Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/North Carolina hurricanes

North Carolina hurricanes[edit]

Main page	Articles
List of North Carolina hurricanes	List of North Carolina hurricanes (pre-1900) – List of North Carolina hurricanes (1900–1949) – List of North Carolina hurricanes (1950–1979) – List of North Carolina hurricanes (1980–present)

Finally, there's a sequel to the Florida hurricanes topic. Every list is either featured, or on FLC. There are no gaps, and they're all inter-connected. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update - List of North Carolina hurricanes (1900-1949) is now featured. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update: List of North Carolina hurricanes is featured per this diff. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 16:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional support - Damn, Hurricanehink, you never quit. Well done, they even all have matching charts at the bottom. Pending the FLC of the 1950-1979 list you have my support. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 04:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support - based on when the last two pass FLC, though I am 100% certain that they will. --PresN (talk) 05:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional support as long as current article in FLC passes you have my support. Well done. 02blythed (talk) 11:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per criteria: "The topic should not have any … Featured list candidates,… when nominated for featured topic. Please have all required processes done before nominating." Zginder^{(talk) (Contrib)} 19:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hurricanehink certainly committed a faut-pas by submitting it early, but I don't think that is worth opposing on that ground when it is very likely that the last article will pass. A conditional support seems reasonable. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to cut the guy some slack in this regard, mainly because he has to his credit 36 FAs, 15 FLs, and 3 FTs, none of which have ever been de-listed. Honestly, at this point when he nominates something, I just assume it will pass. --PresN (talk) 21:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, thanks. I knew the FTC nom would take longer than the FLC's to pass. As both FLC noms already have supports, I chose not to wait another few weeks. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After nomination closed: Support Now meets criteria. Z gin der 2008-04-19T12:36Z (UTC)

Conditional support - will gladly provide full support when the remaining non-featured items pass WP:FLC. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional support on the same condition as Sephiroth. Otherwise, he never quits, he'll write till he's done. Anyway, I guess 4 FTs isn't bad for 1 user. ^Mitch 32 ^contribs 02:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the two remaining articles are of high quality, so no need for the "conditional" here. The 1900-1949 list is well on its way to passing FLC, and the topic's main page satisfies all the criteria for {{A-Class}} in WP:WPTC, so I've tagged it that way. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 06:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per the criteria A-class is not enough. Zginder^{(talk) (Contrib)} 21:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand WP:WIAFT correctly, it is, per criterion 3(c). It is impossible for the list to become a good article, so the other conditions apply. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 03:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lists can be featured lists which are included in 3(a), so 3(c) does not apply. Zginder^{(talk) (Contrib)} 17:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I agree with Titoxd, no need for being conditional, articles not featured are of very high quality. Hello32020 (talk) 03:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Conditional~~Full support on the remaining non FLs passing. Even if they are of high quality, they can't be "officially" identified as such because GA and A status doesn't apply to lists. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:14, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's true for GA's, but not for A-Class pages. A-Class status is designated by WikiProjects, and the assessment scale gives two options to WikiProjects: the first one is to use {{List-Class}}, and the other one is to assess lists using the full FA/A/GA/B/Start/Stub scale. WikiProject Tropical cyclones assesses all of its lists, and does not make use of the List-Class rating. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 05:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. I'm not really involved in projects, which is why I didn't know. Though it is good to know that's how they become A rated. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 06:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agreed with Titoxd and Hello32020. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus to promote --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 06:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC) Just saw that one hasn't been promoted yet. Might as well do this right. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 06:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Has anyone noticed that the very titles of three out of four lists incorporate MoS breaches? En dashes ought to be used for date ranges as opposed to hyphens. I seriously wonder how it has come to pass that this was not noted in any of the three FLCs. Waltham, The Duke of 09:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I experimented with that, but it wouldn't work. Are you sure it's required to have an endash in the title? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I am absolutely certain. I do not understand how it could not work; all one has to do is move the page, fix the double redirects, and, for the sake of appearance, change the most important links (like those on the FL master page and within the topic itself). See Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth for an example of a page—a Featured Article—which has recently undergone this process. Waltham, The Duke of 19:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Wow, something was screwy when I tried it before. OK, I took care of all of them. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:24, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Urm, this is really awkward... Only date ranges should have en dashes; pre-1900 is not a date range, and is correct hyphenated. (Well, was.) That one should go back... Waltham, The Duke of 15:56, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        I have fixed it myself, although it was not my mistake. I guess I was too impatient... Waltham, The Duke of 22:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The number of users who ~~care about~~ know about dash types is too small to catch all of these from getting through. I guess those editors will have to spend a lot more time in FLC for us to always get it right. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 03:16, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus to promote – Now they are all featured. That's much better. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 16:19, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Supplementary nominations[edit]

Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Lists of North Carolina hurricanes/addition1