Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Jesus College, Oxford/addition2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jesus College, Oxford (2nd supplementary nomination)

[edit]

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Jesus College, Oxford for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

  1. List of alumni of Jesus College, Oxford: Clergy
  2. List of alumni of Jesus College, Oxford: Law and government
  3. List of alumni of Jesus College, Oxford: Mathematics, medicine and science

The main alumni list has grown and spawned three sub-lists, all of which are now FLs in their own right, hence this supplementary topic nom. BencherliteTalk 06:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not that there should be anything urgently needing my attention on this non-controversial supplementary nomination, but just to leave a note that I'm off Wikipedia for the next fortnight. BencherliteTalk 18:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Meets all criteria. Good job on getting Jesus College Boat Club (Oxford) to FA; you are just one away from a fully featured topic! Dabomb87 (talk) 13:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I support these additions somewhere but am going to throw out a suggestion. Because these 3 additional alumni FLs are so tightly connected with the main alumni list, might it be better to have a alumni subtopic of 4 lists. I know FTs should not be excessively subdivided, but I just thought I'd suggest it as those 4 lists clearly go together as a set. Good work on this! Rambo's Revenge (talk) 22:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    While both topics would be comprehensive within themselves, the total number of articles here is 9, hence I think this would break the "needlessly small" recommendation -- the only reason to split would be that it's more impressive which isn't really a reason IMO. I suppose there is another alumni topic so in a sense it seems a bit unfair that this topic doesn't get to be broken in two when that topic is one half of the resultant break, but if a USNA topic is brought up to scratch, and the number of articles is such that one merged topic wouldn't be too big, I would advocate merging there, too - rst20xx (talk) 23:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - rst20xx (talk) 23:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • SupportJuliancolton | Talk 19:02, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing with consensus to add supplementary articles.YobMod 18:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]