Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Arcade Fire awards

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 promoted by User:The Rambling Man 09:21, 28 July 2008 [1].

List of Arcade Fire awards

This is based off of List of The Killers awards, a featured list promoted a few weeks ago. Gary King (talk) 21:01, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
- Got the feeling this a little light. The lead could be expanded at the very least.
- "...and has sold over 320,000 copies in the United States and over..." 2 x and in a single sentence becomes, for me, a little hard work.
- Question really, is "favourable" Canadian English (i.e. with the u which US English omits but which Brit Eng mandates?)
- "Arcade Fire has received five nominations...." maybe "...but no awards" or something, since this list is called "list of Arcade Fire awards"..
- Consider making the columns in each table the same % width so they look similar throughout the list. Especially as Juno Awards year column is masssssive.
- "Arcade Fire has won five awards from 20 nominations." - not according to your infobox...
- Expand the caption to say where and why as the info seems to be available in the Commons description.
- Maybe worth clarifying that Grammys are US since you've said BRITs are British.
- I'd prefer to see ref's ordered numerically unless there's a really good reason not to.
- How is this a WP:RS?
- Your EL's have a Polish fansite and a forum, are these quality links we need at FL?
- Pity the Arcade Fire template doesn't link to this list?
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All done. "Favourable" is Canadian. Columns in each table are same size, at least for me. They all use the exact same code to create them. The reference in question is reliable because several reliable news sources have used it in the past, including:

"In tune with the GRAMMYS". Star Tribune. 2006-02-08.
"Online Service Helps Bands Create Tours". Post-Standard. 2005-10-05.
"Web Sightings". Ocala Star-Banner. 2000-06-04.
"Grammy Odds & Ends". Dayton Daily News. 2004-02-08.

Gary King (talk) 18:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cols are still mega-screwed for me in Safari under Mac OS X. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should be fixed now. Gary King (talk) 18:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments on column width 01:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment In {{Awards table}}, width is fixed in pixels; should be changed to percentages. The columns look weird whenever width is fixed in pixels. I am talking about pages where more than one table is present.--Crzy cheetah 18:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, perhaps, Gary, this is the problem with all those tables I've commented on. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I made the tables fixed widths. Looks fine in Safari now. Gary King (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Looks weird in IE still. The columns in the first and second tables do not have the same widths.--Crzy cheetah 19:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Should be fixed in IE now. Let me know if it's not. Gary King (talk) 19:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Sorry to say it's not working for me still. I guess the use of the {{Awards table}} hasn't been fully tested across browsers... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Sigh why do you have to use Safari :) I removed the fix for Safari when working on Internet Explorer; now should look fine across the browsers. There's a different fix for each browser! Why can't everyone just use Firefox and be done with it :) Gary King (talk) 19:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(←) Perfecto for me now. Rather than ask everyone use the same browser, ask Microsoft etc to implement HTML correctly, ok?! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You think that's easier to do?! :p Gary King (talk) 20:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gary, you've got influence... how many FLs? Microsoft and Mozilla are waiting for your call... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the fact that I wrote some code for Firefox is more important to them than some FLs :) Firefox's browser is the one that's doing things right; both Microsoft (Internet Explorer) and Apple (Safari) are lumbering giants that are too slow to move to improve their browsers. Gary King (talk) 20:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Knee-jerk Apple-fanboy oppose~~ - how rude. I know what you mean though Gary. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it look good now. Just to make sure, did style="table-layout: fixed;" fix this layout problem for us IE users?--Crzy cheetah 22:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, while the width="" for the table fixed it for Safari. Neither is needed for Firefox :) Gary King (talk) 23:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~ Support Is "Rock on the Net" reliable?--Crzy cheetah 01:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I explained it's reliability above, to TRM. Gary King (talk) 01:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Could you substitute that source to a more well-known publisher anyway? I can't verify any of your examples listed above, plus that site looks like a fan-site. I don't think it's hard to find another site.--Crzy cheetah 01:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Gary King (talk) 02:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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