Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Shooting thaler/archive1

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 The Rambling Man 14:06, 14 December 2010 [1].

Shooting thaler

Nominator(s): RHM22 (talk) 15:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the standards for a Featured List and covers the topic of shooting thalers thoroughly.-RHM22 (talk) 15:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments resolved by GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs)

Quick Comments:
- You didn't add non-breaking space. See here.
- References should be after punctuation marks.

-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 20:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. I fixed the punctuation, but I have a small question about the NBSP. Should they be added before and after a number, or just after? For instance, if I wanted to write "The United States entered World War II in 1941 due to the bombing of Pearl Harbor", should I type "The United States entered World War II in 1941 due to the bombing of Pearl Harbor or "The United States entered World War II in 1941 due to the bombing of Pearl Harbor"?-RHM22 (talk) 20:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NBSP wouldn't be necessary in that instance for the year. It should be used for "World War II", or anywhere that separating the number would cause confusion (see examples at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Non-breaking_spaces). At a glance, the only place I see the need for it here is in the diameter measurements. Jujutacular ^talk 03:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! The only problem, however, is that I used conversion templates for all the diameter measurements.-RHM22 (talk) 04:01, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And you should add for example in measurement modules like this: 10 centimeter or 40 millimeter. oops, didn't read above, sry.

Just to be sure, there aren't any places left that need the NBSP, are there? I went over the article and I didn't see any.-RHM22 (talk) 01:07, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found one and added non-breaking.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 13:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Currencies shouldn't have non-breakings.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 13:22, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've removed the NBSPs from the currencies.-RHM22 (talk) 15:15, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments nice to see a list of something slightly different here! Comments on the lead only as I am "otherwise engaged"!

Avoid bold links in the lead.
The lead could be perhaps three times the size, this list is big so the lead needs to comprehensively summarise it.
No French for "shooting festival" or "free shoot"?
I hate years in headings, but that's just my opinion.
Perhaps a useful link for "circulating" for non-numismatists.

The Rambling Man (talk) 21:07, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the great suggestions! I'll fix those right away. Unfortunately, I don't know what the French translations for those two words are. I know the direct translation ("tir libre" for "free shoot", for example), but I don't know if those are actually correct in that context. I'll check my books and see what I can find. Thanks again for the suggestions.-RHM22 (talk) 21:54, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! I found the French translation, at least for shooting festival. It should be "fête de tir"!-RHM22 (talk) 21:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added some to the lead, but I was only able to increase it by about double. Also, I don't really think I can remove the years, because they're very important in coin-related articles. I fixed the other problems. I'm sorry that I was not able to improve upon it more.-RHM22 (talk) 01:04, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments more on the top part of the list...

Not sure why the year needs to be in the heading when it's repeated in each table.
Would make the lead into two paragraphs rather than one big one.
Would force the table of contents to display to level two only as it's quite oversized right now.
Image caption has a capital T for Thaler, but the article title doesn't. Why?
"each bearing the same design. One of which is struck in silver while the other is struck in gold" ->"each bearing the same design, one struck in silver, the other in gold".
Caption "5 francs" ->"five francs".

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think addressed everything. Using a little imagination, I was able to remove all the years in the lead. I fixed the capitalized "thalers" and the clumsy sentence and edited the lead into two paragraphs. One for the definition of a shooting thaler and one for history of the coins. The table of contents thing was a really good idea. I don't think it affects the ease of access at all, and it looks a lot better. I changed the caption for the 1934 image to "five francs", but you didn't mean to change all the captions within the tables, did you? I can do that, I just wasn't sure if that's what you meant or not. Thanks again for great suggestions.-RHM22 (talk) 02:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A quick note to those interested in the article: JohnFromPinckney suggested added new tables to the article in order to increase it's usefulness to users who are required to use special read-aloud software (sorry, I forgot exactly what that is called). John and I have both decided on a suitable layout. I'll begin implementing them soon, but it may take a little while, as I need to add some information about the images for the rollover text. I apologize for the inconvenience to reviewers. Please feel free to remove this article from the FL nominations if these changes could possibly cause some type of jam in the system. Thanks to all who have contributed thoughts and suggestions.-RHM22 (talk) 00:12, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. I think withdrawing the nomination is a good idea if you are about to undertake a large overhaul of the list. I'll remove it from the listing in due course. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:07, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Will it be ok for me to renominate the list after all necessary changes have been made?-RHM22 (talk) 13:57, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I know I'll have to wait two weeks for the renomination, but I'm not in any rush.-RHM22 (talk) 14:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, renomination is fine, and in this case I would see no objection to it being listed sooner than two weeks. Good luck with your changes. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:04, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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