Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/February 2018

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC) [1].

---

List of career achievements by Cristiano Ronaldo

Nominator(s): Hurrygane (talk) 18:49, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list. Hurrygane (talk) 18:49, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Comments from BeatlesLedTV

First off, your description for nominating is probably the best one I've seen since being an FLC contributor. Anyways on to comments:

• Featured lists don't begin with "the list of..."
• I think for this list to be featured it shouldn't be a dynamic list – it should be complete
• All images need alt text (use this)
• All tables need scope cols & rows per MOS:ACCESS
• In the "FIFA Club World Cup Golden Ball" table, people should be sorted by last name per WP:Sorting, ref cols should be unsortable, as well as in general sort by ascending year
• Honestly feel like many of these tables don't need to be sortable
• Countries should be listed next to their respective flags. Most people probably can't tell countries by their flag

That's it for now. Nice work! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

@BeatlesLedTV: Done (excluding one matter; I thought tables were already sorted by ascending year?) ✔ Hurrygane (talk) 11:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Comment - not sure why there is a list dedicated to his career achievements, or Lionel Messi for that matter, doesn't that set a precedent? All their football honours and achievements could be summarised in their respective pages, something like this borders on WP:LISTCRUFT. Lemonade51 (talk) 16:39, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose if we are embarking on a path of creating a template for the career achievements of footballers (isn't almost all of this covered in Ronaldo's article?), it needs to be spot on. This, in my opinion, is not. Far, far, far too much of it is unreferenced, and that's a speedy fail. It's not particularly engaging to "read", it's list after table after list after table. I'm sure it's taken a lot of hard work to get it here, but in my opinion, it's not really a piece of featured work. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:52, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose agree with TRM; somehow, even with 200+ references, there are still a ton of things left unreferenced, and the layout is just... exhausting. The first of those is at least straightforward enought to deal with, but there's no response to TRM's comment in the last 10 days, and the nominator has been sporadically active in that time. I'm going to close this fairly soon if there's no movement. --PresN 20:22, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Closing. --PresN 04:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been not promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:31, 1 February 2018 (UTC) [2].

---

List of Fordham University alumni

Nominator(s): Drown Soda (talk) 05:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it covers FA list qualifications—it is broad, appropriately cited, and has a sufficient lede section. --Drown Soda (talk) 05:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 11:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Comments We don't start FLs with "This list of ...", just as FAs don't start with "This article about..." Image captions which are fragments should not have full stops. "Fordham has over 183,500 " as of? Tables need to comply with MOS:ACCESS in terms of row and col scopes. Is File:Symbol Morden vote.svg accessible, i.e. do screen readers verbalise it helpfully? Any images of these alumni? The list is somewhat turgid right now with walls of tables. Enough to get started. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:14, 12 October 2017 (UTC) Drown Soda these comments remain unaddressed for nearly three weeks, are you intending to make progress here or shall I close the nomination? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:35, 1 November 2017 (UTC) @The Rambling Man: Apologies, I did not receive a notification of this having received any commentary. I will try and address your points and check back later. --Drown Soda (talk) 21:46, 1 November 2017 (UTC) No, you'll need to keep this on your watchlist and look for changes. We don't all ping people. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 1 November 2017 (UTC) Again, my mistake. I am addressing this right now. --Drown Soda (talk) 22:15, 1 November 2017 (UTC) The Rambling Man I've made some alterations based on your comments and clarified some of the points that remained unclear (i.e. the 183,500 estimation). I also removed the File:Symbol Morden vote.svg and replaced it with a textual signifier which would be more appropriate across platforms and not cause any readability issues. I also scaled down the width of the tables and added photographs of the alumni in the list. --Drown Soda (talk) 23:01, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Comments –

• "situated across three campuses in southern New York State". The last word probably shouldn't be capitalized.
• The hyphen in "Academy Award-winner" should be removed.
• Music: The source for Chrissy Costanza was to Wikia and has been removed. Either find a reliable source and add it, or remove the entry as uncited.
• I'm not doing a full source review, but refs 18 and 277 need access dates, and some refs have improper all caps that should be removed. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:17, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Comments

• "Individuals who may belong in multiple sections appear only in one." - how is it decided where the individuals in question appear?
• What does "class year" refer to? Is it the year the person graduated? Why is it missing for many people?
• In the fictional section, there is inconsistency in the descriptions ("character" vs "a character" etc)
• That's all I have spotted so far..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:51, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I suppose it could use clarification, but the primary reason for notability is how the groupings have been based; there are people in the list who could be classified as belonging to multiple groups, but their primary notability has been the general approach. Class year refers to the year(s) the individuals graduate from the university; it is noted in the key that blank spaces mean the information is unavailable (i.e. there is no reliable source stating the subject's graduation year). I will work on the consistency in the fictional alumni section. --Drown Soda (talk) 01:28, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Comments from BeatlesLedTV

• I know Rambling Man mentioned this earlier but none of the tables comply with MOS:ACCESS in terms of scope rows and cols. See MOS:DTAB for more help.
• I think every table would look better centered except with the name & nobility columns left-aligned.
• In some of the tables when you sort by name, not all names are in order. Make sure they are.
• The fictional table isn't sorted by last name. See WP:Sorting
• How come some boxes have N/A in them while others are complete blank? I would have N/A in every one that's unknown.

That's what I can give you now. It's getting there! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 21:02, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Per your first comment, I will look this through--the formalities when it comes to tables are somewhat new to me, so I will look at MOS:DTAB to figure out what approach I should take. As for the N/A, this is to distinguish individuals who did not graduate from those who did, but whose degrees are unknown (as blank cells denote information being "unknown"—for the subjects who did not graduate, there is (DNG) included next to their class year/years attended, but if the degree cell is left blank, it seems at a glance to suggest that the information on the subject's degree is unknown, when it's in fact not—they just didn't graduate. I'm not sure if there might be a better way of sorting that or not. --Drown Soda (talk) 01:28, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

@Drown Soda: Are you still working on this nomination? There have now been several reviews without response, and this nomination will be closed soon if there's no progress. --PresN 21:36, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@PresN: I have recently read over the comments and suggestions here, and I do plan on chipping away at this. There are a handful of things that may prove somewhat laborious (such as changing the table alignments in each entry, as there are hundreds of people in this list), but I do want to work on it. I'm new to FA lists so some of this has been a learning process as I've mainly worked on biographies/film and historical articles. Let me know what you feel on this; I'm not sure I can give a fool-proof timeframe, but I'd hope to address most of these things within the next week. --Drown Soda (talk) 01:28, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it has been almost another 2 weeks without any comment or edit to the article by the nominator, and the FLC still has no supports; I'm going to have to close this for now. Feel free to re-nominate this whenever you get back to it. --PresN 18:03, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been not promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.