great! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, I think I nailed it down. The same week that the Top Latin Albums chart was established was also when the Latin Pop Albums became a sub chart of it. I fixed the sentence to the best I could, how does it look? Erick (talk) 17:13, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:39, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh

[edit]

This review is based on version of the article.

Source review: Passed

  • Reliable enough for the information being cited
  • Consistent date formatting
  • Consistent and proper reference formatting
  • Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
  • Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for

Feedback:

  • Ricky Martin image has no alt text
  • Ref 7 – It looks like your approach is to link the first instance of a source in references, so with that said... Link to the LA Times
  • Ref 7 and 9 – Need url-access parameters added, as they request a subscription to read
  • Refs 12, 15, and 16 – Your referencing practices seem to be to link the first time a source appears in the references, so only link Recording Industry Association of America in ref 12
  • Ref 17 – First time AllMusic appears, so link it
  • Refs 18, 20, 21, and 22 – For consistency with ref 17, it seems these should be using the website or work parameter for AllMusic instead of the publisher one.

That's what I've got, and you've got nothing to apologize for regarding any type of absence. I'm just thrilled whenever a FLC regular returns or sticks around. Please ping me when the above has been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:41, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hey man im josh Hey there, thanks for your kind comments! The only changes I couldn't fix were the {{Certification Cite Ref}} to disallow multiple to the RIAA and for AllMusic, I corrected the name and moved all of them to publisher since AllMusic is an online music datatbase. Erick (talk) 19:40, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Magiciandude: Makes sense, so long as the AllMusic references are consistent. I'm a bit hung up on the consistency for linking though, as that is one of the main things that I look at when doing reviews. Perhaps you could swap to a different citation template, or link to the source in all references (would be quick with the built in find and replace tool)? Hey man im josh (talk) 19:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hey man im josh If I understand what you're saying, I can just link to the RIAA database and from there, the information can be verified with its searchable database? Erick (talk) 20:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Magiciandude: I see now what the purpose of that template is in regards to auto generating the reference. Yeah, that complicates things a bit, but linking to just the search itself isn't an improvement. This is what I meant when I suggested you convert the references so that the linking can be consistent. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ohhhh, whoops, heh, my bad. I'll keep that mind next time I do a FLC for these kinds of lists. Thanks Josh! Erick (talk) 20:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:05, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jpeeling

[edit]

A few reference bits spotted:

  • Current references 55, 81, 86, 87, 125, 206, 230, 391 and 398 all link to wrong date of Billboard charts
  • "February 15, 1997" is a repeated row
  • References 308 to 310 link to correct date but use wrong year in the title of the reference
  • References 115, 368 links to correct date but wrong date in the title of the reference
  • Second use of reference 5 (Ana Gabriel chart history) placed after statement regarding Selena's 44 weeks at number 1, should this be to Selena's chart history?

JP (Talk) 10:23, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpeeling Thanks for catching those! Let me know if I missed anything else. Erick (talk) 18:10, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

75th Primetime Emmy Awards

[edit]
Nominator(s): Birdienest81talk and RunningTiger123 (talk) 09:55, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We are nominating the 2023 Primetime Emmys because we believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I followed how the 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2024 were written and structured. Note: RunningTiger123 is also listed as a co-nominator since he made considerable and significant contributions to this list. Birdienest81talk 09:55, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • File:75thEmmysPoster.jpeg - Fair use
  • File:Jeremy Allen White, AT&T Center, 2013.jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0
  • File:Quinta Brunson Peabody Awards, Jun 2023.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Kieran Culkin by Gage Skidmore.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Sarah Snook Saphires (cropped).jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0
  • File:SDCC 2015 - Steven Yeun (19674345441) (cropped).jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0
  • File:Ali Wong for Wired.jpg - CC BY 3.0
  • File:Ebon Moss-Bachrach by Gage Skidmore.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Ayo Edebiri (2018) (cropped).jpg - CC BY 2.0
  • File:Matthew Macfadyen 2019.jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0
  • File:Jennifer Coolidge - Cropped.jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0
  • File:20210526—Paul Walter Hauser, interview for "Cruella", LosCriticologos (05m21s).jpg - CC BY 3.0
  • File:Niecy Nash 2010.jpg - CC BY 2.0
  • File:Anthony Anderson 2010.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
  • All images have proper captions, alt text, though must change the images size using |upright rather than a fixed px size.
    @Arconning: I believe Birdienest81 has addressed the image sizing. RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Support on image review :) Arconning (talk) 12:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OlifanofmrTennant

[edit]

* "[Downtown Los Angeles], [California]" MOS:GEOLINK violation

History6042's comments

[edit]
Grammar
[edit]
  • "were honored included All in the Family" -> "were honored were All in the Family" Were makes much more sense here than included.
  • "All in the Family. Ally McBeal, Cheers, Grey's Anatomy, and The Sopranos." -> "All in the Family, Ally McBeal, Cheers, Grey's Anatomy, and The Sopranos." This should be a comma, not a period.
  • "let host Anderson's mom Doris Bowman interrupt", "let host Anderson's mom, Doris Bowman, interrupt"
  • "acceptance speech as "terribly awkward"." -> "acceptance speech was "terribly awkward"."
  • "host Anderson's mom" -> "Anderson's mother" The word host is not necessary here, it's not a title.
WP:MOS
[edit]
@History6042: Updates have been made. RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:04, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "The awards ceremony was held live" - weird wording - how could it be held not live....?
  • "Amazon Freevee and Tubi each earned their first nominations this year" - last two words are redundant, I think
  • "this marked the first time two Black women won both comedy female acting categories in a single year" => "this marked the first time Black women won both comedy female acting categories in a single year" is fine I think
  • "This marked the second year in a row that the ceremony would fall on a Monday" => "This marked the second year in a row that the ceremony fell on a Monday"
  • "The ceremony would be produced by Jesse Collins Entertainment" => "The ceremony was produced by Jesse Collins Entertainment"
  • "not attend promotional events while the strike is ongoing" => "not attend promotional events while the strike was ongoing"
  • "and the winner's emotional acceptance speeches" => "and the winners' emotional acceptance speeches"
  • "It also achieved a 0.87 rating among adults ages 18–49" => "It achieved a 0.87 rating among adults ages 18–49" (the "also" doesn't seem to connect to anything in the previous sentence, which doesn't talk in terms of ratings.
  • "The annual In Memoriam segment was introduced by Rob Reiner and Sally Struthers, which included" - I think "Rob Reiner and Sally Struthers introduced the annual In Memoriam segment, which included" would read more naturally
  • That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:33, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude: I slightly tweaked how I reworded your fourth bullet point; all other suggestions have been implemented. RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:28, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review from TheDoctorWho

[edit]
  • All images have alt text.
  • All images are free to use except for the poster, which has a proper fair use rationale.
  • TVLine needs linked in Ref 16.
  • Refs 2, 15, 17, 20, 27, 29, 44, 45, 47, 66, 73, 76, 86, and 87 lack archives.
  • I noticed a few MOS:CURLY quotes in some titles, I suggest running this script.
  • The sources also use a mix of title and sentence case, only one format should be used. There's also a script for this.
  • Spot checked refs 1, 14, 19, 21, 29, 58, 70, 78, 95, and 96, everything checks out except for the below.
    • I don't see a mention in ref 1 that it was three hours long, there are brief mentions of when it went off air and 20 second overage, unless I'm missing something?

Great work! Just a few comments, mainly around archives and titles. TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:33, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TheDoctorWho: Regarding ref 1, the second paragraph states it ran for 3 hours (and the lines you mention confirm it did not run over). Regarding the archives, IABot doesn't seem to be able to add the archives – not sure why, but I can try taking a look and manually adding them (or at least make sure they've been added to Wayback Machine). All other items should be addressed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 06:38, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Would have helped me find the proper sentence in ref 1 if I had CTRL-F'd "three" instead of "3" 😂, my apologies. I won't hold this back because of the pesky IABot, I've struggled with it not picking up archives myself. Everything else checks out. Source and image reviews pass and I'm happy to support. TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:45, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Was just about to follow up on my previous comment – I can confirm all of the sources are in Wayback Machine, so even if IABot is having issues they'll be available. RunningTiger123 (talk) 06:46, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh

[edit]

This review is based on this version of the article.

Source review: Passed

  • Reliable enough for the information being cited
  • Consistent date formatting
  • Consistent and proper reference formatting
  • Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
  • Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for

Feedback:

  • Ref 12 – Add url-access parameter
  • Ref 75 – Add url-access parameter
  • Ref 92 – Add url-access parameter
  • Ref 82 – Needs a publish date

That's all I've got, good stuff as always. Please ping me when the above has been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:17, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hey man im josh: All done except the last one – I think you meant ref 83? RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I must have, yes. I see it's now been addressed, so support. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Older nominations

[edit]

List of Dallas Cowboys seasons

[edit]
Nominator(s): Hey man im josh (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Dallas Cowboys are, historically speaking, one of the NFL's most successful franchises, holding the second-highest all-time regular season record and having won 5 Super Bowls. The list is an overview of their season-by-season results and awards. This is #4 in my ongoing effort to get all of the lists of NFL team seasons to featured list. As always, I will do my best to be as responsive as possible and address all criticisms and suggestions that come up. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "Originally a member of the NFL Western Conference, the team was moved to the NFL Eastern Conference in 1961 after just one season, they remained in this conference until 1970." - this doesn't work grammatically. I would suggest either "Originally a member of the NFL Western Conference, the team was moved to the NFL Eastern Conference in 1961 after just one season; they remained in this conference until 1970." (note punctuation change) or "Originally a member of the NFL Western Conference, the team was moved to the NFL Eastern Conference in 1961 after just one season and remained in this conference until 1970."
  • "the Cowboys division, the NFL Capitol Division" => "the Cowboys' division, the NFL Capitol Division"
  • "total championships amongst all 32 NFL franchise" => "total championships amongst all 32 NFL franchises"
  • "The team currently has had" - I believe the word "currently" is slightly frowned on, so change to "as of 2025"
  • Image caption: "During which time he had 20 consecutive winning seasons" => "During this time he had 20 consecutive winning seasons"
  • SuperBowl winning rows use a symbol which the key says relates only to years up to 1969....?
  • Footnote: "Up to 1967, the league was either divided its two divisions into, two conferences, or neither" - this is a bit mangled. I think what is meant is "Up to 1967, the league was either divided into two divisions, two conferences, or neither" but I am no expert and might be wrong
  • That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Originally a member of the NFL Western Conference, the team was moved to the NFL Eastern Conference in 1961 after just one season, they remained in this conference until 1970." - this doesn't work grammatically. I would suggest either "Originally a member of the NFL Western Conference, the team was moved to the NFL Eastern Conference in 1961 after just one season; they remained in this conference until 1970." (note punctuation change) or "Originally a member of the NFL Western Conference, the team was moved to the NFL Eastern Conference in 1961 after just one season and remained in this conference until 1970." – Done with the punctuation change. I need to get better about utilizing semi colons
    • "the Cowboys division, the NFL Capitol Division" -> "the Cowboys' division, the NFL Capitol Division" – Done.
    • "total championships amongst all 32 NFL franchise" -> "total championships amongst all 32 NFL franchises" – Pluralized
    • "The team currently has had" - I believe the word "currently" is slightly frowned on, so change to "as of 2025" – You're right, we do frown on that. Changed to simply "The team has had...", to match a past promotion. Also added to the beginning of the paragraph "As of the of the 2024 season...", which should clarify that the numbers in that paragraph apply to that entire paragraph.
    • Image caption: "During which time he had 20 consecutive winning seasons" -> "During this time he had 20 consecutive winning seasons" – Done.
    • SuperBowl winning rows use a symbol which the key says relates only to years up to 1969....? – Ack! Tried to use a consistent key across season articles and mistakenly left the old one in place. I've fixed this and double checked other symbols to be sure, and it should all be good now.
    • Footnote: "Up to 1967, the league was either divided its two divisions into, two conferences, or neither" - this is a bit mangled. I think what is meant is "Up to 1967, the league was either divided into two divisions, two conferences, or neither" but I am no expert and might be wrong – No you're right, I've made the fix, thank you.
    As always I greatly appreciate the feedback ChrisTheDude! Your suggestions always make the articles I work on better  :) Hey man im josh (talk) 15:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

OlifanofmrTennant

[edit]

Comments from Jpeeling

[edit]

Appears to be a few bits in the lead that may need an update and reworded:

  • "The Cowboys have won their division 25 times" ref shows 26 division wins and clear second
  • "They have also made the playoffs 36 times, an NFL record shared with the Green Bay Packers" ref shows Packers are clear leaders with 37
  • "eighth-best playoff record in terms of win–loss percentage" ref shows they are now ninth

JP (Talk) 10:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • "The Cowboys have won their division 25 times" ref shows 26 division wins and clear second – It may seem clear if you're unfamiliar with the situation, but that number actually seems to include when they led a conference, prior to when there were divisions in that case. What appears to have been included was them leading the conference in 1966. It appears I factored this in mentally without finishing up the search when I originally worked on this. This did however lead me down the rabbit down, and makes it clear that the Packers have actually only won their division 22 times, but they won their conference (when there were no divisions) 5 times, led the league in regular season 3 times (before the NFL Championship existed, which they are credited a division win for), and were credited for 1982, when there was essentially no divisions and they finished 3rd in their conference, which is why their total is listed as 31 instead. Given the ambiguity of the situation, I've replaced the text to state they won their division 25 times, with a different reference, and mentioned that they lead their division in wins instead.
  • "They have also made the playoffs 36 times, an NFL record shared with the Green Bay Packers" ref shows Packers are clear leaders with 37 – Fixed. Missed when I did my updates on this.
  • "eighth-best playoff record in terms of win–loss percentage" ref shows they are now ninth – Looks like this has been changed as of Saturday after the Chiefs', so this has now bene updated.
I believe I've addressed all of your points @Jpeeling:, thank you for the feedback. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:00, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just following up to confirm I've addressed your feedback @Jpeeling. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you have addressed my comments, thank you JP (Talk) 17:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review from Octave

[edit]

Happy to help out with a source review. See below for comments:

Reviewed diff/1270648368

Reliability

  • The only question I have is on Pro Football Network. From a search, Josiah Caswell seems to be a journalism student: that makes me pause. What makes this a reliable source?
  • Otherwise, reliable sources used consistently.

Formatting

  • Could we have consistent title or sentence case?
  • Mdy used consistently.
  • References formatted with proper citation templates.
  • Wikilinks used consistently and appropriately.

Other comments

Spotchecks

  • Ref 1a & b: pass, not sure we need a citation in the lead image but it's not a problem.
  • Ref 2: pass.
  • Ref 3a: pass.
  • Refs 3b and 10: I'm not seeing verification for "(1974 and 1984)."
  • Ref 5a: surely "they remained in this conference until 1970" cannot be verified by a source from 1961?
  • Ref 6b: pass.
  • Ref 9a, b & c: pass.
  • Ref 12: pass.
  • Refs 14 and 15: not seeing verification for the AP award, suggest using [6].
  • Ref 18: pass.
  • Refs 20 and 42: pass.
  • Ref 23: pass.
  • Ref 27: pass.
  • Ref 34: pass.
  • Ref 46: pass.
  • Ref 51: pass.
  • Ref 66: pass.
  • Ref 72: pass.
  • Ref 80: pass.
  • Refs 84 and 85: pass.
  • Ref 91: pass
  • Refs 96 and 97: pass.
  • Ref 99: pass.

That's all, happy to pass this once these minor problems are sorted. Nice work. UpTheOctave! • 8va? 22:17, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UpTheOctave!: I believe I've addressed everything under other comments. As for the cases used, I don't typically adjust the casing used at the source unless it's all capitalized, at which point I change it to title case. Lastly, regarding Pro Football Network, I do believe they're generally treated as reliable enough for non-controversial information (Jimmy Johnson coach of the year), I went ahead and replaced the reference out of laziness instead of trying to dig up said discussion.
I think and hope that addresses everything! Hey man im josh (talk) 23:15, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy with the comments, thank you for replacing the Pro Football Network source. I see a set title format as part of consistent citation formatting, but I know opinions can differ. Only the issues identified in spotchecks to fix now, specifically refs 3b and 10, ref 5a, and refs 14 and 15. UpTheOctave! • 8va? 16:33, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Shame on me, I missed those aspects of the review when I was dealing with this last night on mobile.
  • Refs 3b and 10: I'm not seeing verification for "(1974 and 1984)." – Re-used a ref from elsewhere that makes this clear.
  • Ref 5a: surely "they remained in this conference until 1970" cannot be verified by a source from 1961? – So, this information is actually elaborated on two sentences afterwards when it mentions the merger, so it is explained, but you bring up a valid point. I added a reference, because why should I expect people to have to go looking for it, right?
  • Refs 14 and 15: not seeing verification for the AP award, suggest using [1]. – If I'm adding refs I gotta reference everything in there properly, and I must have been thinking of what was in the table was already referenced. I used a different reference which verifies that (link).
I hope I've addressed everything now @UpTheOctave!. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looking good! Thanks for fixing these, happy to pass this review. UpTheOctave! • 8va? 18:33, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs recorded by SZA

[edit]
Nominator(s): Elias 🦗🐜 [Chat, they chattin', they chat] 05:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Having returned from a pretty chill holiday break, I've found myself in a better headspace to work on major projects. Inspired by the release of SZA's most recent album, I'd like to present the list of songs recorded by SZA. This was a daunting page to complete, but I hope with your comments, this list is brought to its best possible condition. Elias 🦗🐜 [Chat, they chattin', they chat] 05:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • File:Glaston2024 2806 300624 (157 of 173) (53837667841) (cropped).jpg - CC BY 2.0
  • File:Pulitzer2018-portraits-kendrick-lamar.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
  • File:Isaiah Rashad Feb 2014.jpg - CC BY 2.0, original source shows a different tag or am I missing something?
  • File:Travis Scott - Openair Frauenfeld 2019 08.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
  • File:Cardi B 2021 02.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Doja Cat Planet Her Day Party 1 (cropped).jpg - CC0
  • File:Glasto2023 (181 of 468) (53009327490) (cropped).jpg - CC BY 2.0
  • File:Deshaymephi.jpg - CC BY 3.0
  • File:RobBisel–NicKhang1 (2) (cropped) (cropped).jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
  • Captions, alt text, pictures, all relevant.

Comments on lead only

[edit]
  • "Psychedelic, lo-fi instrumentals and an urban musical style with "feminine inflections" characterize SZA's early songs" - "psychedelic" is an adjective, not a noun, so you can't say that "Psychedelic [...] characterize[s] SZA's early songs"
  • "As time passed, the media started to consistently label SZA in publications" - last two words are redundant I think - where else would the media label her thus?
    • Good point
  • "SZA has appeared on dozens of soundtracks" - really? she has appeared on 25+ soundtracks? That seems a lot for an artist who released her debut album less than 8 years ago.....
    • That was definitely a stray phrase I forgot to remove before moving to mainspace. My bad.
  • "her label's manager Punch said that leaks of the sort could cause" => "her label's manager Punch said that leaks of this sort could cause" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "Feminine inflections" is a quote and should be attributed accordingly
    • Removed; I figured it made the sentence way too long
  • "Dear Evan Hansen soundtrack" → "Dear Evan Hansen: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack"
  • "Space Jam: A New Legacy soundtrack" → "Space Jam: A New Legacy (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack)"
  • "Trolls World Tour soundtrack" → "Trolls World Tour: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack"
  • "Insecure soundtrack" → "Insecure (Music from the HBO Original Series)"
    • Any reason why all of these four should be changed?
  • "SZA co-wrote one SOS track with Lizzo" → "SZA co-wrote "F2F" with Lizzo" per WP:EASTEREGG
    • Removed the link instead
  • Wouldn't it be better to have a separate column for the refs in the unreleased songs table?
    • I do not think so. Moving all the references to another column will (1) make the column very cluttered and (2) make it hard for readers to determine which source supports which fact
  • The acronym DSPs is invoked several times but it doesn't say anywhere what it stands for
    • Now defined in the "Back Together" entry

That's all I have! Sebbirrrr (talk) 20:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Sebbirrrr. responses above. Elias 🦗🐜 [Chat, they chattin', they chat] 02:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@PSA: Thanks for the ping, just one more inquiry. Sebbirrrr (talk) 18:59, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sebbirrrr done (for consistency with the For the Throne entry) Elias 🦗🐜 [Chat, they chattin', they chat] 04:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Sebbirrrr (talk) 18:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh

[edit]

This review is based on this version of the article.

Source review: Pending

  • Reliable enough for the information being cited
  • Consistent date formatting
  • Consistent and proper reference formatting
  • Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
  • Spot checks on sources match what they are being cited for

Feedback:

  • Ref 12 – ASCAP and BMI shouldn't be listed as the authors, but as work/publisher or something similar
  • Ref 12 and 106 – Typically we only do via Internet Archive when they're the host of said info, like a book or something.
  • Ref 106 – ASCAP should be listed as the website or work instead of the author
  • Ref 117 – Link American Songwriter
  • Ref 118 – Missingauthor and publish date
  • Ref 118 – Is there a reason you don't link to People (magazine) and pipe it as "People"?
  • Ref 120 – No website listed

Please ping me when the above has been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

[edit]

List of things named after Julius Caesar

[edit]
Nominator(s): The AP (talk) 13:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Caesar’s name is still known around the world, and I was honestly surprised when I realized there wasn’t a list like this. I spent two weeks putting it together in my sandbox, digging through books on Internet Archive, using resources from TWL, reading articles from other Wikipedias, and browsing all kinds of sites to find mentions of him. A lot of people mix up things named after Augustus and Caesar since they both had "Julius Caesar" in their names, so I made sure to double-check everything to avoid that mistake. This is my first FL nomination, and I’m hoping it goes well. Alea iacta estThe AP (talk) 13:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive by comment

Image review

[edit]
  • File:Retrato de Julio César (26724093101) (cropped).jpg - CC BY 2.0 (picture), actual work (Public Domain)
  • File:Triglav.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0 + GNU, source link is deleted so it needs to be fixed (or the image itself could be replaced) + caption needs to be sourced
  • File:Il ponte di Cesare sul Reno.jpg - Public Domain, source link needs to be fixed
  • File:Vincenzo Camuccini - La morte di Cesare.jpg - Public Domain, source link needs to be fixed
  • File:Edwin Austin Abbey - Within the Tent of Brutus, Enter the Ghost of Caesar, Julius Caesar, Act IV, Scene III - 1937.1148 - Yale University Art Gallery.jpg - Public Domain
  • File:Lo - Caesarsboom.jpg - CC BY 2.0 + GNU
  • Don't use fixed px size on images, use |upright instead.
  • All images have proper alt text and are relevant to the article.
    @Arconning
    • I have removed File:Triglav.jpg and File:Il ponte di Cesare sul Reno.jpg .
    • I have replaced File:Vincenzo Camuccini - La morte di Cesare.jpg with File:Jean-Léon Gérôme - The Death of Caesar - Walters 37884.jpg
    • I have changed fixed px size to |upright
    Note: I am browsing replacement images for the Triglav mountain and Caesar's Rhine Bridges. The AP (talk) 15:12, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have replaced the painting of Rhine Bridge with a pic of Forum of Caesar. The AP (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support on image review. Arconning (talk) 13:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History6042's comments

[edit]

Drive-by comment

[edit]

Comments

[edit]
  • "in start of 44 BC" => "at the start of 44 BC"
  • "Temple of Divus Julius was built in his honor by his adoptive heir, Augustus in the Roman Forum." => "Temple of Divus Julius was built in the Roman Forum in his honor by his adoptive heir, Augustus."
  • "Several works of plays, operas, and films" => "Several plays, operas, and films"
  • "the Latin name Norba Caesarina, which was founded" - the name wasn't founded. Maybe "chosen in honor".....?
  • "A French commune located at the mouth of the Argens valley and was founded or expanded" => "A French commune located at the mouth of the Argens valley which was founded or expanded"
  • "It is present in the Roman Forum and was named after Caesar" => A building in the Roman Forum which was named after Caesar"
  • "believed to be built by Cleopatra VII" => "believed to have been built by Cleopatra VII"
  • "These were the first two bridges on record to cross the Rhine river, were built by Caesar" => "These were the first two bridges on record to cross the Rhine river. They were built by Caesar"
  • "It is located in Coventry Castle, is believed to be named" => "Located in Coventry Castle, it is believed to be named"
  • "It is third senate house in the Roman Forum, was named after Caesar" => "The third senate house in the Roman Forum, it was named after Caesar"
  • "Built in the Roman Forum by Augustus in 29 BC. It was dedicated to Caesar" => "Built in the Roman Forum by Augustus in 29 BC, tt was dedicated to Caesar"
  • "A Conte di Cavour-class dreadnought battleship of the Regia Marina, was named after Julius Caesar" => "A Conte di Cavour-class dreadnought battleship of the Regia Marina, it was named after Julius Caesar"
  • " A Majestic-class pre-dreadnought battleship of the Royal Navy, was named after Caesar " => " A Majestic-class pre-dreadnought battleship of the Royal Navy, it was named after Caesar "
  • "A collier for the United States Navy whose namesake was Caesar and was built in England in 1896" => "A collier for the United States Navy whose namesake was Caesar, she was built in England in 1896"
  • "various wars like — Spanish–American War, Philippine–American War and World War I" => "various wars including the Spanish–American War, Philippine–American War and World War I"
  • "seen in July 44 BC, following the Caesar's assassination." => "seen in July 44 BC, following Caesar's assassination."
  • "between 1658 and 1736 which depicts the Caesar's assassination" => "between 1658 and 1736 which depicts Caesar's assassination"
  • "The Death of Caesar, an 1867 painting by the Jean-Léon Gérôme." - this is not a complete sentence so it should not have a full stop. There is also no reason for "the" before the name of the artist
  • "based on August Wilhelm von Schlegel's translation of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar" - play title should be in italics. Also, everywhere else you show it as "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar", not just "Julius Caesar"
  • "A 1953 American film adaptation of the Shakespeare's play" => "A 1953 American film adaptation of Shakespeare's play"
  • "An episode of BBC Television Shakespeare" - TV show title should be in italics
  • "A historical drama named after Caesar" - made when? By which channel/network?
  • "The common name is derived from the title Caesar (originally a family name) of the Roman emperors" - full stop missing
  • "Caesar's autocratic rule as Rome's dictator from 49 to 44 BCE" - elsewhere you used "BC", not "BCE"
  • "It derives from the cognomen of the Roman dictator Julius Caesar" - this far into the article, you don't need to inform readers that Caesar was a Roman dictator, or use his full name
  • Check for overlinking. Julius Caesar, for example, is linked three times in the list
  • That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Done @ChrisTheDude I have reworded some lines regarding Norba Caesarina; kindly check again. Removed overlinking. Added director and network for the historical drama. The AP (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Pinging @ChrisTheDude for follow-up. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

[edit]
  • " The length of the Julian year is the average length of the year in the Julian calendar, from which the unit is named" - needs a full stop.
  • "the month was renamed to July by the Roman Senate" - did they really name it "July"? That doesn't look like a Latin word at all.
  • Oil on canvas is written both with and without hyphens
  • Are there really only two biographies of Caesar? I find that hard to believe. Or are there only two notable ones?
  • "that was adapted from the play Caesar and Cleopatra (1901) " - play title should be in italics
  • "whose plot is loosely based" -> "the plot of which is loosely based"
  • "or from the word Lex Caesarea" - "Lex Caesarea" is two words, not one
  • "Speculations that Julius Caesar was born by what is now known as a C-section are false[108]; " - ref should go after punctuation
  • "claimed that caesarean birth "was done in the case of Julius Cæsar." [109]." - remove duplicate full stop after the ref -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello @ChrisTheDude
    • Added the full stop
    • The month July evolved from the month "Julius," which was originally called "Quintilis." I changed it to Julius and added an explanatory note.
    • changed it to "oil on canvas"
    • Notable ones: on a quick count, there are roughly 25-30 books that discuss him, with titles bearing his name. I’ve only included those that are considered notable. If you think I’ve missed any, please let me know!
    • Changed to italics
    • changed it to "the plot of which is loosely based"
    • removed the mention of "word" as Lex Caesarea is a proper noun and refined the sentence.
    • changed the location of the punctuation
    • removed the duplicate full stop
    I have also added missing full stop in other sentences.The AP (talk) 15:35, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Airship

[edit]

Is this a list of notable things named after Caesar, or all things named after Caesar? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notable - but as I see, it includes pretty much everything.I used various books and TwL resources to search for the mentions of the name "Caesar","Julio" and "Julia" ; I explored many websites too. The AP (talk) 03:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure about that. A ten-minute Google search reveals:
That's a ten-minute Google: some notable, some not-so-notable, but all probably worth thinking about. And of course, that's not getting into anything named after him indirectly. Does anything named after the title Caesar count? The inclusion of Cáceres, Spain suggests yes, in which case this list is extremely incomplete. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:41, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @AirshipJungleman29,
I would like to let you know that there are, in fact, many Roman emperors and civilians named Caesar. The individual on whom this list is based is Gaius Julius Caesar, a dictator. He had an adoptive son, popularly known as Augustus. Augustus's full name was Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus.
  • As mentioned in the article, the construction of Chaussée Jules César was initiated by the Roman governor Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, who was a lieutenant to Augustus. No reliable source explicitly states that the road was named after either of the Caesars. If you can provide one that says so, I would happily add it.
  • Regarding Piazza Giulio Cesare (Palermo), the article on itwiki does not cite any references. Upon a quick search, sources such as Medium a generally unreliable source and some travel sites like TripAdvisor provide little to no reliable information.
  • For roads, there is a category on Commons: Category:Roads named after Julius Caesar. Some roads in the category are not notable, and I could not find mentions of them in reliable sources—for example, Calle Julio César in Montevideo.
  • To be honest, I have not investigated hotels, but since they are not mentioned in secondary sources, I do not find them significant enough to include in the list.
  • Regarding Does anything named after the title Caesar count, do you mean the literal title Caesar or the last name (i.e., cognomen)?
The AP (talk) 10:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: @AirshipJungleman29, @History6042, @ChrisTheDude – After reading Airship's comment, I revisited my research to find "notable" things named after Caesar. To my surprise, I discovered that I had missed 3 paintings, 3 films, and 2 items in popular culture. I kindly ask that you review the prose again, as I have also made significant revisions, such as rearranging items in alphabetical order. I sincerely apologize for this oversight. The AP (talk) 17:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also have added more items. I believe this is the last addition. The AP (talk) 12:37, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of awards and nominations received by Bini

[edit]
Nominator(s): Royiswariii Talk! 04:31, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Filipino girl group Bini have a numerous awards and nominations from first day until now. I believe that deserve have a featured list here on Wikipedia just like on SB19. Although, I tried to nominate the girl group single Cherry on Top and it was unsuccessful, it may be have a chance here on Featured List (and i will nominate COT soon). Note: I cited a YouTube channel which is a Official Verified Channel and can be treated as reliable sources per WP:RSYT. Royiswariii Talk! 04:31, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • Remove wikilink of Bini above infobox. Wikilink instead first mention of Bini in lead.
  • Image used in infobox should have alt text and not use a fixed px size.
  • Wikilink first mention of ABS-CBN in lead.
  • Mention the individual members of Bini. (Ex: The Filipino girl group Bini, composed of...)
  • They began their career in 2020 with the release of their pre-debut single, "Da Coconut Nut", a cover of Ryan Cayabyab’s song., this could be written better (Ex: ...with the release of their pre-debut single, a cover of Ryan Cayabyab's song "Da Coconut Nut". )
  • That same year, Bini became the first Filipino group to win Best Asia Act at the 2024 MTV Europe Music Awards[12] was also honored with the Rising Star Award at the Billboard Philippines Women in Music., I'm guessing there should be an "and" after source 12.
  • For their efforts in promoting healthy lifetsyles among the youth,, quite vague, could this be better explained?
    Hello, @Arconning! Thank you for you comment!
    • Remove wikilink of Bini above infobox. Wikilink instead first mention of Bini in lead.
    Done.
    • Image used in infobox should have alt text and not use a fixed px size.
    Done.
    • Wikilink first mention of ABS-CBN in lead.
    Done.
    • Mention the individual members of Bini. (Ex: The Filipino girl group Bini, composed of...)
    Done.
    • They began their career in 2020 with the release of their pre-debut single, "Da Coconut Nut", a cover of Ryan Cayabyab’s song., this could be written better (Ex: ...with the release of their pre-debut single, a cover of Ryan Cayabyab's song "Da Coconut Nut". )
    Done.
    • That same year, Bini became the first Filipino group to win Best Asia Act at the 2024 MTV Europe Music Awards[12] was also honored with the Rising Star Award at the Billboard Philippines Women in Music., I'm guessing there should be an "and" after source 12.
    Done. (I just forgot to add "and" lol)
    • For their efforts in promoting healthy lifetsyles among the youth,, quite vague, could this be better explained?
    According to the video, the National Youth Commission (Philippines) appointed The Star Hunt Academy Trainees (which is Bini (girl group) included here) as ambassador in 2019 to promote Fit Fil Youth Against Drugs campaign. Removing due to WP:EXCEPTIONAL, 'cause it's not covered on some news articles.Royiswariii Talk! 12:28, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Royiswariii Another comment. Multiple sources differ on the spelling of "P-pop Awards", the official awards are entitled the "PPOP Awards". This should be fixed. Arconning (talk) 14:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Arconning Done. Royiswariii Talk! 16:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Mentions of "P-pop Music Awards" and other similar statements need to be replaced with "PPOP Music Awards" as that is the original name based on the official site. Arconning (talk) 13:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:ALLCAPS and MOS:TMRULES should be applied here, right? The word "PPOP" is the short term for Pinoy pop, the popular music in the Philippines. It is not an acronym. Conventionally, it is written as "P-pop", similar to K-pop and other pop music genres. The accolade uses the word to pertain to the fact that they honor Filipino acts in the Philippine popular music. AstrooKai (Talk) 20:54, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @AstrooKai @Royiswariii Ah I see, I'd suggest to remove the hyphen to stay true to the original award's name while abiding by these, put a note clarifying this to differentiate it with the word "P-pop". Arconning (talk) 10:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Arconning Done! Royiswariii Talk! 10:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Follow-up notice on this change. I removed the footnote since the accolade's name is unlikely to be confused since "Ppop" and "P-pop" are acceptable forms. While the hyphenated version is grammatically correct, clarification seems unnecessary in this case since both pertains to the same topic. AstrooKai (Talk) 10:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. Arconning (talk) 11:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! Arconning Royiswariii Talk! 12:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Arconning, I think I will agree to AstrooKai because it maybe violates the WP:ALLCAPS and MOS:TMRULES? Royiswariii Talk! 08:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

[edit]
  • "The Filipino girl group Bini, composed of Aiah, Colet, Maloi, Gwen, Stacey, Mikha, Jhoanna and Sheena have received" => "The Filipino girl group Bini, composed of Aiah, Colet, Maloi, Gwen, Stacey, Mikha, Jhoanna and Sheena, have received"
  • "They began their career in 2020 with the release of their pre-debut single" - how can they have had a "pre-debut" single? Surely their first release was their debut....?
  • You have "The Filipino girl group Bini [...] have received" and "In 2024, Bini released their first extended play", where the group name is treated as plural, but later you have "Bini [...] was also honored", where the group name is treated as singular
  • in the table I can see both "P-Pop" and "P-pop" - which is correct?
  • Recipients that start with a quote mark should sort based on the first actual letter/word
  • "12 Christmas Song Covers You Should Listen to This 2024" - this doesn't make sense
  • That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @ChrisTheDude! Just passed by this FLC discussion. I'm one of the significant contributors to this list and other articles related to the group, so I'm gonna answer one of your comments while the nominator—@Royiswariii—is away.

    How can they have had a 'pre-debut' single? Surely their first release was their debut....? Pre-debut singles are common in the K-pop industry (considering that idol groups like Bini in the Philippines are primarily influenced by the K-pop industry of South Korea) and is increasing in the P-pop industry. Bini's pre-debut single, "Da Coconut Nut", is an electropop remake of Ryan Cayabyab's song with the same title. On the other hand, "Born to Win" is the debut single of the group, released few days before their official debut. Few example of other pre-debut singles by music groups include:
    AstrooKai (Talk) 15:53, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @AstrooKai: - why is "Born to Win" regarded as their debut single if they had already released a single before it? That's what I don't understand..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:27, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    "Born to Win" is considered Bini's debut single because it was the song officially released when the group officially debuted on June 11, 2021, while "Da Coconut Nut" was released as a pre-debut single before their official introduction to the public. AstrooKai (Talk) 16:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, @ChrisTheDude!
    I think the purpose of the "pre-debut" is to prepare the members for their official debut while building anticipation and an initial fanbase. So, that's why Bini have a pre-debut before the release of their official debut "Born to Win". Royiswariii Talk! 16:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • "The Filipino girl group Bini, composed of Aiah, Colet, Maloi, Gwen, Stacey, Mikha, Jhoanna and Sheena have received" "The Filipino girl group Bini, composed of Aiah, Colet, Maloi, Gwen, Stacey, Mikha, Jhoanna and Sheena, have received"
    Done.
    • in the table I can see both "P-Pop" and "P-pop" - which is correct?
    P-pop and P-Pop (known as Pinoy pop) are the same meaning its either, PPOP,P-pop, P-Pop and Pinoy pop can be called on this. However, on WP:BOLD it should be called as "P-pop", so I changed it.
    • "12 Christmas Song Covers You Should Listen to This 2024" - this doesn't make sense
    Actually, it's included in listicles because it's a staff editorial picked from Billboard Philippines which they're also love the song or adding it to listen it because that time is Christmas and they added the song "Joy to the World (Bini song)".
    This will i can answer for now, the other questions or suggestions, i will update it once I added your suggestions. Royiswariii Talk! 17:00, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe I didn't write it as clearly as I could, but what I meant was that "12 Christmas Song Covers You Should Listen to This 2024" does not make grammatical sense in English. You can't say "this 2024" like you would "this Tuesday" because by definition there was only one 2024 -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Never mind, I can see that that actually is the title of the source. It makes no sense in English but I guess we have to go with how the source is titled ..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:47, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi again! Roy gave me the green signal to contribute to this FLC. So I'll help in the other comments.
    • You have 'The Filipino girl group Bini [...] have received' and 'In 2024, Bini released their first extended play', where the group name is treated as plural, but later you have 'Bini [...] was also honored', where the group name is treated as singular
    This is a complex one because the group's name is a collective noun, which can be considered singular or plural depending on the context or its use in the sentence. Hence, the group may be referred to singularly or plurally. A similar practice can be seen in SB19's (another P-pop group) list, List of awards and nominations received by SB19, which is a featured list. In the list, it can be seen that SB19 was referred to plurally (The Filipino boy band SB19 have received...) and singularly (In 2021, SB19 was nominated...). Personally, I can't decide whether to use singular or plural throughout since the group's name usage varies in context.
    • Recipients that start with a quote mark should sort based on the first actual letter/word
    Done. See revision 1267458158.
    AstrooKai (Talk) 05:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Mentioning @ChrisTheDude Royiswariii Talk! 05:33, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, ChrisTheDude!
    I'm pinging you again if this your review is complete? and if you are support or oppose? Royiswariii Talk! 07:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I still don't understand why you swap between referring to the group as singular and plural. You have both "The Filipino girl group Bini [...] has received" but "Bini released their second studio album". In UK English, a group name is treated as plural ("Coldplay are"/"Coldplay have released"). In US English it's treated as singular ("Aerosmith is"/"Aerosmith has released"). I don't know what the norm is in Filipino English but it surely must be one or the other and not a random mixture of both......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Resolved. See revision 1268347141. To avoid further complications resulting in prolonged discussion, which can be time-consuming, I have standardized the referencing of the group's name as a singular entity. Since the article uses Philippine English, which adheres to the American English convention, collective nouns are treated as singular. AstrooKai (Talk) 08:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks mate! This is duly appreciated! AstrooKai (Talk) 09:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History6042's comments

[edit]

Comments from Jpeeling

[edit]
  • Table lists it as "Ppop Music Awards", lead/infobox as "P-pop Music Awards", choose one and stick with it
  • Within the table, the "nominated" for the 2022 Awit Awards does not have the pink background like the others in that column, any reason?
  • Within the table there is no reference for the Ppop Music Awards - 2022 - P-pop Girl Group of the Year nomination
  • In the infobox, there is inconsistency on whether wins are also classed as nomination totals, for example the single win at Acervo Awards is included in the nomination tally but for P-pop Music Awards it is 13 wins and 4 nominations so the wins are not counted as nominations.
  • In the infobox, Myx Music Awards is listed twice
  • In the other accolades section, "The 15 Best Albums and EPs of 2024" isn't centred
  • In the other accolades section, some of the Billboard Philippines references are entitled "best x of 2024 (so far)" and were published mid-way through the year, is it accurate to list them as annual accolades without that "so far" cavaet, were any of these accolade lists updated by Billboard Philippines at the end of year?

JP (Talk) 15:57, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,Jpeeling!
I'm apologize for not responding due to participating on NPP January Backlog 2025 and my semester and school was back, and it's Done see revision 1269781155.
  • In the other accolades section, some of the Billboard Philippines references are entitled "best x of 2024 (so far)" and were published mid-way through the year, is it accurate to list them as annual accolades without that "so far" cavaet, were any of these accolade lists updated by Billboard Philippines at the end of year?
    • I check the ref of Billboard Philippines where have a "(so far)", I think it was a final and I don't see any changes, however, I suggest that do not remove the "(so far)" ref title to avoid misrepresent or confusion, I guess.
If you have any questions, just ping me. Royiswariii Talk! 10:45, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Royiswariii:, sorry if I wasn't clear regarding my final point, an article written in June or July with a "best x of 2024 (so far)" portrayed as "best x of 2024" is misleading. As you can see with the "The 15 Best Albums and EPs of 2024" (written in June) -> "The 50 Best Albums and EPs of 2024" (written in December), a lot can happen in half a year. Either the table should include the "(so far)" bit or were there end of year lists for Standout Songs or Music Videos that can be used instead? I also think points 1, 3 and 4 of my comments remain unresolved. JP (Talk) 11:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Jpeeling! @Royiswariii has allowed me to take over this one and address it on their behalf.
  • Table lists it as "Ppop Music Awards", lead/infobox as "P-pop Music Awards", choose one and stick with it
Done, see revision 1269786544. I have sticked to "Ppop ..." since it's the official styling (no hyphens) of the accolade's name.
  • Within the table there is no reference for the Ppop Music Awards - 2022 - P-pop Girl Group of the Year nomination
Done, see revision 1269787293.
  • In the infobox, there is inconsistency on whether wins are also classed as nomination totals, for example the single win at Acervo Awards is included in the nomination tally but for P-pop Music Awards it is 13 wins and 4 nominations so the wins are not counted as nominations.
Done, see revision 1269786205. Wins are also considered nominations, Roy may have probably misunderstood your point.
As for the Billboard Philippines listicles, I have removed the partial year listicles since they were already completed by December 2024.
  • 24 Standout Songs of 2024 --> The 50 Best Songs of 2024
  • 10 Best Music Videos of 2024 --> The 50 Best Music Videos of 2024
  • The 15 Best Albums and EPs of 2024 --> The 50 Best Albums and EPs of 2024
Let me know if there's anything else needed to be addressed. AstrooKai (Talk) 11:44, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you AstrooKai, all my comments are resolved, happy to Support. JP (Talk) 12:18, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is good to hear. Thank you! AstrooKai (Talk) 13:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "The formation of the group began in 2018 when ABS-CBN's Head of Entertainment Production, Laurenti Dyogi, selected the members from a talent search to undergo training." → I'd recommend rewording this by starting with "In 2018, ABS-CBN's Head of Entertainment Production, Laurenti Dyogi..." as the previous sentence also starts with "the"
  • "The group gained wider recognition" → "Bini gained wider recognition" (avoid overuse of "the group")
  • "where Aiah, Sheena, and Jhoanna also won individual awards." → unlink the names of the members per MOS:DL
  • Link extended play
  • "The group also won several awards at the 2024 P-pop Music Awards" → "At the 2024 P-pop Music Awards, the group won several awards"

That's all from me! Sebbirrrr (talk) 20:11, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Sebbirrrr!
Done see revision 1269783858 Royiswariii Talk! 11:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Support. Sebbirrrr (talk) 16:24, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Royiswariii Talk! 05:08, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Michelin-starred restaurants in Washington, D.C.

[edit]
Nominator(s): Expandinglight5 (talk) 00:26, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because the list is well-organized, follows the style guide set by the task force and closely resembles the List of Michelin-starred restaurants in Mexico which has achieved FL status. Expandinglight5 (talk) 00:26, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's weird how little of the lead is directly about the DC list. The Mexico list has similarly little but at least has the local context as the second paragraph, but this doesn't get to the list's actual topic until the third, and there's still not a lot of summarization. What else can you tell me in the lead about these restaurants? Can you also mention that the local tourism board has to pay for the guide to be made? Reywas92Talk 05:28, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I formatted the article starting with the history of the guide and then moving into the specific content about Washington, D.C. which leads into the list. I've added some content about background of the dining scene in D.C. Adding content about Michelin charging the local tourism boards seems more like content belonging to the Michelin Guide page rather than the specific list for the region. Thoughts?
Expandinglight5 (talk) 20:01, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An article should include background, but you shouldn't have to get to the third paragraph before the present article is introduced. Presumably anyone who gets to this article already knows what the Michelin guide is. It should really start with at least saying there are 26 current starred restaurants, then get into the background – one reason besides just getting to the point is that the preview ought to show page-specific information, not the generic content that may be duplicate across the set. Apparently the tourism board wasn't involved here like in other cities, but [7] still has good DC-specific info that could absolutely be in the article – anything relevant to this particular guide and its listings can be included.
I think the statistics with the exact populations and income levels aren't necessary though – that's conceptual background with unnecessary specificity rather than about DC's starred restaurants. You added nothing that further introduces this list's content. But I also see that you literally just copied and pasted this paragraph from the souce, which in turn quoted from the DC Policy Center, albeit with quotation marks. That's a copyright violation and honestly embarrassing. Reywas92Talk 21:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The tourism boards come into play as Michelin expands into smaller markets, typically ones that historically were not large enough to support printed publication. It isn't clear if the tourism board for Washington, D.C. is involved today in keeping the reviews continuing to exist given the fact North American regions are no longer in publication.
The content regarding populations and incomes aren't a direct copy and paste and minor revisions were made from the original content. I will edit it further if there is concern over copyright violation.
Thank you for the feedback on background and suggested order. I'll make subsequent edits.
Expandinglight5 (talk) 21:28, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed the minor changes but that's far from good enough (this is much closer to a direct copy than even a WP:Close paraphrase) and I hope not representative of your edits elsewhere. But those stats aren't needed at all, even if reworded. I'd hope the lead can get into some extra facts about the restaurants themselves, one example could be noting that Aaron Silverman is the chef for three of them. Reywas92Talk 21:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good ideas. I appreciate the feedback on all topics.
Expandinglight5 (talk) 21:41, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Prose and image review:
  • Well, the image caption is incorrect; it's not Washington, D.C.-based as the lede states.
  • Since the list is sortable, you should link all the mentions of each cuisine, not just its first mention by default. (It also might be useful to explain what "contemporary cuisine" means, potentially as a footnote as its def. less self-explanatory than the rest)
  • Image is correctly licensed and appropriate
  • Agree with what Reywas said above; also perhaps a sentence or two of independent information about the D.C. cuisine scene overall could be nice.
That's all from me! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the feedback. I've addressed the caption on the image as well as the cuisine links. I'll add additional content regarding Michelin as well as the dining scene Expandinglight5 (talk) 19:04, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • Don't think the article should start with a one-sentence "paragraph". Merge it with the one after.
  • "based on its evaluation methodology: One star means" - no reason for capital mid-sentence
  • Third "paragraph" is also just one sentence. Merge it with the one after.
  • No need to link Washington D.C. twice in two sentences near the end of the lead.
  • No need to link List of Michelin-starred restaurants in Chicago ⋅twice in consecutive sentences
  • "Michelin awarded stars to The Inn at Little Washington, which is in Virginia." - the fact that this is the only restaurant in the guide ever awarded three stars surely merits mention in the lead -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. I've revised for bullets 2-5. I'll work on incorporating changes for the first and final bullet this week.
    Expandinglight5 (talk) 18:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I made a couple of changes myself and am now happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:42, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

[edit]
  • Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
  • Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. ! 2017 becomes !scope=col | 2017. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.
  • Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. |[[Albi (restaurant)|Albi]] becomes !scope=row | [[Albi (restaurant)|Albi]]. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
  • Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 14:25, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @PresN @tbhotch
    • Caption text has already been included. |+Michelin-starred restaurants is the caption text. Please advise if I need to make revisions on this item but I believe this is correct.
    • Column scopes have been added to the table.
    • Thank you for bringing to my attention row scopes on the “primary row” as this wasn’t an item I was familiar with on Wikipedia and in reviewing another featured list (Michelin Mexico) it doesn’t appear to have scoped rows. Perhaps this was an oversight during FLC review? I am using scoped rows for the star ratings similar to the Mexico list.
    In reviewing other featured lists such as List of freshwater islands in Scotland and List of awards and nominations received by Aerosmith, these don’t have scoped rows either. Is there a reason in these examples why they wouldn’t’ have scoped rows?
    I don’t oppose the scoped rows but I’m working on improving our current style guide and would like to make The Michelin-starred lists consistent and understanding this requirement is helpful.
    Expandinglight5 (talk) 01:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The two FLs you've picked are from some time ago (2008 and 2010). I would expect recently promoted FLs would have the proper row and column scopes mentioned in any tables.
    The table in this list does have row scopes but they are in the wrong place. Instead of the star columns, they should only be on the cells having the names of the restaurants. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This is very helpful. Thank you. I’ll revise the scoped rows for Washington, D.C. along with the Michelin style guide later this week and will update this talk page upon completion. Expandinglight5 (talk) 21:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I've made the revisions to the table. Please respond if you support. Expandinglight5 (talk) 21:20, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History6042 comments

[edit]

Source review

[edit]
Why is DCist reliable?
Why is Bon Appétit reliable?
Why is Ultimate DC Dining reliable?
Dates are inconsistanly formatted (a few use DMY)
Sources are inconsitantly linked
Ref 2 is missing source (Washingtonian)
Ref 2 is missing author (Jessica Sidman)
In ref 3 MICHELIN should be lowercase
Ref 6 is missing source (The New York Times)
In ref 10 Vox is listed as the publisher, this is the only ref to do that
Ref 9 is missing author (Maura Judkis)
Ref 10 is missing author (Missy Frederick)
Refs 14 and 15 are missing author (both Ryan Sutton and Missy Frederick
Ref 16 is missing author (Ann Limpert)
Unrelated but "The Inn at Little Washington" is linked twice in the lead.
Spot checks line up
Ping when done Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:47, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Expandinglight5: reminder Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 19:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve asked a few other editors to help in regards to updating the author on the various sources. I’m not sure of the best way to add / amend the references. Expandinglight5 (talk) 19:53, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone can suggest a bot/tool to help with the above source issues, that would be appreciated. I previously used ReFill with no success. Expandinglight5 (talk) 21:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Expandinglight5: just add the information manually Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think I fixed all of the above. Let us know if you support Expandinglight5 (talk) 16:40, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Svalbard discography

[edit]
Nominator(s): Chchcheckit (talk) 15:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I am about 1 article away from setting up a "Svalbard studio albums good topic" (4 albums); this is basically the reason this page exists. And because I think I've covered most/all bases in terms of their releases. Yeah. // Chchcheckit (talk) 15:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: all 4 studio albums are at GA status. // Chchcheckit (talk) 19:11, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that you had failed to transclude this page to WP:FLC, but I've just done so @Chchcheckit. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ah. Facepalm Facepalm // Chchcheckit (talk) 21:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from MFTP Dan

[edit]

Hello! I just have a few comments, mostly about sourcing.

  • The band's formation story should be tightened for a discography page. How they met Lilley is not important here, especially considering this source is borderline and admissible probably only because of the circumstances of types of sources available to cover the band at the time. So, less is better here.
  • I would recommend briefly highlighting in the lead how The Weight of the Mask was the band's first album to chart.
  • Refs 26, 29, 35, and 36 are all attributed to Kerrang!. How come 26 and some others have an author placeholder? I don't think it's necessary myself, but if you must insist on adding something to that spot in the absence of a writing credit in the source, please do it to all such citations. You do it to at least one other source, too. Just make it consistent.
  • What makes ref 5 and 15 - Circuit Sweet - a reliable source?
  • What makes refs 7 and 18 - Idioteq - a reliable source? In all reality it's probably fine but I've never used it before and I don't remember if I ever have heard of it.
  • Ref 12 should be reformatted to read Brave Words & Bloody Knuckles.
  • Ref 38 - thePRP - is not my favorite. Is there anything better covering this information?

Other than that, good job. Look forward to seeing this and the albums promoted. mftp dan oops 14:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MFTP Dan Hi again. Comments:
  • "this source is borderline and admissible probably only because of the circumstances of types of sources available to cover the band at the time" is an issue I recognize. I have tried to avoid primary sources where possible. im cureently looking for alternative sources to circuit sweet & idioteq in case ig:
    • If it helps, here's another reference confirming the release date of Flightless Birds
  • lead cut down w/ note.
  • Fixed Kerrang inconsistencies.
  • Brave Words reformatted
  • Regarding thePRP: I was trying to find a source which stated the director name. The only other one I can find with a google search of "to wilt beneath the weight" "fraser west" [sic] is this, if this is (though i don't think it is) any better.
I've never done one of these before so ig i got things to learn lol // Chchcheckit (talk) 22:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I find Thrash Hits preferable to Circuit Sweet, for what it's worth. It's certainly more recognized in the scene. mftp dan oops 22:31, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's certainly more recognized in the scene. [citation needed] // Chchcheckit (talk) 22:32, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
if consensus then consensus nonetheless // Chchcheckit (talk) 22:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@MFTP Dan alr, see anything else that needs patching up? // 22:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC) Chchcheckit (talk) 22:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the absence of anything otherwise suitable, the official video currently lists the director in the YouTube description. mftp dan oops 22:44, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i'll just do that then. Chchcheckit (talk) 22:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I looked into thePRP more - I'd prefer if you removed it actually, wookubus claims to be the only person running the place and I don't like the idea of using a self-published source here. After that, I will support, that about does it. mftp dan oops 00:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aok Chchcheckit (talk) 12:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@MFTP Dan done. plus copyedits Chchcheckit (talk) 13:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • You largely treat the band name as a plural, which is correct for British English, but as an outlier you have "Svalbard self-released its eponymous debut extended play in May 2012"
  • "Svalbard developed a relationship with Pariso" - are Pariso another band? If so, maybe say "Svalbard developed a relationship with the [some sort of description] band Pariso"
  • "release of their third album When I Die, Will I Get Better?." - as the title ends with a punctuation mark, there is no need for that full stop
  • "Format: 7"" - suggest "Format: 7" vinyl" for total clarity (same on other similar rows)
  • That's all I got - nice work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude All points have been addressed. // Chchcheckit (talk) 18:01, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:49, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • "Svalbard self-released their eponymous debut extended play in May 2012" → "Svalbard self-released their eponymous debut extended play (EP) in May 2012"
  • "The band's fourth album" → "Svalbard's fourth album"
  • All tables need a caption
  • Are the music videos included on the albums?
  • Shouldn't the year for ref 4 be 2015 as that is when Discography 2012–2014 was released?

That's everything from me! Sebbirrrr (talk) 00:20, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sebbirrrr:
  • Done
  • Done
  • Done
  • Are the music videos included on the albums? Confused: Please clarify what you mean by this
  • Ref 4 is the 2016 reissue/remaster, which I own. I use this reissue specificially (as opposed to the 2015 original and 2022 Church Road pressing) because it has detailed liner notes on when EP's/songs were released, pressing quantity and recoridng credits. The other reissues do not include such credits.
// Chchcheckit (talk) 13:46, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(note: the original catalog number for the 2015 issue is HRR130CD, as opposed to HRR164) Chchcheckit (talk) 13:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait.
  • "Svalbard self-released their eponymous debut extended play (EP) in May 2012" Isn't that kinda redundant since "extended play" is already mentioned above??
// Chchcheckit (talk) 16:26, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chchcheckit: Apologies for the extended play comment, I skipped over the first sentence but "(EP)" should be added after "six extended plays" as the acronym appears later. Regarding the music videos, I meant to say that if they were not put on the album alongside the songs, then the album section is redundant. Thanks for clarifying my ref 4 confusion. Sebbirrrr (talk) 17:03, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How is that redundant? The song the video was filmed for belongs to the album, I don't see how that really implies what you're saying it does. mftp dan oops 17:06, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i don't personally think they matter but aghhhhhh ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ // Chchcheckit (talk) 20:37, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry! I just thought that column is better suited only for the singles but now I think it's fine to leave it as it is. Just don't forget about adding EP in the first sentence and that should be all! Sebbirrrr (talk) 18:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ok Chchcheckit (talk) 19:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sebbirrrr done Chchcheckit (talk) 19:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Great work! Sebbirrrr (talk) 19:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review from TheDoctorWho

[edit]

I can see a few comments on sourcing have been made above, but this is still listed as needing a formal source review.

  • Not a sourcing issue, but the image needs alt text
  • "V13.net" -> "V13 Media"
  • The following comments apply to multiple sources:
    • Is "csweet" just an abbreviation for Circuit Sweet? If so, this should be removed as there doesn't appear to be a listed author on the source.
    • Is "anon" just an abbreviation for Anonymous? If so, same goes above.
    • Same goes for "admin".
    • Several sources are still live, but contain no archive.
  • Spotchecked references 3, 8, 11, 16, 21, 24, 36, most appear to support their statements, bar the two below
    • Ref 21 doesn't appear to support that "Ripped Apart" was released in 2014
    • Ref 36 doesn't appear to support that Phelan directed "Silent Restraint"

Great work! Just a few issues to address. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:35, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TheDoctorWho Thank you!!
  • done
  • done
  • done
  • done
  • done
  • internet archive botted
  • Is Ref 21 an issue because it says "streamed"?
  • Ref 36: "Whilst putting these clips together I realised that, to me, this video represents positivity and togetherness in a time when we've never been further apart," says Liam. [...] Thanks to everyone who contributed. I had a lot of fun putting it together." ah. i see. editing is not directing??? "n/a"-ed.
// Chchcheckit (talk) 12:05, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The issue with source 21 was that I wasn't seeing a date (like essentially there was no way for me to tell if the article had been published in 2014 vs. yesterday). I checked the archived link, and it had the publish date, it's just something that's been removed in the live version of the source. Regardless, I'm satisfied with the archive link. Source review passes and I'm happy to support. TheDoctorWho (talk) 20:25, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man im josh

[edit]
  • I think the singles and music video tables could be vastly improved by moving the references to their own columns. I recognize that the studio album table may not need this, as the current format is typical of album tables.
  • Studio album table is missing some column scopes
  • Music videos table is missing all column scopes
  • "Kerrang!" as the website is not consistently wikilinked in sources
  • Ref 29 – Leave out "Kerrang! Staff" as the author. It's assumed its the site/company's staff when no author is listed, hence the website parameter.
  • Ref 7 – Same as above, remove "Rock Sound" as the author
  • The music video sources, in a spot check I did, were not actually verifying the directors that are mentioned
  • The ref for Ripped Apart under the singles table doesn't verify the year

Please make sure that the refs appropriately verify the information, that scopes are added where necessary, that the publisher/website is linked where possible in references, and then I'll provide a further review. Please ping me when that has been addressed. I do also have some concerns about the reliability of some sources used, but I'll address that in further feedback once the above has been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi;
  • What are the missing column scopes? Sorry, not clear/don't understand what you mean here (i understand)
  • Krrang staff (ref29) and Rock Sound (ref7) removed
  • The music video sources, in a spot check I did, were not actually verifying the directors that are mentioned. I have a good idea of what you're gonna say. Should the director credits (mostly found in the music videos/youtube sources) be kept separate from the general references for the music videos?
  • "Ripped Apart": archive URL used instead. this issue was noted by TheDoctorWho also.
// Chchcheckit (talk) 23:33, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hey man im josh Okay, done all suggestions? I've added a column for references like you suggested. // Chchcheckit (talk) 13:54, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also: removed citations that were not directly verifing music videos directors Chchcheckit (talk) 13:58, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leader of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia

[edit]
Nominator(s): --TheUzbek (talk) 08:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is my comeback nomination and, hopefully, my last comeback as well :) I did most of the work but also got invaluable help and insights from @Vipz:. As for why I did not nominate the article earlier, I could never find the membership year of Miroslav Ivanović, the last leader. But as far as I am concerned, that information is lost to history. I've tried to track it down, but I've been at a loss. As for the quality of the article itself and its worthiness for FL, I will note that it is obvious. It both covers a very important historical topic and covers the topic as well as it can do with the sources at hand. --TheUzbek (talk) 08:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Generalissima

[edit]
  • Done Shouldn't events before it was renamed to LCY call the party by its period name?
    • Sure, but what specifically are you referring about? One has the "Institutional history of the highest-standing office of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia" table as well as the headers "Political secretaries of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia" and "Organisational secretaries of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia" for the period up to 1937 and "|Leaders of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia" for the period up to 1991. Or am I missing something you are seeing and not me? :)
  • Done Rather than focusing on the names used for the position overtime, I think it'd be better to focus on the evolution of the position's power (and esp. give context for Tito's rule and rise to greater power!)
    • Classical communist institutions are rather vague when it comes to specific powers. For example, the general secretary of the Soviet communist party was not mentioned in the party charter until 1966. The same could be said of earlier stipulations in the Yugoslav party. It is only with the 1966 reforms that the LCY tried to develop a set of institutions different from its Soviet counterparts based on rules. THat is why the article has more information on the post 1966 years than the years before.
  • Done Tito needs to be wikilinked at his first mention in the body.
    • Done
  • Done Since you wikilink Tito's death in the lede, you should also link it in the body.
    • Done
  • Done Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Slovenia, Switzerland and the Soviet Union do we need this big list of country names? We can just say "various other countries" or something.
    • Done, shortened it to "Soviet counterpart" as that was the most important one.
  • Partially done The LCY's article says it wasn't renamed to the Communist Party of Yugoslavia until the 2nd congress; that might not warrant a separate entry on the tables, but maybe a footnote could be helpful.
    • I have added in the text that the party was renamed at the 2nd and 6th congresses.
  • Done Tito's position as leader factored into his command of the resistance during World War II, right? That should be given a good mention.
    • I will try to find information on that. Formally, the partisans were under the control of the Unitary National Liberation Front and the Anti-Fascist Council for the National Liberation of Yugoslavia, two institutions the party controlled. The KPJ Central Committee also appointed him commander-in-chief of the resistance, but I don't think they did it formally speaking because he was general secretary. I will try to ascertain it.That is, of course they nominated him because he was the sitting general secretary, but I am not sure that they did that because of the institution he held or because of the immense power he held in practice. Does this make sense? Even so, I will try to use the power of Google!
  • Done The article currently doesn't state the point where the party (or the leader for that matter) actually held power in Yugoslavia. A brief mention of the NKOJ and the abolition of the monarchy in 1945 would probably be warranted.
    • Good point, will work on it!
    • Come to think of it, this should at least mention the early political situation, that its leaders led it into the 1920 elections and all
      • Maybe? It's not necessary to know about the institution of the LCY leader, but at the same time, a sentence won't hurt either.
  • responsible -> accountability seems like overlinking.
    • Done
  • Partially done It's unclear to me whether the President of the League had more power or not than the General Secretary position
    • The general secretary had more informal powers by dominating and leading the secretariat, but the secretariat was abolished in 1966. The powers of the presidents were formalised into clear rules, which never happened to the general secretary. The post-1966 reforms also tried to strengthen the political powers of the Presidency by turning it to a political-executive organ (merging the powers of the Politburo and the Secretariat). In communist systems, the general secretary (most notably Stalin) successfully bypassed the politburo, the highest political organ, by dominating the secretariat, the highest executive organ. I will clarify.
      • As written above, communist politics is de-institutionalised. No clear formal rules on the remit of the general secretary exists.
  • Done On the "Institutional history of the highest-standing office" table, probably would be easier to read if you merged the two "1st Congress" cells.
  • Done It might be good to add a sentence or two about what led to the foundation of the party with the SSDP and all.
    • Good point!
  • Done What was the seat before the Ušće Towers? Also, the towers don't seem to be cited or mentioned anywhere in the text.
    • I will try to find info on this!
  • Done This is a pretty minor gripe, but the text in "Institutional history" are in big blocks that are a bit hard to scan. Maybe break it up into slightly smaller paragraphs and add an image if there's any applicable ones?
    • Will do.

@TheUzbek: That's my bit. Sorry if any of this seems too nitpicky - feel free to reject or ask for clarification on anything! Generalissima (talk) (it/she)

@Generalissima: You made great comments, and I will try to address all you're comments by Friday or Saturday :) Thanks for taking the time to review the list! --TheUzbek (talk) 09:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheUzbek: Things look great so far, though I wanted to check if you're done with your fixes or not. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Generalissima: I have now responded to all you're comments; what do you think? :) --TheUzbek (talk) 11:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History6042's comments

[edit]

TheAstorPastor's comments

[edit]

Bold words signify that those word(s) have been added or changed

  • when it was replaced by the office of president of the LCY. → when it was replaced by the office of the president of the LCY.
  • the 14th Congress rejourned and elected → the 14th Congress reconvened and elected
  • established as a people's democratic state and established a communist form of government → established as a people's democratic state and adopted a communist form of government
  • elected by the congress and was accountable it, the conference → elected by the congress and was accountable to it, the conference The AP (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC) I will check the list too; but now nap time![reply]

Timeline of the 2004 Pacific hurricane season

[edit]
Nominator(s): Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 20:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My fascination with Wikipedia's hurricane season timelines began when I was very young. Around the time I first started reading Wikipedia, I came across the timeline of the 2004 Pacific hurricane season, and it stuck out to me due in part to a humorous narrative tidbit regarding Hurricane Isis. Though I now realize such writing isn't appropriate for an encyclopedia (indeed, this portion was rephrased soon after I found it), I loved how the timeline presented a chronology of the season. As for the season itself, it was remarkably low on both activity and impacts. No systems made landfall above tropical depression strength nor caused any known fatalities, though a few systems did cause minor effects.

I attempted to push this timeline through FLC in late 2010, but was unsuccessful. Over the past few months, I have rewritten it to the standard of the timeline FLs I've helped promote this year (see Timeline of the 1995 Pacific hurricane season and Timeline of the 2011 Pacific hurricane season for the two most recent examples), and I believe it is ready for a second crack at the bronze star. Personally, I would love if my 10th featured list could not only be one that I had previously tried to promote, but also one that holds some nostalgic value for me. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 20:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Generalissima

[edit]

@Dylan620: Since I want to do my part in making FLCs pass quicker, I'll review each part here.

Images: All images are correctly licensed (PD) and fitting for the article. All good there.

Prose: Lede is solid. You wikilink atmospheric stability, but I think "air mass" is the more important one, since you can kind of infer what stability means there if you know what an air mass is (I didn't - not a meterology person, lol.) Formatting looks solidly in line with your previous FLs in this area. I don't see anything to remark on in the timeline itself. (Side note: amazed we don't have an article on the concept of a major hurricane beyond just the scale!)

Source: Everything is cited properly, and the sources are well-formatted. Things are mostly cited to the NHC and NOAA. I checked these sources and found nothing out of place:

  • Avila et al., 2005
  • "Huracán "Javier" Acecha a la Costa Pacífica de México"
  • Avila, Tropical Cyclone Report (though this one should have the date, 2004, added to the cite)
  • Beven, Tropical Cyclone Report (ditto on the date)
  • Pasch is missing the date too. Just double check all the cyclone reports and make sure they have dates! That's all that seems off to me. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for the thorough review, Generalissima – everything should be resolved now! I wikilinked air mass and de-linked atmospheric stability to avoid falling afoul of WP:SEAOFBLUE. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 23:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea - Support on both counts. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 00:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • No systems caused any known fatalities, although... – I highly doubt the fishermen are still alive, would "confirmed" be a better word here?
  • ...prompted water rescues in California due to high surf. – Is there a possible link for surf?
  • ...Cabo San Lucas, Baja California Sur; this makes it the first Pacific major hurricane... – In my opinion the semicolon is clunky, can probably be replaced with a period. Understandable if it you don't want to replace it though.
  • ...Acapulco, Guerrero; this makes it the second... – same issue as above.
  • Manzanillo, Colima should be linked when first mentioned.
  • Sinaloa should be linked in its only appearance.

Other than that, good work! Kline • talk • contribs 04:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good catches, Kline, I appreciate the feedback. All should be resolved; I wikilinked Surfing#Surf waves in response to your second point. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 13:33, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, support! Kline • talk • contribs 18:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
MPGuy2824
  • Tropical Storm Lester is first mentioned in the lead, but not wikilinked there.
    • I had to think a bit on how to resolve this. There is no wikilink to Lester in the lede because Lester does not have its own article. I briefly considered wikilinking Lester's section in the season article (as I had done in the body of the timeline), but realized that I would have to wikilink the sections of each system mentioned in the lede for consistency. Recently, Drdpw (courtesy ping) informed me at Timeline of the 2024 Pacific hurricane season that, in his words, we do not link sections in the season article, only stand alone articles. I had been linking season article sections because the last season timeline to be promoted before 2024, Timeline of the 2020 Pacific hurricane season, did so. Turns out that timeline was an exception to the rule; I spent about an hour or so this morning looking back through several other featured hurricane season timelines promoted before 2024, and indeed the majority only wikilink storms that have articles. I didn't like doing this – I personally find the section links to be helpful for navigation and accessibility, and could not seem to find a discussion where consensus had been reached for their omission – but I have resolved this issue by removing all links to tropical cyclones that do not have their own articles. Dylan620 (he/him • talk • edits) 17:49, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 3 "Annual Summary: Eastern North Pacific Hurricane Season of 2004" is missing its archive link.
  • Area of responsibility is an article about a military term. Maybe a link to Tropical cyclone basins#Overview might be better.
  • That's all I could find in the prose. Support in advance, since I trust you'll fix the above issues. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:17, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for removal

[edit]

List of premiers of Alberta

[edit]
Notified: WikiProject Alberta, WikiProject Governments of Canada, and WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada; nominator is long inactive

2006 promotion; fails WP:FLCR 3b with 21(!) unsourced claims and almost no citations in the table and 5c, with MOS:COLHEAD and no column or row headers (although it looks like the latter issue is with {{Canadian first minister list}}). It also has over 2,000 words of prose, which should be copied to Premier of Alberta as appropriate. Talk page concerns went unanswered. charlotte 👸♥ 06:21, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added col/rowscopes to the table template, but the list still needs to set a |caption= on the header template and remove the psuedo-header rowspans (e.g. "Premiers of the North-West Territories"). --PresN 13:01, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bleach season 5

[edit]
Notified: Sephiroth BCR, WikiProject Anime and manga, WikiProject Television

This list is missing key sections (namely production and reception), has poor sourcing (too many primary sources or lower-quality sources), and overall fails to meet present-day expectations for season articles. See also the related FLRCs for seasons 1, 2, 3, and 4. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:46, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remove per the last 4. Should not be a list article and isn't even close to GA. Sgubaldo (talk) 12:05, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of major Super Smash Bros. Ultimate tournaments

[edit]
Notified: User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy, WikiProject Video games

I am nominating this for featured list removal because... This article is frankly horrible. It lacks modern information after 2022. It's not as simple as adding the information as essentially the entire smash scene regarding rankings and tournaments imploded in 2022 when Panda Global went bust, so you'd have to add a separate ultrank 2023.1 list, then you'd have to add a separate lumirank list from when Luminosity Gaming acquired ultrank. This makes it too much work to just be a few simple edits from staying in featured lists.

A good alternative would be someone taking on the job of fully fixing this page up - which is not an easy effort.

Furthermore: there are many grammar problems found in the article. Examples being:

"In a January 2020 interview, Nintendo president Shuntaro Furukawa indicated that the company did not intend to support esports, stating that the company's focus was on inclusiveness, and their ability to create games that many people want to play, without the need for prize money, was one of Nintendo's strengths" - Run on sentence. "was" shouldn't be used twice here as it makes the sentence grammatically incorrect (clause being "the company's focus was on ... was one of Nintendo's strengths) versus (the company's focus on ... was one of Nintendo's strengths)

"Ultimate was released on December 7, 2018, to critical acclaim,[8][9] and broke sales records in the United States and Europe en route to becoming the best-selling fighting game of all time." - comma splice

"Players control one of over 80 characters drawn from Nintendo and third-party game franchises, and try to knock their opponents out of an arena. " - awkward + incorrect comma usage considering this sentence stands alone. should be no comma or "franchises, with the goal being to..." or similar

Many such grammatical errors in the opening, as well as outdated information which is not easily fixable, leads me to believe this is not a featured list-worthy list. Witsako (talk) 23:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: I don't care what happens to this article and I'm not going to put in any effort to fix it. In 2020, several sexual misconduct scandals broke in the competitive Smash community, and after seeing how much of that community essentially went "we don't care as long as they press buttons good", I want nothing to do with Smash anymore. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That is entirely fair and I do not blame you whatsoever. Witsako (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Characters of God of War

[edit]
Notified: JDC808, WikiProject video games

There are visible issues in the article. The lead should be updated + there are tons of unsourced statements for this to remain on the featured list + italicize game and film titles in the citation titles per MOS:CONFORMTITLE. The reception should be expanded/rewritten and the websites should be italicized. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 05:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Nominator's concerns are entirely superficial and incredibly easy to fix editorially. There's nothing here that cannot be solved by one editor, as the bulk of the content meets the FL standard already. Putting editors on unnecessary time constraints because of easily fixable issues does not seem necessary when the nom could fix the issues themselves, or request the help of other editors to do so (Such as at Wikipedia:VGCHAR or Wikipedia:VG). Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:30, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Assume WP:Goodfaith. I don't think this is "easily fixable" where there are several unsourced statements, PlayStation Universe is not reliable and should be removed, italicize game or film titles in the citation titles per MOS:CONFORMTITLE , and possibly some of the description/plot should be trimmed down a bit. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 00:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I never said nor implied I believed bad faith, and I apologize if it came off that way. Regardless, I do believe this can be fixed rather easily, and you reiterating your exact statements from the nom do not change my mind on the fact.
-PlayStation Universe is used once. This is a simple removal and doesn't impact the article given the wealth of other sources used in the article.
-CONFORMTITLE is a factor, sure, but that's just basic legwork. An article shouldn't be sent to a demotion process when an editor can just italicize titles in a process that takes twenty minutes at most.
-Glancing over the article, I see a few spots without cites, but they seem to be in the minority of statements. Plot statements do not need citations (Though preferred), and the few missing voice actor cites can be added or removed depending on the availability of sourcing.
-If plot should be trimmed, then there's nothing stopping you or any other editor from being Wikipedia:BOLD and trimming down the content to more manageable levels. If you're uncertain on what should be cut due to unfamiliarity, that's a process that can be discussed in venues like those I mentioned above. A lengthy demotion process like this does not need to be involved in this kind of content discussion, and the plot expansion is not so vast that it is unmanageable by just one or two editors.
I would make these changes myself, but JDC seems to be on it already above. I'll leave it in their capable hands, but this task is something easily performed, and for which a venue like this is unnecessary. Articles should only be sent to reviews or removal forums if their content is so far gone that it cannot merely be resolved through simple edits. This article does not fall under that case. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Left the issues at talk page, but hasn't resolved yet; so I nomed it into here (FL has the same quality as GA, not FA). It would be more disappointing if the article was sent to featured list review, and the author possibly retired already in the future. I should have expected that it would be fairly "easy" for an editor who is very active despite the article has several unsourced statements and other stuff. I would like to apologize also if this was sent abruptly, but it doesn't need to be rushed anyway. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 03:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Re:Talk page. Can't speak on other editors, but I rarely check Talk pages unless I'm tagged or it's an article I'm currently working on and there are disagreements with another editor that needs to be resolved. So, I personally never saw that Talk page post. Tagging me on that post (or any editor who has contributed to the article) could have possibly had the issues resolved sooner and avoided this removal nom. And there is in fact a timeline on the review, so can't put this off for long. And Pokelego999, feel free to make changes that you see necessary. It would make it a little easier on me. --JDC808 ♫ 02:26, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@JDC808 do you want me to handle the CONFORMTITLE stuff? From there I can probably look over and see if anything can be trimmed, but I don't want to interfere with anything you already have planned. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:44, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pokelego999, that's fine. I don't have anything specific planned. I was basically just going to start at the top and address the concerns as I see them. --JDC808 ♫ 02:51, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@JDC808 did some italics fixes per CONFORMTITLE. Looking at the plot, a lot of the new bloat the nom seems to be referring to seems to hail from recent releases like God of War (2018 video game) and God of War Ragnarök. I'm unfamiliar with these two, so I don't know which characters should be kept on the list or not. I will leave this in your hands, but if there's anything I can do with helping to improve the article, let me know. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done some various copy/editing and updated parts for the Norse games. Now just to locate sources for some of the voice actors that are missing citations. --JDC808 ♫ 04:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I should have pinged you in last post, but Pokelego999, if you would like to help locate missing sources for the voice actors, that would be great. I'm going to take a break for the evening and come back sometime tomorrow. --JDC808 ♫ 04:50, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Got caught up in some other stuff and forgot to get back to this the other day, but I believe I have taken care of all citations in regards to voice actors. I believe that addresses all the issues brought about by the nominator. --JDC808 ♫ 03:21, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work with the article. Since this is FLC not FA, the article looks like in a decent shape. I will choose to Keep or withdraw this nomination. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 03:29, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appy Awards

[edit]
Notified: The Rambling Man, Video games, Awards, Apps, Lists

Looking at when the was nominated, which was three days after the awards were presented, it definitely seemed like a second year of these were expected but that never happened. And looking at the sources used, most of them come from the Appy Awards website itself. Also don't believe that What Mobile is a reliable source. It just looks too barebones to really be called a Featured List with it just being two paragraphs and a table. GamerPro64 02:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Remove. I think it's possible that this is the best the article can ever be, which is commendable, but I also don't think every topic can qualify for featured status. I don't think this article qualifies for AFD, but the three secondary sources in Daily Telegraph, BBC, and What Mobile are all rather short and not particularly in-depth stories. A Google for "Appy Awards -wikipedia" does not turn up a lot of stuff that could be added, either. I don't think the secondary sourcing is strong enough here. SnowFire (talk) 05:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Frankly, I'm not even sure this passes WP:SUSTAINED or WP:GNG in general. That it should not be featured is a foregone conclusion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:44, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove I don't think this award passes WP:GNG, since beyond the inaugural event which was itself barely covered by reliable sources, there has been no further significant coverage that indicates notability here (WP:SUSTAINED). I would probably nominate this article for AfD or for a merger to Carphone Warehouse after this FLRC closes. Either way I don't think there's enough material here to make a FL sadly. Fathoms Below (talk) 18:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This isn't notable, but otherwise keep. This fails SUSTAINED and should be merged to Carphone Warehouse (and thus automatically lose FL), but it is stupid to arbitrarily declare that a list is too "barebones" when it meets the criteria just fine and there is no room for expansion. charlotte 👸🎄 09:46, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • FLC3 includes "does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article," so I'd say that there's a valid concern here. More generally, some editors would look askance at backdoor removing featured status via merging the article, so having some sort of RFC-ish discussion somewhere is valid before taking action, and doing such a discussion at FLRC seems fine to me. (And to be clear, per my earlier !vote, I don't think the article necessarily "needs" to be merged to lose Featured status. Insufficient sourcing should be a problem for featured status anywhere.) SnowFire (talk) 20:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates&oldid=1272812775"