Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Welcome to featured list candidates! Here, we determine which lists are of a good enough quality to be featured lists (FLs). Featured lists exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and satisfy the FL criteria.

Before nominating a list, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Peer review. This process is not a substitute for peer review. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FLC process. Ones who are not significant contributors to the list should consult regular editors of the list before nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly.

A list should not be listed at featured list candidates and peer review at the same time. Users should not add a second featured list nomination until the first has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed. Please do not split featured list candidate pages into subsections using header code (if necessary, use bolded headings).

The featured list director, Giants2008, or his delegates—Crisco 1492, SchroCat, and PresN—determine the timing of the process for each nomination. Each nomination will last at least 10 days (though most last at least a month or longer) and may be lengthened where changes are ongoing and it seems useful to continue the process. For a nomination to be promoted to FL status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the directors determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the director who considers a nomination and its reviews:

  • actionable objections have not been resolved; or
  • consensus for promotion has not been reached; or
  • insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met.

It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve critical comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support.

After a reasonable time has passed, the director or delegates will decide when a nomination is ready to be closed. A bot will update the list talk page after the list is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the {{FLC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates or adds the {{ArticleHistory}} template. If a nomination is archived, the nominator should take adequate time to resolve issues before re-nominating.

Purge the cache to refresh this page – Table of Contents – Closing instructions – Checklinks – Dablinks – Check redirects
Shortcut:

Featured content:

Featured list tools:

Nomination procedure

Toolbox
  1. Before nominating a list, ensure that it meets all of the FL criteria and that Peer reviews are closed and archived.
  2. Place {{subst:FLC}} on the talk page of the nominated list.
  3. From the FLC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please post to the FLC talk page for assistance.
  4. Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~ and save the page.
  5. Finally, place {{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/name of nominated list/archiveNumber}} at the top of the list of nominees on this page by first copying the above, clicking "edit" on the top of this page, and then pasting, making sure to add the name of the nominated list. While adding a candidate, mention the name of the list in the edit summary.

Supporting and objecting

Please read a nominated list fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.

  • To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the list nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole FLC page).
  • To support a nomination, write *'''Support''', followed by your reason(s). If you have been a significant contributor to the list before its nomination, please indicate this.
  • To oppose a nomination, write *'''Object''' or *'''Oppose''', followed by the reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, the director may ignore it. References on style and grammar do not always agree; if a contributor cites support for a certain style in a standard reference work or other authoritative source, reviewers should consider accepting it. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed. To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it. Alternately, reviewers may hide lengthy, resolved commentary in a cap template with a signature in the header. This method should be used only when necessary, because it can cause the FLC archives to exceed template limits.
  • If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so after the reviewer's signature rather than striking out or splitting up the reviewer's text. Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, break up, or add graphics to comments from other editors; replies are added below the signature on the reviewer's commentary. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page, with a diff to the reviewer's talk page showing the request to reconsider.
  • Graphics are discouraged (such as {{done}} and {{not done}}), as they slow down the page load time.
  • To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write *'''Comment''' followed by your advice.
Nominations urgently needing reviews

The following lists were nominated more than 20 days ago and have had their review time extended because objections are still being addressed, the nomination has not received enough reviews, or insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met. If you have not yet reviewed them, please take the time to do so:

Contents

Nominations[edit]

List of Padma Bhushan award recipients (1980–89)[edit]

Nominator(s): Dharmadhyaksha (talk · contribs) and Vivvt (talk · contribs)

I am nominating this for featured list because with some inputs from you this can easily become a featured content. It is inline with the past FLs of Padma Bhushan of past decades; the 1950s and the 1960s.
Note: Vivvt & i independently have one open FL nom each. But both those noms have received supports and have no pending open points. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 17:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Lakes in Minneapolis[edit]

Nominator(s): BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 03:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

And now for something a little different! There are currently no featured lists of lakes (Justin Timberlake discography notwithstanding) and where better to change that than from Minneapolis, Minnesota, the City of Lakes? The structure of this list is based on List of tributaries of Shamokin Creek and other lists of tributaries. This is my first nomination to WP:FL and I look forward to making sure this is the best list it can be! Uff da! BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 03:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Support. Great idea for a list. I learned a lot from this article. -SusanLesch (talk) 21:30, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
  • One nit. Would it be possible to link Grand Rounds Scenic Byway to "Grand Rounds National Scenic Byway"? I believe that's the name sometimes in use by the Park Board, plus it's the honest truth. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:24, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Selena singles discography[edit]

Nominator(s): – jona ✉ 00:39, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it has since been copy-edited by members over at WP:GOCE and was updated to match model FL singles discographies. – jona ✉ 00:39, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Thank you and good luck on your FLC. Best – jona ✉ 14:46, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

List of cities and towns in Montana[edit]

Nominator(s): Mattximus (talk) 23:55, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

This is my 9th nomination for list of local governments. I have completely reworked this one to now include more demographic data than anyone really needs. I've also tried to standardise formatting to be consistent with other local administrative lists (List of cities and towns in California, List of cities and towns in Alabama etc...). This time I've tried using more templates to make the list a bit more aesthetically pleasing. Please let me know if there is anything else that can be added to perfect this list. Thanks for your input. Mattximus (talk) 23:55, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment: It would be nice if in the Type Column, you also mention the class of the cities. For example, Billings would be City (First Class).Blackhole78 talk | contrib 19:54, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment. I have tried what you proposed in my last list, List of cities and towns in Alabama, but I'm actually considering removing them for several reasons. I'm unaware of any single source that lists which class is which city. Population doesn't automatically change the class, there is some procedure to do so, thus it is impossible to know what class any particular city is (see Birmingham, Alabama for one such anomaly). For the Alabama list, I assumed this to be the case, but no source backs it up, which is not very encyclopedic and is the main reason I'm going to remove them. Secondly, they don't actually mean much functionally. If you have a source that gives either the classification of all cities, or what the functional legislative differences are (there may not be any), I will be happy to add both/either to the list. Thanks again! Mattximus (talk) 21:32, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Support: I can see you take care the sort problem this time, good work.--Jarodalien (talk) 16:31, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Emirates Cup[edit]

Nominator(s): Lemonade51 (talk) 02:40, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Another football nom. The Emirates Cup is a pre-season tournament, hosted by Arsenal which tends to run every summer with few possible exceptions. Just like the competition itself, this list is largely modelled by the Amsterdam Tournament which was promoted years ago. I've polished the history bit, added some pictures and think it's now worth a shot here. As ever would welcome any sort of feedback, mercy buckets....Lemonade51 (talk) 02:40, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Michelle Williams on screen and stage[edit]

Nominator(s): Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:34, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Michelle Williams is an actress who, despite several acclaimed roles, likes to keep a low profile. This listing of her stage and screen appearances has been well-cited, and I appreciate all constructive comments on its improvement. Cheers! Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:34, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Please see the discussion at the article talk page. This editor has a long history of violating policy just to put a FA/FL under his belt. —Musdan77 (talk) 18:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Note: Delegates please note that if I was violating policy, I wouldn't have FA/FLs under my belt. Musdan77 is trying to insinuate that the FLC delegates who have passed my previous 21 FLs don't know what they're doing. This is just another bad-faith tactic by Musdan77, who has a history of attacking editors who write featured content. Look at the persistent disruptions that Musdan77 made at Emma Stone's awards list that eventually became an FL. Krimuk|90 (talk) 02:35, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I checked the whole discussion and can concurr that Musdan77 needs to WP:DROPIT. Being tag happy for the sake of it when you don't even understand the basic structure of lists is borderline disruptive. Further disruptions if reported by other editors should be taken to WP:ANI. —IB [ Poke ] 12:20, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Some of their edits were good suggestions. For example, there are redundancies: section titled Film has a second title called "Film roles of Williams" which can go. Same with other two sections. Why do you need 2 titles for each list? However I do disagree with the lead, it is of an appropriate length. Mattximus (talk) 01:22, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, one is a section title and the other is the table title. But yeah, that isn't really important and I have removed the latter. Cheers! Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:54, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Raymond Chandler bibliography[edit]

Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 21:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Raymond Chandler was an excellent author who struggled initially with writing in the 'hard-boiled' style for which he is best known. This list has been re-written with new material added, and all constructive,comments are welcome. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 21:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Support. Only two, very minor comments, both to do with the lead section:

  • "British-American" – I see from the main Chandler article that he took British nationality in 1907. If that means that he was hitherto an American citizen, I think perhaps British-American would be better switched round to American-British, though the point is not of great importance.
  • For the Williams quote in the final sentence of the introduction, I think the prose would flow more smoothly if you moved the opening quotation marks three words to the right, beginning the direct quote with "a touchstone..".

That's all I can find to throw in. Clear, well laid out, thoroughly sourced and referenced, and doubtless comprehensive. Happy to support promotion. Tim riley talk 15:09, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks Tim. Your suggestions happily adopted. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 21:06, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

List of G:link stations[edit]

Nominator(s): New9374 (talk) 06:32, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria. I created the article and think its on par with similar lists. I am a relatively new editor. This is my first nomination. Please excuse my inexperience. I would appreciate any assistance. Please note I cannot find any detailed ridership figures besides those in the lead with inline citations. Please note I cannot find any distance figures; the article previously included figures that were original research but I removed them. New9374 (talk) 06:32, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments from Gonzo_fan2007
Lede
  • Just my opinion, but I would bold sixteen stations in the G:link, not just sixteen stations.
  • The second paragraph has a lot of short, choppy sentences (specifically "There are no park and ride lots.") and a lot of them start similarly (i.e. Eight stations... , fifteen of the stations..., etc.). If you could go through it, copyedit and merge some of those sentence it would help the flow of the lede.
  • Add a comma after "2018 Commonwealth Games" in the third paragraph.
  • Rewrite "It is planned to have three station:..." to something like "Current plans call for three new stations:...". "It is planned" sounds off.
    • Yes check.svg Done difference. Re-wrote to "Three new stations are planned". New9374 (talk) 02:20, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Rewrite "It is expected to take 11 minutes to travel the extension" to something like "The new extension will add approximately 11 minutes to the total travel time."
    • Yes check.svg Done difference. Re-wrote to "The new extension will add 11 minutes to the total travel time." New9374 (talk) 02:20, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Add "of the new" to "Two of the new stations will have free park and ride lots with a total of 1,400 new parking spaces."
  • Add a comma after "public consultation" in the last paragraph.
Tables and Key
  • I am not sure the paragraph in the Key section is needed. All of the info in this paragraph is readily stated in the tables, and thus seems repetitive. I would recommend removing.
  • I would recommend using different symbols for each transfer station, like † or the {{Rint}} template.
  • Remove the Park and Ride column in the main table, as it doesn't provide any useful info (all of the stations have 0 park and ride spaces).
  • Zones are mentioned in the table but not explained in the lede. I would recommend explaining what zones are, how many zones there are and how many stations are in each zone.
    • Yes check.svg Done difference. Explained in the lede what zones are, how many zones there are and how many zones the stations are located within. New9374 (talk) 06:49, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I would recommend removing the Time column. If you want to keep it, you need to mention the time is in minutes [i.e. the column name could be Time (in minutes)] and include a {{Note}} explaining it (i.e. that the time builds up from the first station at Gold Coast University Hospital). Also, the Time column should be unsortable {i.e. !class="unsortable"|Time).
    • Yes check.svg Done difference. Mentioned the time is in minutes. Included a note. Made the Time column unsortable. New9374 (talk) 02:09, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
      • difference. I think it's unnecessary to mention "(in minutes)" in the column heading and it's "enough" to just mention "in minutes" in the note. Plus I don't like how it widens the column. Hope that's okay with you. New9374 (talk) 03:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Have the future stations been designed enough to include their Grade and Platform Layout (similar to the main table)?
  • You may want to consider adding a See Also section and linking Public transport in Australia (note the piped link to the section) to help readers.
  • You may to consider adding {{South East Queensland public transport}} to the article (and maybe linking this article in the template).
Sources
  • All sources look good and are reliable.
Files
  • All images look good, freely licensed and include alt text and descriptions.
    • N Stale difference. Now that the "Coordinates" and "Tourist attractions nearby" columns are added, I thought it'd be best for the table to be full width so I removed the photo thumbnails to increase the available space and instead added photos to the table in a new column and systematically wrote new alt text. Just like the featured list List of London Underground stations. Thank you, New9374 (talk) 06:08, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I would recommend adding a system map to the article (check-in with the Graphics Lab for requesting a map be made. You can see my request here for how easy it was). It wouldn't hold back my support, but system maps really help the reader understand where the stations and system are located.

Thanks! Let me know if you have any questions. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 01:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I made a small copyedit here, fyi. Hope you don't mind! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 02:52, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Support Looks good! Nice work. I am fine with your responses regarding the minutes and the see also section. Good luck with the map request. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 04:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, only Shiftchange will know for certain, but what would the likely reader of this list be wanting to know? While some of the readers will be train spotters and fascinated by the G:link stations themselves, I suspect the bulk of readers will be people planning on catching the G:link and wondering where they should get off. I suspect many tourists will want to get off at Cavill Avenue being the heart of Surfers Paradise. And I imagine both the hospital and the GU campus will probably be popular destination for some folks. And if I wanted to go to GCEC or the casino, I'd want to get off at North Broadbeach. If I wanted to go to Pacific Fair, I should go to South Broadbeach. Maybe you want to create a separate column for Local Attractions to avoid linking the station name itself (and there might be multiple things to link, e.g. casino and GCEC). Given the Gold Coast's status as a holiday destination, I think local attractions are more important for this list than if this was a list of suburban tram stations in a non-holiday town. Kerry (talk) 13:35, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done difference. Added, sourced from "Stations Archive". RideTheG. Keolis Downer. 2016. Retrieved 10 June 2016.  New9374 (talk) 00:27, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Comments from Kerry Raymond

Could the table have the lat/long coordinates for the stations restored please; they appear to be in this version of the G:link article. Could look at adding a {{GeoGroup}}to show the set of locations on Google Maps, Open Street Map etc. Thanks Kerry (talk) 04:21, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't think you need worry too much about minor differences in lat/long especially once you are at 4 decimal places and beyond; it makes little difference in practice. And the techtonic plates can move at up to 10cm or so a year (although generally less so here in Australia), so all lat/longs become less accurate over time anyway. Kerry (talk) 13:46, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, New9374 (talk) 20:52, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Sam Waterston on screen and stage[edit]

Nominator(s): Arbero (talk) 15:29, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I would like to make this list my first featured list. Thanks. Arbero (talk) 15:29, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Support. Nice work on the text and tables. I've not checked the sources, but may get round to a source review before the end. – SchroCat (talk) 21:32, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Cheers, I hope everything is alright with the article. As for the references, I'm quite sure most of them are reliable, but a check wouldn't hurt. Arbero (talk) 14:09, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Older nominations[edit]

Kerala State Film Award for Best Actor[edit]

Nominator(s): Charles Turing (talk) 16:16, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

The Kerala State Film Award for Best Actor is the most prestigious award given in the Malayalam film industry of the South Indian state of Kerala in India. The award is part of the annual Kerala State Film Award instituted by the Government of Kerala since 1969. This is my second nomination for the same. Unfortunately, the previous one was failed without considerable attention or reviews. --Charles Turing (talk) 16:16, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Support: Having carefully examined the article, I can say that it has my support and hope it passes the FLC this time. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Kailash. Thanks for the comment and support. --Charles Turing (talk) 18:43, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks.--Charles Turing (talk) 14:41, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Overall a great read, though there are way too many instances with the word "award"; I even misread some words in the lead because of that. – jona ✉ 23:16, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
@AJona1992: Reworded some of it. Is it okay now ? --Charles Turing (talk) 19:34, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
The article now flows and reads better and I support its nomination. If you're not too busy, I have a FLC of my own that could use some comments; though you don't have to comment at all if you wish not to. Best – jona ✉ 20:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I wish to, but I am totally unfit for a review. Good luck on your FL. --Charles Turing (talk) 12:31, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Mexican National Women's Championship[edit]

Nominator(s):  MPJ-US  23:26, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

This list is the second to last list needed to create a Feature Topic on current CMLL Championships (the last one has not yet been created) and it follows the formats and standards of the twelve other Featured Lists I have gotten promoted over the years, and as always this list has benefitted from input received during previous FLC nominations and thus to me represents the qualities needed in a Featured List. I welcome all feedback and will be happy to take all constructive suggestions on. Thanks in advance for anyone's input.  MPJ-US  23:26, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Support from the POV of a wrestling editor: based on my review below, all concerns were addressed. starship.paint ~ KO 13:28, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

@MPJ-DK: Here are my comments: starship.paint ~ KO 06:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

  • ... created and sanctioned by the Comisión de Box y Lucha Libre Mexico D.F. - needs a source.
  • Fixed
  • In the table, when you state live event, can you also state the promotion holding it? Because you said AAA and CMLL used the title but I don't know when they did.
  • I will go over the sources and clarify the time line
  • I have indicated which shows were specifically CMLL and AAA to clarify the timeframe a little better.
  • Please explain what is the point of the 1, 2 and the A, B, C in the table. Why not 1, 2, 3, 4, 5?
  • I see how that may look odd, so here goes. I have source confirmation on who the first and second champions were. Champions listed as A, B, C etc. have been sourced as ho!ding the title at a certain time but no confirmation on what number they are. There could have been 5 champs between 2 and "A", or none but records don't confirm that. It would be Original Research to list Rose Williams as " 3" and so on. The lineage is unclear so I tried to not make the list misleading. MPJ-US  11:05, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @MPJ-DK: Ohh okay. I get it now! This explanation needs to be in the table Key. Could you leave a note there? Also, instead of A, B, C, D, E, F, G, I would suggest A1, B1, B2, C1, C2, C3, D1. starship
  • I have changed it to your suggestion, grouping them where the order of reigns is known.

.paint ~ KO 12:09, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Jennifer Lawrence[edit]

Nominator(s): Krish | Talk 18:15, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because Jennifer Lawrence, as we all know, need no introduction. She has achived both critical acclaim and commercial success, and that too in such a short span of time. Coming to the list, which provides the information about the awards and nominations she has received, I feel meets the FL criteria. Looking forward to lots of feedback on this. Krish | Talk 18:15, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I guess I'll take the first bite at this list. I figured I'd take a look at this list since I managed to promote Bradley Cooper's awards list to FL status not too long ago. I'll take a closer look tonight, but just something I noticed right of the bat. Recently, this was a thing, and I had to reword the opening line of the Bradley Cooper list to not include the number of awards and nominations. You should definitely look at it. Famous Hobo (talk) 23:52, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Alright, my previous commitment took much longer than I expected, and I'm kind of tired. But I still did a cursory look through the lead, and so far so good. One thing that can be easily fixed is "her portrayal of Raven Darkhölme / Mystique". Personally, I think you can leave it as Mystique, as most superheroes in superhero movies just go by their superhero name instead of their real names (Captain American, Wolverine, etc.) There is also another mention of Raven Darkhölme / Mystique in the last paragraph. Famous Hobo (talk) 05:12, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Fixed: Famous Hobo Thanks for looking at the list. I really appreciate it. Krish | Talk 17:23, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
  • There are WP:OVERLINK issues in the lead (People and Teen Choice Awards, Golden Globe). – jona ✉ 23:20, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Rajinikanth filmography[edit]

Nominator(s): Kailash29792 (talk), —Vensatry (talk) 18:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Rajinikanth is probably the biggest 'Superstar' in Indian cinema. His body of work encompasses 170-odd films in seven languages. He has been in the industry for 40 years and has been the highest paid actor in India for the last two decades. I joined Wikipedia with the sole intent of taking the actor's bio to GA. I've been working on this list, one of my long-pending tasks, for more than a month. As always, look forward to comments and suggestions. —Vensatry (talk) 18:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments from Pavanjandhyala

A note to the nominator(s) and the delegates before starting the review. Though being a fan of Rajinikanth, i am not really aware of a major portion of his works. Though this is a filmography list, please do try to answer those queries where his characterisations are concerned. And, my affection for the actor is not going to show any sort of impact on my review of this candidate. Thank you.

  • Considering that he seldom worked in the technical crew and writing, i think the word "film career" can be replaced with "acting career".
    • He worked in theatre even before doing his diploma from the Madras Film Institute. So, 'film career' would be the best option to go with. —Vensatry (talk) 07:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • "While performing in a stage play at the institute, he got noticed by the Tamil film director K. Balachander, who signed him for four films". -- two things. First, i think it can be simplified as "...at the institute, Tamil filmmaker K. Balachander noticed him and signed the actor for four films". Second, were the four films written by him, directed by him, or produced by him? If it is the second and third, i suggest you to mention it as "four of his films". If it is the first, mention it as "four films he wrote".
    • Rephrased the former. I don't think the latter needs clarification because it clearly says 'Tamil film director Balachander'. —Vensatry (talk) 07:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Alright. I'm okay with the current sentence there. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:49, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Rajinikanth made his debut with the director's 1975 Tamil drama -- acting debut?
    • Reworded as 'cinematic debut'. —Vensatry (talk) 07:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Fine. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:49, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • "He secured his first major role in Balachander's Telugu drama film Anthuleni Katha (1976). Later that year, he was cast in a negative role in Moondru Mudichu, which marked his first full-fledged role in Tamil." -- This statement can be simplified as "Balachander's Anthuleni Katha and Moondru Mudichu—both released in 1976— offered Rajinikanth his first full fledged roles in Telugu and Tamil films." He played the villain in both the films, so mentioning that isn't too important. The continuing sentence "It was through this film that his style and mannerisms got noticed by the audience" can be rewritten as "His style and mannerisms in the latter earned recognition from the audience."
    • There's a difference between 'major' and 'full-fledged'. And, he was not a 'villain' in either of them. —Vensatry (talk) 07:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • "The success of the film brought the actor-director duo..." -- "Its success brought..."
    • Rephrased as 'The film's success', because we're talking about his role/performance in the previous sentence.
Fine. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:49, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

More to follow... Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:33, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@Pavanjandhyala: Look forward for a thorough review. Thanks, —Vensatry (talk) 07:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Resuming...

  • "Rajinikanth played a dual role for the first time in his career in the "action thriller" Billa (1980), which was a remake of the Bollywood film Don (1978)." -- Is Kailash really the co-nominator? ;-)
I'd prefer to call the film a "gangster thriller". Kailash29792 (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm terrible in this area. Will leave it to Kailash. —Vensatry (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
@Kailash29792: What makes you call Billa a thriller in the first place? Care to explain by giving a small example? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 10:00, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Our definition: Thrillers are characterized and defined by the moods they elicit, giving viewers heightened feelings of suspense, excitement, surprise, anticipation and anxiety. I'm now confident that Billa fits the bill. —Vensatry (talk) 12:40, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Our article on the original calls it an action film, not a thriller. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:40, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘G. Dhananjayan calls the remake an action thriller. So, this should be okay now. —Vensatry (talk) 08:59, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Wasn't that the same book which you found a case of WP:MIRROR in the past? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:50, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
So? —Vensatry (talk) 17:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Is it advisable to use such a source for verifying a claim, for a featured standard article? Please give it a thought. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Why not? The author is clearly an expert in the field. —Vensatry (talk) 05:29, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Nevermind. I found another reliable source which calls it an action thriller. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:16, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
  • What was the fate of his 100th film, considering that it is a landmark one? If information is available about it, please add it.
All I know is that it failed commercially, and may be one reason why Rajinikanth does not often appear in arthouse-like films. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, it's a flop. —Vensatry (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • "In the latter half of the 80s" -- 1980s. It is better to pronouce it completely, though the actor was born in 1950.
  • "He made his debut as a screenwriter in the commercial failure Valli (1993)." -- i suggest you to rephrase it as "He made his debut as a screenwriter with Valli (1993), a commercial failure." Release first, fate next.
Yes, I go with what you say. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
'Fate' is predetermined. :) Nevertheless, rephrased as suggested. —Vensatry (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I think his character in Baashha can be described as a crime boss instead of a gangster. He leads a team of henchmen in the film and stands on a level par with the villain who influences the system. Give it a thought, gangster is too small to describe him. BTW, isn't it important to mention its director?
Yep, he was a crime boss. "Gangster", IMHO, means a lower-level criminal. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Am I the only one who thinks 'crime boss' (I know our article has this title) is a bit informal? —Vensatry (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Crime boss is not an informal word. I hope that you too would feel the same after reading this article by Federal Bureau of Investigation on the Italian Organized Crime. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 10:00, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Okay, done. —Vensatry (talk) 12:40, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • "Rajinikanth himself compensated for the losses by repaying them with money" -- "...compensated for the monetary losses". Rather than money, i don't think so that they lost something else which could've been compensated by the actor.
  • What makes Chandramukhi a horror "comedy"?
This source describes it as one. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I really pity the writer. What made him consider Chandramukhi a comedy is not something i can understand. Anyways, the source is reliable and i am okay with it. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 10:00, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
@Pavanjandhyala: Its actually the hilarious scenes between Rajinikanth and Vadivelu dominating the film, the exorcist bit with Nassar, Vadivelu and Manobala, Vadivelu himself too, that makes Chandramukhi a horror comedy than just plain horror. IMHO, if the film were just plain horror, it wouldn't have given Rajinikanth the comeback he desperately needed. Look at the article's "Legacy" and "In popular culture" sections and you'll know what I mean.  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 11:18, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Our article on the original calls it a horror-comedy. —Vensatry (talk) 12:40, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Let the readers know about the commercial failure of Kochadaiiyaan.
    • I'll leave it to Kailash. —Vensatry (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
@Kailash29792: I await your response. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:40, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Done I think. —Vensatry (talk) 08:59, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
  • It is Paparayudu not "Paapparayudu" in Pedarayudu. (PS: Really strange name for a male, phew! :))
    • Gosh. I, too, was wondering. Fixed —Vensatry (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Ref no. 27, titled "Brand Rajinikanth", is changing its sub-domain. Please fix it.
  • Ditto with ref no. 15 and 29. Both are related to The Hindu.
    • Not sure what's the problem here. —Vensatry (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I've fixed it. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:40, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Can you please provide a better alt text for the only image being used?

Support -- For an actor whom i arguably call the last Indian superstar existing, this is a well detailed list. Hardwork put in by the people is visible. Regards, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:16, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

List of accolades received by Inside Out (2015 film)[edit]

Nominator(s): FrB.TG (talk) 20:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Another awards list of another fantastic film of 2015, which in my humble opinion, meets the FL criteria. FrB.TG (talk) 20:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Support Comments have been addressed, I looked at other similar articles and have found it to be acceptable. The list is well-written, detailed and complete, the writing is superb, and well deserving of FL status. Best – jona ✉ 14:22, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. FrB.TG (talk) 14:35, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

List of Valley Metro Rail stations[edit]

Nominator(s): « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

I came upon this list when it look liked this. Lots of issues including incorrect names of the stations, no references, and just a poorly organized list. Since the system is from my home town, I thought I would take a crack at it! Now this is my first FLC nomination in many, many years, so I apologize if I have missed anything. But I believe that it is a helpful list, meets all of the criteria, and has many helpful images. Please feel free to provide any feedback, I will address any comments promptly. Thanks for taking the time to review the article! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment: The lead section is a bit overlinked; you could probably do without the links to brand, train stop, municipality, intersection (road), weather, waste container, drinking fountain, parking space, nonprofit organization, sales tax, and board of directors. Images check out; all are freely licensed on Commons. Actually, I'm not sure whether File:VMR Station Public Art.jpg should be in there–it may not be covered by freedom of panorama which does not cover artworks, even permanent ones, in the US. On ref 15, the archive/accessdates aren't in a format inconsistent with the other accessdates. This page is looking in good shape! BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 07:15, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Thanks @Bobamnertiopsis! I appreciate the review. Here are my responses:
      • I have delinked based on your recommendations.
      • The piece of art on the station is public art (in that it was commissioned and paid for by Valley Metro and the City of Mesa). I believe that all copyright is released in this case. I am basing this off of the publication of photos of each art piece by Valley Metro found here. I updated the file's description accordingly to clarify. Let me know if this satisfies your concern.
      • On Reference 15, the first date is that date of publication, the second date is when the article was archived by WayBack Machine and the third date is when I accessed the article. It looks different because it is the only source that I used an archived version (Phoenix Business Journal's links rot sometimes).
    • Please let me know if you have any follow-up comments. Thanks again! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:17, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for delinking things in the lead! It feels a little cleaner now.
  • In re the public art: as I understand it, even publicly displayed, publicly funded art in the US is subject to copyright and not subject to the freedom of panorama. Wikimedia Commons's page on freedom of panorama says "17 USC 120 [which governs freedom of panorama in the US] applies only to architectural works, not to other works of visual art, such as statues or sculptures." See Portlandia (statue) or Cloud Gate for some very prominent works of public art that art still not covered by freedom of panorama and whose accompanying pictures are therefore hosted with a non-free use rationale.
  • In re the ref date thing, I was just wondering why you'd gone with "Sunnucks, Mike (August 27, 2015), "Prop. 104 supporters lay out what's next for Phoenix following measure's passage", Phoenix Business Journal (Phoenix, Az), archived from the original on 2016-06-03, retrieved 2016-06-04" instead of "Sunnucks, Mike (August 27, 2015), "Prop. 104 supporters lay out what's next for Phoenix following measure's passage", Phoenix Business Journal (Phoenix, Az), archived from the original on June 3, 2016, retrieved June 4, 2016", the latter of which would leave all dates in the article in a standard format.
  • Oh, may bad! I didn't understand what you were referencing at first. It has been fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 13:33, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Good work on this article! If I have the time, I may make a similar one for the light rail stations on my local metropolitan area's train lines, using yours as a template. All the best, BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 05:18, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Comments Good list but needs some work before promotion
  • Like another editor said, still too much overlinking. Common nouns in the lead should be linked with caution and there's no need to link all the cities and platform types for each station.
  • Although I agree with you, I think this is outside the scope of WP:FLC. None of the criteria require proper naming convention for articles that are just linked to the featured list candidate. If I have time I may be able to address this separate from this nomination. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:38, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • No need for a separate column just for references, just add them at the end of the station name in the first column
  • Since the station name column has various symbols after many of the stations, adding references here would probably create a readability issue. I don't believe there is any guideline or FL criteria that states it cannot be done this way. If you have another recommendation on where to put the references, I would be open to any suggestions. Any thoughts? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:38, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • The gallery section is a bit odd and doesn't seem to comply with WP:GALLERY. For example, readers don't need a picture of what a station trash can looks like.
  • The images column in the list doesnt work well, mainly because all the thumbnails look very similar and do not illustrate the article well. I would suggest removing the column and adding select images to the right side of the page with a descriptive caption.
  • Infobox seems unnecessary; I've never seen a list article with one and I think that it should be restricted to the article about the line/system itself.
  • The system map should be included (but not as part of the infobox). However, the SVG map does not render properly as a thumbnail and is very difficult to read, so I would consult WP:SVG help for futher assistance.
  • The SVG renders fine on my computer and is legible when I open the image itself. Considering it is representing a 26 mile long line, with lots of stations near each other, I think it would be difficult to read in thumbnail version either way. However, I think its encyclopedic value outweighs any possible readability issues when presented as a thumbnail (since the reader can click on the image to see it better). Any thoughts? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 13:47, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • No need to bold the "35 stations" text.
  • Fix formatting of ".5 miles" to "0.5 miles" and change "electric people mover" to simply "people mover".
  • Final lead sentence does not satisfy MOS:DATED and needs a citation.
  • Utilized the {{as of}}. This statement is almost cited because there are no sources that explain the future configuration. I haven't been able to find anything that specifically states this and I am pretty sure that Valley Metro Rail hasn't publicly discussed how the system will be configured after everything gets built. Would you recommend that I just remove the sentence? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:54, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
–Dream out loud (talk) 09:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you @Dream out loud! I really appreciate your review and in-depth comments. I believe I have addressed or responded to all of your comments. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do to address your comments. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:54, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Support: I liked the images embedded within the list but that's probably a preference thing. Thanks for your responses to these comments; the list looks in good shape! BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 21:04, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Ariel Award for Best Director[edit]

Nominator(s): Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:42, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it is complete and referenced, and it is modeled after the FL Academy Award for Best Director. The Ariel Award is the most important film award in Mexico, known as the Mexican equivalent to the Oscars. Thanks for your comments and input. Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:42, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Support after my comments were resolved. – jona ✉ 22:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

List of countries by GDP (nominal)[edit]

Nominator(s): Zach Vega (talk to me) 02:05, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because the article's prose has been improved, references have been updated, and all data has been updated and checked. The list failed nomination two years ago due to these factors. Zach Vega (talk to me) 02:05, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

  • The first sentence seems tautological, it needs to be clarified.
  • I strongly believe this could be done as a single table, with columns for country and each of the sources. The format seems odd with four parallel tables and the country names duplicated, and that makes it more difficult to compare the sources.
  • I think it would make sense to merge this page with List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita as the data is fundamentally the same. Add a column for population in the table, and you could have Country-Population-IMF-IMFpercap-WB-WBpercap-UN-UNpercap in a single concise table. It's sortable, so no worries about the different rankings. Reywas92Talk 21:09, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Reywas92: The first sentence has been fixed.
  • Four parallel tables are included because the sources differ in their time frame and coverage. The IMF and World Factbook data are from 2015, while the UNSD and World Bank data are from 2014. Additionally, many of the regions measured in one table are not measured in the other. Another issue with combining the tables is determining the rank. Which dataset is the countries ranked by? The IMF one? The UN one? One could average them like suggested in the first nomination, but this would be a violation of WP:SYNTH.
  • The per capita data is not fundamentally the same. The list up for nomination measures the aggregate size of economies, often used to determine international economic influence and power, whilst the per capita rankings typically determine development and standards of living. These two concepts, while based on the same notion, are greatly different in what they cover. Additionally, this would constitute doubling the size of a table that is already pushing the limits of acceptable scope. Zach Vega (talk to me) 04:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
They don't have to be ranked, they can be in alphabetical order and the table is sortable, or just pick one to be default and have a note. That is a good point about per capita, we can see what others think. The reason the page is so big is because every country and flag is there four times when it could just be once, and every cell has a center alignment tag that could be applied collectively; size is not a concern. Reywas92Talk 18:58, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm going to have to agree with the above, the lists are hard to view on even medium resolution screens. The fix would be to have every country listed only once (instead of 4 times!), but with a column for each measurement. Having four entire tables side by side is quite hard to capture on normal sized screens. Mattximus (talk) 19:12, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

List of Uncharted media[edit]

Nominator(s): PresN 20:12, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

A couple months ago, someone created this list in time for the release of the 4th main game of the franchise, and I thought it was pretty clearly based on my own FL List of Mass Effect media. And if they were going to go ahead and make a list based on an FL of mine, I thought it only made sense to come through and finish it off to nominate. This is the 8 video games, 2 motion comics, 1 film, 5 books, 1 board game, and 7 albums of the best-selling "totally-not-Indiana-Jones" video game franchise, all pulled together into one list. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 20:12, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I created it, and I mean, thanks for nominating it and all, but just to bring you back down to earth I didn't base it on your list. I don't think you invented the "List of X media" format, and I have never played a Mass Effect game. Have a nice day. Andre666 (talk) 20:27, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Oh well, guess it was in my head, then. Just thought it looked really similar, using the same table format. Sorry! --PresN 20:43, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Support - Usual good quality, great job everybody. The article looks complete, well referenced, and references seem to resolve without any errors. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:49, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I noticed there is a complete lack of any media on this list of media page. Is there a reason images such as box covers, or a photograph of one of the main people involved in creating this series is not included? Mattximus (talk) 22:33, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Fair use images, such as box covers, would be more than likely deemed purely decorative and would not pass fair use requirements. Salavat (talk) 15:30, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
I've never been a big fan of referencing pages like this, but that's only a personal preference; I can't deny their reliability, particularly for recent games like these. This entire article is meticulously sourced, and well-formatted. It's a Support from me. – Rhain ☔ 05:24, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

List of international goals scored by Miroslav Klose[edit]

Nominator(s): '''tAD''' (talk) 02:11, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I had nominated it around six months ago and it failed because it went stale; I was a novice and was not commenting on enough other reviews to gain consensus. All of the criteria brought up by the reviewers back then were addressed. '''tAD''' (talk) 02:11, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Comments

  • No need to make the first digit of each score bold, you've already stated the Germany goals are listed first.
  • Result col doesn't sort correctly (the 13-0 comes before 1-0...)
    • I am not particularly technical, do you know how to make it go in that order? '''tAD''' (talk) 10:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
      • Saints be praised, I've done it '''tAD''' (talk) 12:06, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Competition and Venue columns don't have consistent linking.
    • That was to prevent overlink but this is a table and people will move it around so yeah I'll link all of it '''tAD''' (talk) 10:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC) Done '''tAD''' (talk) 11:34, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
  • You may need to explain Cap (or add a Key which does this).
  • row and col scopes needed for all tables per WP:ACCESS.
  • I added the Category:Career achievements of association football players for you!

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

    • Thanks. That category seemed to have been emptied earlier, as if it were deleted... '''tAD''' (talk) 11:34, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Lecrae[edit]

Nominator(s): 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:18, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it only failed the previous review due to a lack of attention from reviewers. All the concerns from the previous review were addressed. Hopefully this time it will get some more attention.3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:18, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Comments by jfhutson[edit]

  • "No. 1" spell it out I think
  • Wikilink Billboard charts not the mag
  • "In 2011, his fourth album..." Long complex sentence and the first comma might not be necessary.
  • The Sketch the Journalist article seems (forgive me) a little sketch. It seems promotional, especially with the exhortation to prayer at the end.
  • "In 2013, Lecrae became the first hip hop artist to win the Grammy Award for Best Gospel Album for his sixth album Gravity (2012)." Could mean the achievement is winning with one's sixth album.
  • In the intro to the BET Awards list, you don't say which award before "this award".
  • Be consistent with "hip hop" vs. "hip-hop".
  • "The Stellar Awards is an awards show that honor artists" honors
  • Couple WP:DUPLINKS, check out this script

Overall it looks like a complete and well-formatted list. Let me know when you've addressed the above and I'll give it a second look. --JFH (talk) 02:43, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I've made all the fixes (and I forgot that I'd installed the duplinks script). With the Sketch the Journalist source, I agree that the tone is rather informal and seems promotional. With the exhortation to prayer, I've often seen this done in Christian hip hop-specialized media (possibly some Christian media in general, I don't remember well). The piece as a whole is an opinion essay, but Sketch is a professional journalist, and so I thought that for the statement it is supporting (that Church Clothes was the to date the most important CHH album) the source was fine.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:48, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
The claim that it's the most important album rings alarm bells (WP:PEACOCK). I expect it to be backed up by a very good source, and then you'd want to attribute the source in-text (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV) unless you can show some kind of consensus among critics of this music that this is the most important album. I also looked closer at the article, and I think it'd be more accurate to say Sketch thinks this may be the most important album. Another problem is that he's writing about an album that hadn't been released at the time of writing, so it's not credible that he could have a well-founded opinion on its importance. --JFH (talk) 02:24, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I'll concede to that argument. I'll take that bit out on all the articles where it is mentioned.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

OK, a second pass:

  • I'm not sure whether "Cypher" is a proper noun in this context. Also, is there another word you can use or a wikilink? I'll let you be the judge of whether that word will be understood by the audience for this page (I had to Google it).
  • I linked "2011 BET Hip Hop Awards Cypher" to BET Hip Hop Awards#2011, as this is a proper noun in this case but the wikilink will explain that it is the name for the performance.
  • I think "Gospel Albums Chart" is a proper noun?
  • Correct.
  • For the "most important album" claim, even with the reliable critical source, you need to WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. The critic is providing a subjective judgement.
  • I added an additional source, Atlanta Daily World, and attributed the statement to Rapzilla and World.
  • Don't spell out "one hundred fifty" (WP:NUMBERS)
  • Done.
  • "Lecrae has received five Stellar nominations, of which he has won three." He won three awards, not nominations. There are several similar constructions. You could say he was nominated for five awards and won three, or he has received three awards from five nominations (as the featured List of awards and nominations received by Katy Perry does).
  • I think I fixed all of these.
  • Done.
  • FN 12, the via param is for the content deliverer. This would be if the article was first published somewhere else and then you read it on the AP's website. In this case, it looks like the AP has copyrighted the article, but there's no indication it was published anywhere else, and if anything Billboard would be the content deliverer. I would just delete the via param.
  • Done.
  • FN 19 link doesn't work
  • I added an archived version of the url.
  • FN 23 is a case for a via param. The document appears to be a news release of the GMA (I would see if you can find it direct from their site and I would use Template:Cite press release). You are getting it via News Release Tuesday. It does not appear to be part of any larger work called News Release Tuesday, so nothing should go in the website parameter.
  • I replaced this source with an archived version of the Dove Awards nominations page.
  • I'd say NRT Media is another case where the publisher param should be left blank as substantially similar to the work News Release Tuesday.
  • Done.

Overall the sources look reputable. I don't see them as making controversial statements (except the "most important album" one), so I'm not worried about the fact that I don't know much about them. --JFH (talk) 02:30, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

All issues mentioned here are addressed. Any others that are outstanding?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:46, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Support, all my issues have been addressed. --JFH (talk) 00:20, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Michael Schumacher[edit]

Nominator(s): Cowlibob (talk), The Rambling Man (talk) 06:37, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Joint nom, Cowlibob did the hard bits, I tweaked around the edges. A comprehensive list of the victories of one the greatest F1 drivers of all time. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:37, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

  • Comments:
    • As the European Grand Prix moves, it could be helpful in the lead to say the course of the 1997 controversy.
    • The 2000 Canadian entry says "Canadian Grand Prix", the others say simply "Canadian"
    • It might be nice to have other tables underneath for his number of wins by each season and event, but I won't mark you down if you consider that to be too crufty.
      • I'm leaning support, I'll hear your comments. '''tAD''' (talk) 02:24, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello tAD, I've addressed the first two comments, I'm not overly keen on bunches and bunches of summary tables that are simply synthesised from the main table. Cowlibob may feel differently, we'll see. Thanks for your comments! The Rambling Man (talk) 06:15, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't mind if the additional tables are not included. Support '''tAD''' (talk) 06:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Comments

  • "in a season in which he won eight races." don't think the first in is necessary here
  • "His victory was controversial as when leading the championship he had been involved in a collision with fellow championship contender Damon Hill at the final race in Adelaide which resulted in both drivers retiring their cars." This is a very long sentence with no punctuation, I think a comma is needed after controversial and after Adelaide.
  • "He won his second the following year..." Need to be explicit here, readers could interpret this wrong. Be clear it was his second championship.
  • A lot of the sentences start with "In..." I would try and change this up a little to improve readability.
  • " in a season in which he won nine races. no need for the first in
  • "...with a consecutive four more championships." Not the best prose I would change to He followed this with fou consecutive championships from 2001 to 2004.
  • "Schumacher broke Alain Prost's record for the most Grand Prix wins." Maybe state the number of victories that Prost had to give some context to the reader.
  • "His 2002 season in which he was on the podium in every race included eleven race victories which broke the record for most in a single season." Another sentence that could do with some punctuation. After 2002 season and every race there should be commas, the last part of the sentence doesn't read too well. I would try and change it up a little.
  • ref 63 seems to be a publication, Atlas F1 and should include this in the ref, with the volume numbers etc.

NapHit (talk) 09:12, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

@NapHit: Thanks for the input. Have made edits to the article, hopefully looks better now. Let me know what else you'd suggest. Cowlibob (talk) 17:37, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
I've copyedited the lead and am happy to support the nomination. Great work. NapHit (talk) 22:15, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

List of regicides of Charles I[edit]

Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 21:12, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

In January 1649 59 judges signed the execution warrant of Charles I. Those judges, and several others, were the subject of punishment following the restoration of the monarchy in 1660. This list (which has been upgraded from its previous parlous and sub-standard state) is now fully fully sourced and several previous errors removed. Any and all constructive comments are welcome. – SchroCat (talk) 21:12, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

  • Support Oppose "List of regicides of Charles I" suggests a list of monarchs killed by Charles I. If there's a reason why I'm misunderstanding this, though, or the article name is changed, I'll switch my !vote to "Support" (upon being pinged as I'm not likely to check back here). Aside from that, the list is quite nice. LavaBaron (talk) 05:49, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Okay, changed. LavaBaron (talk) 06:20, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
That's great: thanks very much. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 06:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Support. A few points, too minor to affect my support:

  • Lead
    • I thought the numeral "3" looked a bit odd. A modern convention (not one I follow, but I'm 4,000 years old) is to write out the numbers between one and ten and use numerals for 11 onwards, and that would, perhaps, look smoother here.
  • Background
    • "The monopoly of the Church of England on Christian worship in England ended with the victors consolidating the established Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland" – this reads as though the second part of the sentence was the consequence of the first, which I don't think you mean. I'm not sure you need the sentence at all for present purposes, though I daresay the Regicides were a glumly Proddy lot.
    • "Following the death of Oliver Cromwell" – as you don't mention Cromwell fils (a sensible omission here, I think) I doubt if you need repeat Oliver's forename here.
    • Dover – you might consider linking the name. It seems unnecessary to me, but the MoS guidance points that way.
  • Treatment of the regicides
    • "according to Howard Nenner, writing for the Dictionary of National Biography" – strictly, the ODNB is a different publication from its predecessor the DNB, and I think you should include the "Oxford" in the title here.
    • Last para – I'm sure the difference in capitalisation between the English and Scottish acts in the first sentence is deliberate, but I just mention it.
    • "However most of the Scottish exceptions were pecuniary, only four men were executed" – comma splice. And if you feel you must start the sentence with "however" (which I'd blitz, personally) you need a comma after it.
  • Tables
    • A few WP:OVERLINKs: the MoS bids us refrain from linking "the names of major geographic features and locations, languages, nationalities and religions", and I think that should be read as including Germany (row 39), Switzerland (row 48), Brussels and England (row 57), and the Netherlands (row 59).

This page reads very smoothly, but I can imagine the research that has gone into it. An excellently comprehensive and well organised survey. – Tim riley talk 10:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Many thanks Tim. Your eagle eye is as welcome as always, and I've altered in line with all your suggestions. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:54, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Peter Martyr Vermigli bibliography[edit]

Nominator(s): JFH (talk) 18:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Vermigli was a lesser-known Reformation theologian whose influence was widespread thanks to his nomadic career. This list includes all his known published works. I've also nominated Vermigli's biographical article for FA. JFH (talk) 18:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Comment by 3family

The list is very well supported by sources, and well formatted. The problem I have with this list is the massive lead attached to it. If the list itself were quite long and extensive, then the lead would be fine, as it would be summarizing a large amount of listed content. But the list itself isn't very large, and so the lead is far, far too long. Would it be possible to work much of the prose into the list sections (e.g., move the content about his minor works and letters into the relevant section)?.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:31, 30 May 2016 (UTC) P.S. I'm also nominating a featured list candidate, List of awards and nominations received by Lecrae, which I would like feedback on. I know that this might be out of your comfort zone, though it just occurred to me that Lecrae is Reformed and thus might be of interest. Thanks regardless, --3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:31, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

OK, I agree, let me know what you think of it now. --JFH (talk) 01:40, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
That looks a lot better now! I'm Supporting this article's promotion.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:58, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Ayrton Senna[edit]

Nominator(s): Xender Lourdes (talk) 11:40, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

I am renominating this for featured list. I came across this list while trying to save it from deletion at AfD some months back. The list was later nominated by Harrias for FL. Unfortunately, I guess due to his real life commitments, Harrias withdrew the nomination and could not work upon the changes recommended by editors like Cowlibob, Nergaal and NapHit during the first FL review. I've seen all suggestions and worked on all of them. You can see the first FL review here. I am replicating a few paragraphs from the first FL review below for the sake of reviewers. These paragraphs were the ones where reviewers had left their suggestions. My new comments are added after each of their suggestions in small letters within the first review. Thanks Xender Lourdes (talk) 11:40, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

The archive of the first FL nomination discussion with my new comments in Red
Please add new comments above. Xender Lourdes (talk) 11:49, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Ayrton Senna doesn't have the most Grand Prix wins; that accolade goes to Michael Schumacher. But Senna, perhaps due to the manner and timing of his death, is revered as one of the best Formula One drivers of all time. Each time a driver passes his wins total, as Vettel and Hamilton have done recently, it is considered a significant milestone. I put off nominating this list for a while, as I had concerns about stability, as I knew that the WikiProject weren't widely in favour. However, it has since survived an AfD, and so I am happy to now list it here. As always, all comments, thoughts and suggestions welcome. Harrias talk 13:13, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments I have no problem with this list meeting 3b or being notable, as Harrias states, when Vettel and Hamilton passed Senna's total is widely covered in the mainstream media.

  • "He entered Formula One in 1984 with the Toleman team, but after one season, he bought out his contract and moved to Lotus." ref?
It's there in Ref 1. "Feeling Toleman couldn't match his ambitions though; Senna bought out his contract and moved to Lotus in 1985" Cowlibob (talk) 22:17, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
  • "McLaren. With McLaren..." not great having McLaren twice in quick succession. Perhaps Senna would win all three of his world championships...with the team? (Edited it appropriately. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • "He wanted to move to Williams after 1992, but was prevented from doing so by a clause in Alain Prost's contract." ref? (Provided. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • "He did make the move for 1994,..." -> He moved to Williams in 1994,..." (Done. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • You need to add a symbol to go with the colour in the table for accessibility purposes (Done. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • Maybe the Race column should be Grand Prix, seeing as that is what they — Preceding unsigned comment added by NapHit (talk • contribs) (Not done. The general usage is races. So...but this is not a sticky issue. Xender Lourdes (talk))
Review by Cowlibob
  • "is considered by many" perhaps "some" would be a more neutral word here (Done. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • "21 April 1985" no need to the repeat the year as we already know it was in 1985. (Done. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • "In 1988, " reword needed to avoid saying 1988 twice in short succession. (Done. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • For the references, is it possible to have more a diverse set of sources as the vast majority are cited to ESPN F1? (Where ESPN has been used in the commentary, I've added additional source. The usage of ESPN in the table is, in my opinion, acceptable, as these are numerical figures and are simply replicated in other references. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • Less shouting in the references. AUTOSPORT should be Autosport, F1PULSE should be F1 Pulse (Done. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • What makes F1 Pulse, speedcafe, Formula One Art & Genius, StatsF1 reliable sources? (They are generally considered reliable. But I have provided alternative additional sources with each one you've mentioned. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • Need info in the key that 1988, 1990, 1991 are highlighted in yellow because those were seasons he was world champion. (Done with the dagger legend. Xender Lourdes (talk))

That's a quick run-through. Cowlibob (talk) 22:17, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments

  • "With McLaren, Senna won all three of his world championships..." I would change this to 'Senna won all three of his world championships with Mclaren...' (Done. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • "In the subsequent three seasons with McLaren..." I feel like there should be a comma at the end here (Done. Xender Lourdes (talk))
  • ref 15 needs the author and date of publication (Done. Xender Lourdes (talk))

Cant' see much wrong otherwise. NapHit (talk) 14:18, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks NapHit . Xender Lourdes (talk) 15:33, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Support Meets the criteria, good work. NapHit (talk) 08:32, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

List of Miami-Dade Transit metro stations[edit]

Nominator(s): –Dream out loud (talk) 08:02, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that it meets all the criteria at WP:FLCR, and is on par with similar lists at WP:FL#Transport. This is the second nomination for this list, as it was previously nominated last year, then subsequently closed and archived by an editor, with no further reasons given.

I previously worked on the following featured rail station lists: List of SEPTA Regional Rail stations (creator, main editor, FL nominator), List of Los Angeles Metro Rail stations (added new sections/updates), List of MetroLink (St. Louis) stations (nominated for FLC-removal, then "saved" list via reformatting/updating). I feel that this list is equal to those in quality and criteria. –Dream out loud (talk) 08:02, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment: This is a well-formatted list with a concise but complete introduction. There are high-quality maps of both parts of the system in the lede, and images illustrating the list. However, Checklinks shows that five Google News citations are dead links; this appears to be because Cox Media Group removed their holdings from Google News in 2015. Although offline sources are perfectly acceptable, for a featured list I think it would be better to have live links - even to subscription-only content - rather than none at all. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:59, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Citations have been fixed. Unfortunately I couldn't find any online archives for The Miami News (including subscriptions), so I just removed all the URLs from the citations. –Dream out loud (talk) 10:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Support All my comments are resolved. I agree ridership is important, no worries regarding the Feb. 2016 data being used. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:28, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments –

  • "with additional five stations opened through Okeechobee station in Hialeah." This is missing "an" before "additional", from the looks of it.
  • "Since opening of the initial line" needs another "the" before "opening". Or you could try "Since the initial line was opened".
  • Would it be possible to include more information about reference 18? Without a date or page number, it's hard to say that this source is verifiable at the moment. What I don't understand is why the date was apparently removed. A page number would be optimal, but a date is a must for verifiability. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Typos have been fixed. I added the date back to the reference - it seems that another editor removed it by accident. I don't have a page number available. –Dream out loud (talk) 09:05, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

List of bowlers who have taken a wicket with their first ball in international cricket[edit]

Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk) 08:53, 24 May 2016 (UTC), Lugnuts (talk) 09:04, 24 May 2016

This is a nice list, well referenced and illustrated. A lot of the work has been put in by Chamal N, Lugnuts and Sahara4u but only Lugnuts is editing regularly. I'm sure between he and me, we can address all concerns. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:53, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Yep, count me in - I'll do my best to get another cricket-related star on my userpage! Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:04, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
You say "pot-aaa-to", and "I say pot-ahh-to" / you say "tom-aaa-to" and I say "'List of bowlers who have taken a wicket with their first ball in international cricket' isn't the best title"...
Having looked at the title issue, and for the lack of a better alternative that I can think of, I'd go with the previously suggested name of List of bowlers who have taken a wicket with their first ball in a format of international cricket. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 10:42, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Thus moved. Now then, to the list itself please! Bencherlite, if you're happy (or happyish) would you cap your comments on the name so we can encourage comments on the list itself please? Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
I've fixed the missing ODI names. TRM - can you take a look at the lead for the article? It states that Arthur Coningham was the first Test player, but the table/source states it's Tom Horan. There's a rather good source attached to Coningham, so I don't just want to butcher it! Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 11:29, 24 May 2016 (UTC)


  • Comment – Can't we have separate pages for each format? 20, 22 and 12 seems like a reasonable fork. —Vensatry (talk) 05:38, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
    I did mention that above, but Bencherlite felt that a single list was more appropriate. I'm not fussed either way. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:04, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm not hellbent on that. Given that last six entries of the T20I table are from the last five years, it's more likely to grow. We can probably decide on this when the count reaches 20. —Vensatry (talk) 06:38, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Sounds good to me, would you be able to review the list itself if you get time? Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Sure, will review it before the weekend. —Vensatry (talk) 09:10, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment – I strongly disagree with a separate pages for each list. I prefer the way it is right now with a single list, it is much more appropriate. There is not much difference in the lead that could be written, and they are all thematically similar. Mattximus (talk) 15:18, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
I support this too. Hopefully there's nothing major stopping this from being promoted up to FL. @Vensatry: - have you had the opportunity to review the list? Thanks in advance. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 13:50, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Source review

  • "Only Maurice Tate, Intikhab Alam and Nathan Lyon went on to play in more than ten Tests" - Ref. missing for Lyon. Yes check.svg Done
  • "The first to achieve this feat was Australian Michael Kasprowicz who took wickets with his first and second delivery in this format in 2005, dismissing New Zealand's Stephen Fleming and Mathew Sinclair." - You need to cite the 'second wicket' and 'Sinclair' parts.Yes check.svg Done
    • Is 'cricketcountry.com' a RS? —Vensatry (talk) 12:04, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Spotchecks done for rest of the refs. in the lead - No issues.
  • Refs. for the three tables (main) - Ted Arnold's first victim was Victor Trumper, not Reggie Duff. Yes check.svg Done

—Vensatry (talk) 16:28, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

@Vensatry: - apologies for the delay in getting back to you. I've now fixed everything per your comments above. I hope everything is now in order. Thanks again for reviewing this. @The Rambling Man: - please could you cast your eye over the article now, incase I've missed anything. Thanks! Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 08:57, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
@Vensatry: - re: the reliable source, I think it is, but in the avoidance of doubt, I've found a source from CricketArchive and replaced it. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:49, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 08:43, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Support Two small changes I might recommend:
  • 1. "Not all of these bowlers took their first wicket in their debut match." -> "Not all of these bowlers took their first wicket in their debut matches."
  • 2. Perhaps you might check if photo captions should contain the stops at the end of the caption sentences. My support any which way. Lourdes 12:51, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure I agree with the first, there are multiple bowlers but they each only have a single debut. As for the second comment, both captions are complete sentences (i.e. not fragments) so the use of the full stop is correct. Thanks for the support. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:00, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. With respect to the "debut matches", I think I noticed a different usage in the next statement: "Clive Lloyd, Inzamam-ul-Haq, Sadagoppan Ramesh, and Martin van Jaarsveld did not bowl in their debut matches." So had an opinion that either it should be "match" in both statements or alternatively "matches". I may be wrong but and would defer to your opinion. Thanks and good work. Lourdes 16:47, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Rajiv Gandhi Khel Ratna[edit]

Nominator(s): - Vivvt (Talk) 10:13, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

This is India's highest sporting honour and its bestowed upon 28 recipients so far since its inception in 1991. Looking forward to some constructive comments.

Note: I am nominating the list to FLC again exactly after 10 years. The last nomination was concluded on 19 May 2006. Face-smile.svg. - Vivvt (Talk) 10:13, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@Yashthepunisher: Thanks much for the comments and support. - Vivvt (Talk) 13:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Comments

Leaning towards Weak Support. Support. I will provide a partial c.e. in a couple of days to make sure I don't miss anything, but great work on the list! NumerounovedantTalk 14:16, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Just a minor suggestion, Controversies could go after the list. NumerounovedantTalk 14:19, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Couldn't really find anything wrong with the article. Good job! NumerounovedantTalk 18:33, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I have offered some more edits to the article, and I do have one further concern-
  • Why not mention the number of times when more than one athlete was awarded Khel Ratna in the lead? NumerounovedantTalk 06:50, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
@Numerounovedant: I made the necessary changes. Please let me know if you have more comments. - Vivvt (Talk) 13:54, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Just a minor tweak, and looks good now. NumerounovedantTalk 16:03, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Shouldn't Arjuna Awards be on the other side with an arrow pointing the opposite side in the infobox (considering the rank)? NumerounovedantTalk 16:06, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
@Numerounovedant: Thats the correct representation. The template has two parameters; preceded by and followed by. Arjuna Awards is ranked after Khel Ratna. So arrow and position is correctly placed. - Vivvt (Talk) 05:20, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying. NumerounovedantTalk 06:48, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
@Numerounovedant: I appreciate your comments. Thanks for your support. - Vivvt (Talk) 18:44, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Good luck with the nomination. Great work. NumerounovedantTalk 07:00, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Comments by Dharmadhyaksha
  • Which one is correct? "sportsperson" or "sports-person"? Both are inconsistently being used.
  • Mention abbreviations in brackets of all those boards and authorities after their names. Then use those abbreviations. This should make some sentences easy to read. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:36, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Done - Vivvt (Talk) 13:30, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

List of United States military premier ensembles[edit]

Nominator(s): LavaBaron (talk) 18:20, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it is lavishly illustrated with no fewer than 41 media files - including photo, video, and audio - all copyright cleared, and provides a meticulously sourced, and copyedited list that meets all requirements. LavaBaron (talk) 18:20, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series[edit]

Nominator(s): Favre1fan93 (talk) and Adamstom.97 (talk) 18:00, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

I am re-nominating this article for featured list because the first nomination failed more so due to lack of eyes and editors voicing their support of it, then it not actually failing to meet FL requirements. Still, since the first nomination, the page has expanded some and is still a worthy addition to be named a featured list. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:00, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

  • My comments were resolved and now giving my support. Consider optionally reviewing a nomination of mine if you're not too busy. Best – jona ✉ 20:19, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Alexandra Stan discography[edit]

Nominator(s): Cartoon network freak (talk) 14:59, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it satisfies the FL criteria. I as well followed the style of Inna discography, which finally became a FL.

Comments by User:The Almightey Drill

  • Some of the best certifications of "Mr Saxobeat" could be mentioned in the lead
  • The German chart links seem to circle back to the site's landing page. I noticed this when I was working on Marina and the Diamonds discography. Like you have done with Italy and Slovakia, you will have to cite each song one-by-one – copy the template from the article I just mentioned and start from there.
@The Almightey Drill: All done! Thanks for your comments. Best, Cartoon network freak (talk) 19:14, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments by AJona1992

  • I now support this nomination, I did minor removals of words and phrases that were redundant. Great job on another great article – jona ✉ 17:46, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by The Voice (U.S. TV series)[edit]

Nominator(s): Mymis (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

I am nominating it for featured list because I do believe that it passes the FL criteria. The article includes a list of various awards and nominations received by popular American singing competition series The Voice aired on NBC. Mymis (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Matt Damon filmography[edit]

Nominator(s): Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:42, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Matt Damon is one of Hollywood's most prolific stars. In a career spanning over 25 years, he has acted in some (and written one) of the most influential films of recent time. His work in bringing up new talent through his Project Greenlight initiative is also praiseworthy. As usual, I look forward to lots of constructive comments. Happy Damon-ing! Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:42, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

P.S. I have another open FLC at the moment, but that has 3 supports and no outstanding comments. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:43, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, LavaBaron. :) Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:29, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, Yash. :) Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:58, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

No major issues, but I've got nitpicks:

  • I don't think "the director" is really needed for Coppola or Scorsese
  • It's probably worth noting in the lead that he was the title character in Good Will Hunting as it's one of his most famous roles
  • "the Steven Soderbergh-directed Ocean's Trilogy"..... I'd go with "Steven Soderbergh's Ocean's Trilogy" or "the Ocean's Trilogy"
  • "but the film polarized critics"..... "but" in this instance suggests you're contrasting the reception to something else, though all that comes before it in that sentence is Damon's involvement
  • No need for "the actor" right before DiCaprio
  • "was a disappointment" is both vague and POV
  • "biggest stars"..... better to say "top-earning" or "highest grossing"
"Top-earning" would be in reference to Damon's salary, and "highest-grossing" would be in reference to how much a film earns. I guess "biggest stars" is appropriate in this context. Krimuk|90 (talk) 04:12, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure if Daily Express is a good source to use
It just provides a cite to an uncredited appearance in a film. It's okay to use this reference in this context. Krimuk|90 (talk) 04:12, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
  • New York Post and TV.com most definitely aren't recommended, especially with the latter being full of user-generated content

Should be good to go before long. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

SNUGGUMS Thank you for taking the time out to review this. All your points have been addressed. :) Krimuk|90 (talk) 04:12, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
No problem at all. However, "failure" is still a vague description for Promised Land; you need to state whether this was critically, commercially, or both. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:16, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, it received mixed reviews and was a box office flop, but I don't want to sound too monotonous, so I've tried something else. Is that better? Krimuk|90 (talk) 04:24, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, and I can now support. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much, Snuggums. :) Krimuk|90 (talk) 04:31, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Comments by AJona1992
  • The statement in the last paragraph in the lead is misleading, there are countless "biggest stars" in Hollywood. You wrote that box receipts accounted for $2.9 billion in North America, which would indicate that he ranks as one of the most commercially successful or prolific actor in Hollywood, I feel as "biggest stars" is a term used so often in media reports.
Tweaked. Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:47, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Any reason why you omitted the budget and gross figures in the table? Since this is a filmography, I would expect numbers to be one of the major components for such an article. – jona ✉ 14:44, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Box office recipts are not compulsory fields in an actor's filmography table. Most FL-quality lists don't mention them. Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:47, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments, AJona1992. Krimuk|90 (talk) 06:47, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

João Sousa career statistics[edit]

Nominator(s): SOAD KoRn (talk) 00:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I nominated this list for the first time back in November 2015, but unfortunately it failed as it didn't receive enough support to be promoted. I believe this time it will be different - the list has matured and meets the criteria for FL status. João Sousa himself has become a regular face in the ATP World Tour and is widely regarded the greatest Portuguese tennis player of all time. I kindly thank you for taking the time to review this list. SOAD KoRn (talk) 00:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, LavaBaron. SOAD KoRn (talk) 18:28, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Source review – All links are in working order and the references all appear to be reliable, as they come from tennis organizations, Portuguese newpapers, and a Portuguese TV station. Formatting looks good throughout. As part of spot-checks, I found the following:

List of tallest buildings in Shenzhen[edit]

Nominator(s): Wishva de Silva (talk) 11:26, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

This list is considerably better than most tallest buildings lists of cities in China. It also has quite a long list of references. Wishva de Silva (talk) 11:26, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Great list, but I do have quite a few recommendations.

  • Why are some buildings linked to wiki pages that don't exist, and some are not. They should either be all linked in anticipation of future articles, or not linked at all.
  • Outdated phrasing should be removed. Featured lists no longer start with "The following is a list of..." as it is rather tautological.
  • Over time, I have seen many of these tallest buildings list decay and find that the biggest issue is the "approved" and "proposed" sections. They are very unreliable, and subject to change. I would eliminate them completely as per the policy of WP:CRYSTAL and report a list of only buildings that actually exist, not some random plan of an architect. Mattximus (talk) 23:21, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I think the gallery would be best removed and the images placed along the right side of the table. The table is not so wide that it would not fit.
  • There are citation needed tags
  • I'm not sure an "under construction" section should exist, but if it is necessary, buildings without firm completion dates need to be removed for now.
  • The last 5 references appear to be incomplete citations.
This is just a first pass of important edits. I will happily look at it again. Mattximus (talk) 23:21, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
@Mattximus: Thanks for the suggestions, I have fixed a number of the issues you pointed out. I agree that the Approved and Proposed sections may be very unreliable over time, but would it be disrespectful to those editors who created these sections? Wishva de Silva (talk) 09:08, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Those were quick edits! Quick note, I think the photos should go to the right of the list, not as a column in the list itself. Simply because not all buildings have pictures. And as for the approved/proposed, I saw one list that had maybe 12-15 proposed buildings, all of which were cancelled. So it's not a very encyclopaedic section if they are imaginary. It is my opinion that wikipedia should report on things that exist, not things that might exist. As soon as the building is well under construction should it be included. Another way of looking at it is that I suggest removing the approved/proposed buildings for now, once they are being built they can be put back. Mattximus (talk) 13:11, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
@Mattximus: Sorry for this rather late reply. Well, I do not entirely agree. Since if you would look at skyscraper lists for almost all major cities they almost certainly have these Proposed/Approved sections (eg New York and Los Angeles), a large portion of them of them are featured lists as well. If deletion is necessary we should discuss with others first. As long as there's someone to update the information on a timely manner this wouldn't be a significant issue--which I probably can do. Wishva de Silva (talk) 09:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I just checked a bunch randomly: List of tallest buildings in Albuquerque, List of tallest buildings in Atlanta, List of tallest buildings in Baltimore all do not have them. I really think it runs afoul of WP:CRYSTAL... no real encyclopedia will list potential buildings that might be build in the future (but probably not). It's just not appropriate. I'm happy to see what others say. Again, once they are actually under construction then they can be added to the list. Mattximus (talk) 22:32, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Looks like the user has given up on nomination and not addressed issues like bare urls. Mattximus (talk) 23:59, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
@Mattximus: No, not yet. Sorry, I almost forgot about this nomination to be honest. Anyway, regarding the Approved/Proposed sections, it would not be constructive to argue about these matters and after another thought, I think you have a point there. I'll delete them first, and if necessary I may start a discussion to explain on the lists' talk page if somebody viewed by edit and reverted it. Wishva de Silva (talk) 12:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Bare urls, I also had problems against to the translated titles (also publisher, newspaper, author etc.). Yes, I could accept translated titles, but not without their original one, if you have to tranlating them (I prefer only keep the original title), then please using trans_title, keep the original.--Jarodalien (talk) 15:31, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
@Jarodalien: I agree these titles should not be translated. Can you give me the URLs with such titles so I can fix them? I have also fixed the Bare URL issue you pointed out. Wishva de Silva (talk) 12:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Just fix one myself, you should least check every sources to make sure they all have proper template (cite web, news or journal), title, publishing date, newspaper (journal, work etc.), publisher (via etc.).--Jarodalien (talk) 13:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

@Wishva de Silva: do you plan on returning to this nomination to address the reviewers' concerns, or should this nomination be closed? --PresN 20:53, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

@PresN: Hi there. I apologize for not responding lately. Thanks for Ping-ing me. I wasn't giving up on the nomination...Let me see if I could do some fixing to the page. Wishva de Silva (talk) 11:24, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Latin Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award[edit]

Nominator(s): Erick (talk) 23:07, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

After my failed attempt at making this FLC, I took Mattximus and Bencherlite's advice and added as much pictures I could find for the artists who have received the Latin Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award. I also took Bencherlite's advice by adding the births and deaths of the artists and their occupations that are listed on the Latin Grammy website (however they do not show the occupations for the 2014 and 2015 recipients). Another Believer has been a great help and provided useful feedback. I am basing this list on the Latin Recording Academy Person of the Year which was made FL by Another Believer and Jaespinoza. I appreciate any feedback! Erick (talk) 23:07, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Review by FrB.TG
  • "José José and Roberto Carlos were later honored" - I don't think you need to use full names, especially when their full names are in the preceding sentence.
  • "Mexican singer-songwriter Armando Manzanero and American singer Linda Ronstadt..." - add respectively to the end of this sentence.
  • I think para#3 should be para#2.
  • Consider using {{Abbr}} for Ref in the table.
  • Why are occupations from Willy Chirino to the end are empty?
  • "The artists's occupation(s) are listed" → The artists'
  • Ref 7 - BBC News (BBC) → BBC News, per {{cite web}} and {{cite news}}: "Do not use the publisher parameter for the name of a work (e.g. a book, encyclopedia, newspaper, magazine, journal, website). Not normally used for periodicals. Corporate designations such as "Ltd", "Inc" or "GmbH" are not usually included. Omit where the publisher's name is substantially the same as the name of the work".
  • Ref 8- who is the publisher of The Portugal News?
  • Ref 9 - who is the publisher of Variety?
  • Ref 17 - ditto.

Consider optionally reviewing a nomination of mine if you like the review. FrB.TG (talk) 20:28, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello @FrB.TG: and thank you for your comments. I believe I have addressed everything you brought up aside from finding the publisher for the Portugal News, which appears to be a self-published newspaper judging by its website. Erick (talk) 18:05, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Support FrB.TG (talk) 07:48, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments by AJona1992

Thanks for resvoling those issues, I can now support this article. Best – jona ✉ 16:45, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Support Very comprehensive and detailed list. Issues from previous attempted FLC have been addressed as well as those expressed above. Great Job! DivaKnockouts 03:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Support. Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:07, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

List of power stations in Sri Lanka[edit]

Nominator(s): Rehman 14:45, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

As the page title says, this is a list of power stations in Sri Lanka. The list is rich with content, referencing, pictures, and a map, and has comprehensive information that is not found elsewhere on the internet. The issues in the previous nominations are addressed accordingly. Pinging past reviewers: User:Dudley Miles, User:Giants2008, User:The Rambling Man, User:PresN, User:SchroCat, User:Calvin999. Thank you, Rehman 14:45, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

  • My queries have been dealt with in the previous review but a couple of minor points.
  • There is excessive white space. This could be reduced by making the map smaller and putting the photos of dams next to the list instead of above it.
  • What are "privately owned first-come, first-served style wind farm projects"? This needs clarification. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:13, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Dudley. I am working on reducing the whitespace by adding a vertical scrollbar for the map; reducing its height by 50%. This should clear the whitespace for resolutions as low as 1280×800. I will ping you again once that's done. Thanks, Rehman 15:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
P.s. Reducing map size overlaps the links on the pogs (i.e. breaks them). The whitespace in the dam image area is fixed. And I have linked the "first-come first-served" term. Rehman 15:08, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
I do not think the scroll bar works. Now you cannot see the whole map at once, and some readers may not notice the scroll bar. How about going back to full size but cropping the sea at the top and bottom of the map? Dudley Miles (talk) 16:05, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
@Dudley: Unfortunately, cropping is not an option as it uses the Location Map resources/files. Do you think it is better in the full form? Rehman 13:59, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes it would be better full form. Maybe there is another way round the problem - e.g. put the map at the top of the page and move the bar chart to be under the lead on the left. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:34, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
That creates a larger whitespace :( You can test screen resolutions on this nice site... Rehman 15:12, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Support. My only issue is the map. I do not think the scrollbar is a good idea, but I will leave it to you how to deal with it. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:57, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Comments by Vensatry

  • Both the images (barchart and map) bloat the corresponding sections. Consider swapping them or at least try to reduce the size.
Consider it fixed. See section above by Dudley. Rehman 15:31, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Whitespace problem has been fixed. Rehman 01:23, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
  • 'Thermal power station ', 'Small hydro', and 'Solar power' are over-linked in the lead
Fixed. Rehman 15:31, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
  • "with a 10–20 year power purchase agreement." - replace the dash with 'to'
Done. Rehman 15:31, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Ref #1 points out to the publications tab; you need to be more specific for each and every claim covered in the lead.
Fixed. Rehman 15:31, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
You need to specify the page nos. —Vensatry (talk)
Done. Rehman 02:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
  • "As of 2015, 1,464 megawatts of the total thermal installed capacity was from state-owned fossil fuel power stations; 900MW from Lakvijaya, 380MW from the state-owned portion of Kelanitissa, 160MW from Sapugaskanda, and 24MW from Uthuru Janani." You need to crosscheck the figures with the source.
Seems ok to me. Please let me know if you had spot an error. Rehman 15:31, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
No, the value for Uthuru Janani according to this source is: 26.7 (8.9*3) —Vensatry (talk) 06:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
The net outputs if the unit is 8MW, the remainder is for running the plant itself. This is the case with many power stations worldwide. The official output capacity rating of the plant is 24, (see also). Rehman 02:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
  • The tables look good. I'll continue with the review once these comments are addressed. —Vensatry (Talk) 10:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks for the review, Vensatry. Best regards, Rehman 15:31, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
@Vensatry. Are there any further corrections to done? Rehman 01:23, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Additional comments

  • As suggested by others, you need to reduce the size of the map; the readers can click the map and view it for a detailed view.
    • The map itself is not clickable, as each pog is a link. Either way, there is no more whitespace issue, right? Rehman 15:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Add WP:ALT for all images.
  • Space needed between the numeral and unit. (For eg., 2,115MW)
    • Done. Rehman 15:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
      • Be consistent with either MW or megawatt. —Vensatry (talk) 06:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
        • Done. Rehman 02:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Image captions are unsourced
    • Added. Rehman 15:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
  • The second para of 'Hydroelectric' section is wholly unsourced. You should expand the refs. for large paras.
    • Added. Rehman 15:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
  • "In 2015, only two grid-connected solar farms were operational ..." -> As of 2016 ...
    • Fixed. Rehman 15:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
      • Not done. —Vensatry (talk) 06:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
        • Done. Reverted. While it is the same for 2016 as well, the remainder of the article has facts dated for 2015, mainly because the CEB posts a particular year's stats only late the following year. So 2015 details will be published later this year. To be consistent, I have put it back to 2015. Rehman 02:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Either reduce the size of the images or find better placement. They make the table look clumsy.
  • What is 'comm.'? (in the Hydroelectric table) —Vensatry (talk) 17:48, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Commissioned date. There is a tooltip loaded for that text. Rehman 15:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
      • Better expand it. Also, what does '00' in 1984-10-00 and 2011-00-00 signify? —Vensatry (talk) 06:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
        • The 0000-00-00 format was used so that the sorting works property. But I have just found {{Sort}}, so this is now Fixed. Rehman 02:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
@User:Vensatry, replied to each point above. Rehman 15:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Vensatry. Is everything now in order? Rehman 14:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
You need to provide inline citations for most claims. Currently the refs. are placed at the end of the paras. It's an issue with large paras. —Vensatry (talk) 06:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
@User:Vensatry, replied to each comment above. Please let me know if there is anything else. Rehman 02:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments by Chris Woodrich

  • Rehman, when four or five different editors are telling you there's an issue with the images, you should probably think of alternatives. If the bar chart is illegible at smaller sizes, then a) reduce the years covered and b) increase the size of the text. People on mobile devices may have 600 or 800 pixels width to work with; a 650 px image will not work for them, at all. Remember, what works for your monitor might not work for others. The map is also an issue: I'm still getting whitespace issues between the end of the paragraph and the start of the first table. For the other images, I just need to shrink my window size by 150px (from 1366px wide) for them to force the table down and use to end up with a whole bunch of white space; in other words, anyone using a device with a display less than 1200px wide is going to get white space. You could probably address this by having the table a fixed percentage of the width of the screen: 74% works well for "Upright". For a forced 300px? Might need some experimentation.
  • Oppose until image issues are addressed. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:13, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Chris Woodrich. Maybe the chart doesn't belong here in the first place, since this is a list of power stations. I removed it, and it seems to have solved the majority of the whitespace issue. Is it better now? Rehman 15:23, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
@Chris Woodrich. Is it better now? Rehman 01:23, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Considering you're still getting negative comments about the map, and you appear to have missed part of my comment ("having the table a fixed percentage of the width of the screen: 74% works well for "Upright") as all you've done with the lower images is set them at 275px instead of 300px. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
@Chris: Negative comments? Maybe you're looking at older comments? Removing the bar chart helps remove the majority of the whitespace, so it was removed. Reducing the image width removes the remaining whitespace, so it was done. As per the link I provided above, the page now works well on nearly all display resolutions. Considering that the map no longer causes any noticeable whitespacing, is simply having the map a point against FL? Is there any other issues that warrants an oppose vote for this FL candidate? Please clarify, and I will do the necessary. Rehman 15:35, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Map is "overbearing", at the very bottom of this page, with no reply from you. A number of other comments of a similar vein throughout the page. I haven't seen anyone express satisfaction with the images. Your choice of works well 1366*768 as a small resolution (as requested by Vensatry) indicates that you don't quite understand the comments about the images. Mobile users don't have 1366*768 to work with. Tablet users don't. Hybrid users don't. Some netbooks don't even go that high (my old Acer One was something like 1024*600). Anyone using one of these devices will get massive amounts of whitespace. Even without the graph. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:14, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Just checked on my phone: the pogs are barely visible, and certainly not tappable (screenshot on request). The map definitely needs work. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:21, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining, Chris. I have removed the map (there seems to be no other choice), and added the chart with some tweaks to how it behaves in smaller resolutions. Can you recheck and see if it is better? I've added the chart because it summarizes the capacities and production nicely, and makes the lead look less empty. Anything else you feel should be done? Thanks, Rehman 14:55, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
@Chris. Is everything now in order? Rehman 14:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments by Imzadi1979
Image comments—as with another nomination where I've commented, I'm getting large blocks of white space connected to the usage of the photo thumbnails above the tables. As I commented there, I think it would be better to convert those groupings of photos into galleries that appear either above or below the tables. That way they won't create a gap of white space below the end of the text and above the tables when readers have smaller screens or those who don't set their browsers to use the full width of a widescreen display. Imzadi 1979 → 08:56, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

I have to agree: either a gallery across the page, or have the size parameter set to "upright". People don't need to,see the image in complete clarity on the page, but can click on the link for a closer look. – SchroCat (talk) 09:11, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Source review—since I'm here from my current renomination, I might as well turn to reviewing the sources used in the article:
    • FN1: Ceylon Electricity Board is a publisher, not a publication, so the name should be in |publisher= not |work=, which is how it is in FN2
      • Done. Rehman 02:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
    • FN5, etc, has Lanka Business Online as a publisher, when it's the name of a website, so it should be in italics. Ditto Lanka Daily News in FN8.
      • Done. Rehman 02:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Traditionally, when the name of a newspaper lacks the city of publication in its name, that is given afterwards. For example, The New York Times contains "New York" in its title, but Daily News does not, so we'd have to additionally specify |location=New York with the latter to produce: "Daily News (New York)". Since several of the cited newspapers (or newspapers' websites) share publication names with other prominent papers, you should provide the missing locations for clarity.
      • Fixed. Rehman 02:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
    • The article is currently inconsistent in whether or not full first names are listed or truncated to initials. Either method is acceptable, however mixing them looks sloppy and unprofessional.
      • FN 18 has "P, Krishnaswamy" when the cited source gives the first initial as P and "Krishnaswamy" as the last name. In the inverted format in use in the article, this should appear as "Krishnaswamy, P.". FN 21 also has the first initials and last names reversed. (Since the cited sources don't actually give the full first name, unfortunately you can't spell them out for consistency with all of the other citations that do.)
    • FN 21, again a publisher appears to listed as a publication title in italics.
      • Are you able to provide more detail please? I can't find any. Rehman 02:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
        • It appears you fixed this one, but the atlas title should be in italics, citing it as a book (which is essentially is) rather than a webpage. Also, you might want to link directly to the atlas at http://www.nrel.gov/wind/pdfs/34518.pdf instead of the index. Imzadi 1979 → 04:20, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
          • Done. Rehman 14:34, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
    • I'll reiterate that it isn't necessary to repeat links to publisher or publication names in multiple footnotes. In fact, it violates the spirit of WP:OVERLINK to repeat the links in every footnote. Also, if items are unlikely to get articles, the redlinks should probably be removed.
      • The 6th I have retained the links per PresN's advise above; anything in particular that you think should be removed? Rehman 02:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Last comment, but the capitalization isn't consistent in source titles, probably because you've directly copied how each one was individually formatted. This means you have some, like FN1–3 that use Title Case, and then FN4 uses Sentence case. If you were publishing an article or paper in APA style, you'd be told to harmonize them all into a specific case style. Our MOS allows either, but like another of my comments above, we're supposed to do things consistently.
      • I thought it was a requirement to state it exactly as per source, and hence didn't pay much attention to consistency. I will recheck and update here again. Rehman 02:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
        • No such requirement. Editors have always been able to quietly alter and harmonize formatting to achieve a polished appearance in their writing. The key is not to alter meaning, just formatting. Our MOS tells us, for instance, to replace « and » with quotation marks when copying quotations from other languages. We can even silently correct spelling errors, unless there's a reason to retain them with a " [sic]". Harmonizing the case of a title is no different, and as I noted, the APA style would require editors using it to change source titles to a specific case style when crafting citations regardless of the original publication's formatting. In short, you can and should harmonize citations for the polished look expected in feature-level material. Imzadi 1979 → 04:20, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Another related item, is the punctuation used to separate a title from a subtitle. FN31 uses the more standard colon, while FN32 uses the non-standard spaced hyphen.
      • Fixed. Rehman 02:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I hope these comments help. The sources meet the reliability and quality tests required for featured-level work, so it's just a matter of polishing their presentation. Imzadi 1979 → 09:12, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Hi Imzadi1979 and SchroCat. The whitespace issue has already been fixed. Do you still get whitespace? I will look at the refs and update again. Thanks, Rehman 01:23, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Replied to each point above. Thanks again, Rehman 02:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
      • Yes, the whitespace issue is still there. Also, with the chart as the lead image now instead of the map, the text is very squished. On my screen, I have my web browser windows set to approximate the width of a printed letter sheet of paper. Accounting for the menu on the left, the display area on a Wikipedia page is about 6 1⁄2 inches (17 cm) wide, which is about what would appear printed on letter paper (8 1⁄2 by 11 inches or 22 by 28 centimetres) with the standard 1-inch-wide (2.5 cm) margins. With the size of the bar chart, it takes up 5 inches (13 cm), leaving only 1 1⁄2 inches (3.8 cm) for text. I took a peek at the coding, and it's set to 650px, yet our MOS says that lead images should normally be only 300px. In short, I think you need to move this down someplace else and center it so that you aren't trying to display text next to it.
        As for the other sections, I still have a bunch of white space. In the "Hydroelectric" section, I have a block 4 1⁄2 inches (11 cm) side by 4 inches (10 cm) tall. The blank block in the "Wind power" section is better at 1 1⁄2 inches (3.8 cm) tall. Imzadi 1979 → 09:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
        • Thank you for the detailed reply User:Imzadi1979. I have done some changes to the way the images behave. Is it better? Rehman 13:55, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
@Imzadi1979, @SchroCat: Is everything in order now? Rehman 14:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@Rehman: much better with the galleries. Imzadi 1979 → 06:11, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments - The images and map are overbearing. The first thing readers see when visiting this article is a map which takes up a large chunk of the screen. The map needs to reduced in size and re-positioned; or got rid off entirely. If the images are to be positioned next to the text they should be reduced in numbers and size. As it stands some browsers/screens are showing large amounts of white space. Ideally the images should be positioned inside the tables (e.g. List of national parks of the United States, List of London Underground stations) or next to the tables. Is this a list of modern or all power stations in Sri Lanka? If it's the latter it is incomplete as it excludes older, decommissioned power stations.--obi2canibetalk contr 18:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

@Obi2canibe: Above issues are fixed as discussed in the previous sections. This is a list of modern power stations as well as notable decommissioned ones from the recent past. Thanks, Rehman 14:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Noted.--obi2canibetalk contr 10:42, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Review by PresN
Before I start: @Vensatry: are you willing to support/oppose this nomination now?
As promised, as this has hit the bottom of the stack I'm reviewing so it doesn't fall through again.
  • "with a smaller share from small hydro facilities, and other renewables such as solar" - no comma needed
  • "12,357GWh" - isn't a space needed between the number and GWh, for all such instances in this sentence, just like you do with MW?
  • "from state-owned fossil fuel power stations;" - should be a colon, since the following is a list of said power stations (and their generation)
  • "Hydroelectricity had played a very significant role in the national installed power capacity since it was introduced in the 1950s–1990s," - since it's still a major source of power, "has" is more correct than "had", and the date range does not make sense- something can't be introduced in a time span of 50 years that ended <20 years ago. Should be "since it was introduced in the 1950s."
  • "The following table lists all the state-run hydroelectric power stations." - sentence should be cut; not only is this followed by another paragraph and not a table, the end of that paragraph says the same thing but more explicitly about what is not included.
  • The solar power table gives one plant as "state-owned", but the thermal table uses "government" to mean the same thing; should be consistent.
  • If "P L" in "Ulagalla Walawwa Resort P L" and the names in the Wind Farm table is an incorporation mark like "Co.", "Inc.", etc., then it should not be included in the name
  • Just noticed that the Hydro table has the start dates in it, but none of the other tables do. Why is Commission date important there but not elsewhere?
  • The hydro table has the headers "Name of Power Station" and "Geo-location of power station", but all the others just say "Station" and "Location"
  • That's it, as I see you got a source review up above. --PresN 20:49, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi @PresN:, @Vensatry:. Thanks for the review. I'm currently at Wikimania pre-conference, but I cannot find stable internet. I will definitely look into this as soon as possible. Please give me a bit of time. Thanks, Rehman 14:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Nominations for removal[edit]

Taylor Swift discography[edit]

Notified: WikiProject Taylor Swift, WikiProject Discographies, WikiProject Country Music, WikiProject Pop music

I am nominating this for featured list removal for the following issues:

  • The lead
  • It is entirely US-centric and fails to take into account her success in any other nations, such as how "Love Story" was her first #1 song in Australia and "Today Was a Fairy Tale" became her first to top the charts in Canada.
  • The prose itself could use work (i.e. "The album produced five singles, all of which"..... may as well give names, "hit" in "her first number-one hit" is too informal)
  • The tables
  • The "singles" section contains 11 columns when WP:WikiProject Discographies/style recommends using up to 10.
  • I can understand having one component chart for a nation, but having both Country and Pop for US present at the same time is just overkill.
  • Music videos really shouldn't contain rowspans; it hinders accessibility in instances like this.
  • The references
  • Many citations are malformatted (i.e. "australian-charts.com" should read "Australian Charts", "irish-charts.com" should read "Irish Charts")
  • Some dead links need fixing
  • I'm not sure if "Noise11" or "Radioscope" are good sources to use, but Us Weekly and "Zobbel.de" definitely aren't.

Overall, this list is simply not up to FL standards. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment – Noise11.com is acceptable as a temporary chart/certification source, but once ARIA/Hung medien updates, it should be replaced. Radioscope is reliable for the NZ old certifications, but again should be replaced whenever possible since RMNZ shows all the chart certifications now. Regarding the 11 charts, I will definitely say to revert the person who added it. Currently Taylor Swift does not require any genre charts to be added seeing that she went from Country to Pop and does not have extraordinary achievement on any particular genre/sub-chart, unlike Madonna for eg. —IB [ Poke ] 09:07, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment - I agree with all of the above. Nevertheless, some peak positions in the UK are not available in the official charts company website. Mainly regarding peaks above the top 100 and if they are backed by Chatsplus they will be fine. The rest a little work would do the trick and keep the page according to FA standards. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:34, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Note – I've done some major work on the list and will need some more time to bring it up to par. FrB.TG (talk) 15:46, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

@FrB.TG: that's a really good start. I would suggest to add France as one of the biggest markets in the chart tables to make it 10 charts. Because anything less than the 10 markets it opens a can of worms and prone to fanboy additions of obscure markets. —IB [ Poke ] 09:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Definitely a good start indeed, though still needs work to meet standards Snuggums (talk / edits) 12:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I addressed every concern raised and everything I noticed. Hopefully it's all better now. Cheers, FrB.TG (talk) 17:40, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Your efforts are appreciated. I just tweaked the lead a bit and don't see any glaring issues now. Good to keep. Snuggums (talk / edits) 18:20, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep Seeing FrB's efforts I can gladly say that this list can keep its featured status. —IB [ Poke ] 15:57, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep. due to the improvements. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:22, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings in Dallas[edit]

Notified: WikiProject Skyscrapers

Since it is almost identical to the recently demoted List of tallest buildings in Austin, Texas, I am nominating this for featured list removal because two whole sections (Under construction and approved/proposed) are completely unsourced. There are many, many outdated facts (numbers quoted are no longer found in the citations), all rankings are all wrong, and has dead links. This would take a lot of work to bring it up to standards again sadly. It was nominated almost 10 years ago and does not look to be well maintained, there are even broken tables with formatting issues. Mattximus (talk) 00:13, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Delist not at all up to par, and multiple completely unsourced sections is by itself an automatic fail for FA, FL, and GA. The fact that it's outdated just makes things worse. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:16, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates&oldid=727594207"