Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

Nominating featured lists in 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 must satisfy the featured list 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 featured list candidate (FLC) process. Those 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 at peer review at the same time. Nominators 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, PresN and The Rambling Man, determine the timing of the process for each nomination. Each nomination will last at least ten days (though most last 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 {{Article history}} template. If a nomination is archived, the nominator should take adequate time to resolve issues before re-nominating.  – Table of contents – Closing instructions – Checklinks – Dablinks – Check redirects

Featured content: Featured articles Featured lists ← Featured pictures Featured topics Featured list tools: Featured list criteria Featured list candidates Featured list removal candidates Featured list statistics Wikipedians by promoted featured list nominations Today's featured list This month's queue TFL submissions TFL statistics Featured lists that have appeared as TFL Featured lists yet to appear as TFL Featured list log Random featured list Former featured lists Removal candidates log

Nomination procedure Toolbox Analysis Before nominating a list, ensure that it meets all of the FL criteria and that any peer reviews are closed and archived. Place {{subst:FLC}} on the talk page of the nominated list. 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 leave a post on the FLC talk page for assistance. Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~ and save the page. 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. When 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 your 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. Alternatively, 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 vote 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 (such as {{done}} and {{not done}}) are discouraged, 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 edit · history · watch · refresh The following lists were nominated almost 2 months 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: Member states of the International Labour Organization (FLC) Coldplay videography (FLC) List of United States Military Academy First Captains (FLC) List of commanders of the British 1st Armoured Division (FLC) List of The Book of Boba Fett characters (FLC) List of World Heritage Sites in Cambodia (FLC) List of accolades received by Drive My Car (film) (FLC) List of international cricket centuries by Babar Azam (FLC) List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Fernando Alonso (FLC) edit · history · watch · refresh The following lists were nominated for removal more than 14 days ago: List of Cathay Dragon destinations (FLRC) List of awards and nominations received by 30 Rock (FLRC)

Nominations

List of accolades received by CODA (2021 film)

Nominator(s): Birdienest81talk 09:25, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

CODA is a 2021 coming-of-age comedy-drama film written and directed by Sian Heder. An adaptation of the French-Belgian film La Famille Bélier (2014), it stars Emilia Jones as the titular child of deaf adults (CODA) and the only hearing member of a deaf family, who attempts to help their struggling fishing business while pursuing her desire to be a singer. This is my eighth film accolades list to be nominated for featured list status, and I largely based the format off of the accolades lists for The Artist, The Big Short, Dunkirk, If Beale Street Could Talk, 1917, The Shape of Water, and Slumdog Millionaire. I will gladly accept your comments to improve this list. Birdienest81talk 09:25, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "After debuting at the 2021 Sundance Film Festival on January 28, 2021, Apple Inc....." - Apple did not debut at the 2021 Sundance Festival
• "particular praise for its Heder's screenplay" - stray word "its"
• Think that's all I got - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:46, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: Done - Everything has been addressed.

--Birdienest81talk 20:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Chompy Ace

• Wikilink Ann Hornaday and A. O. Scott in references.
• Replace Next Best Picture ref (since it is a blog) at source 55 with Spagnoli Gabardi, Chiara (December 14, 2021). "The Women Film Critics Circle Announces Its 2021 Winners, Tributing Hall's Passing and Campion's The Power of the Dog". Cinema Daily US. Archived from the original on December 17, 2021. Retrieved September 13, 2022.
• That's it, and what a very good list! Great job! Also, If you have time would you care for reviewing the List of accolades received by Star Wars: The Force Awakens regarding its featured list nomination? Chompy Ace 07:56, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• @Chompy Ace: Done - I have read your comments, and made the adjustments based on your feedback. Thanks.

--Birdienest81talk 20:54, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Support Chompy Ace 21:10, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

List of Lionhead Studios games

Nominator(s): PresN 20:55, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

This is the second of a pair of lists that chart the rise and fall of Peter Molyneux... this one being the fall. Molyneux and his Bullfrog Productions studio had been famous and successful in the 90s for creating innovative games, and having broken free of EA to found Lionhead Studios, Molyneux was prepared to replicate that success without the stifling corporate oversight. And, for a time, it worked- they came out of the gate strong with the creative Black & White and Fable. And then Black & White 2 didn't sell well, and neither did The Movies, a business simulation/movie making game that had the misfortune of coming out just before YouTube became a thing, and in the background Lionhead was hemorrhaging cash on projects that never seemed to turn into sellable games, so just like Bullfrog and EA, Lionhead was bought by their publisher, Microsoft. And again like Bullfrog and EA, Microsoft turned it into just the Fable developers, and it released 5 more games in the franchise before being shut down.

All of this wouldn't mean the fall of Molyneux, though, except that this was the era that his mouth finally got him in trouble. Molyneux had always talked a big game, but in the 2000s it got away from him- he would promise game features that didn't work yet (and never did), and would even tell the press things would be in a game that were just an idea he just had that he hadn't even told the devs yet. By the time he left Lionhead, he was synonymous with radical, innovative over-promising, and he hasn't released a full game since. This is all just flavor text, though- this is a list of games in the end, including a bunch of cancelled games because, like Bullfrog, Lionhead was really open about that. This list follows the pattern of all the prior lists I've done on 90s/early 2000s developers (3D Realms/id/Raven/Epic/Firaxis/Blizzard/Relic/Bullfrog), so I hope you enjoy it, and thanks for reviewing. --PresN 20:55, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• Does the single reference at the end of the first paragraph source the entire paragraph?
• "Shooter game, Music game" - music probably doesn't need a capital
• That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:07, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Yes it does, and fixed. Thanks! --PresN 03:15, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:57, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Timeline of strategic nuclear weapon systems of the United Kingdom

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:56, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

A simple timeline. I created it for my own use while developing a series of articles on British nuclear weapons. Title comes from the infobox. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:56, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose in present form. There is literally no lead at all -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:52, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

• Added a lead. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:03, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Snooker world rankings 1978/1979

Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:01, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it includes all of the relevant information, with suitable sources. The layout closely follows that for Snooker world rankings 1977/1978 which was successfully nominated as a featured list. Thanks for your consideration. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:01, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

I think my only comment is one which I raised at a previous FLC but I can't remember what the outcome was. How come five players with 0 total points made it into the rankings? There must be more players who did not reach the last 16 of any of the previous three World Championships than just those five, so why were those five players officially ranked and the others not.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:46, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, ChrisTheDude. This was discussed at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Snooker world rankings 1977/1978/archive1. I can still offer no explanation of how some players with 0 points were included. (I did think they should be omitted based on the Snooker Scene article where the rankings were published in 1978, but those players are listed in Chris Turner's Snooker Archive and in Kobylecky's The Complete International Directory of Snooker Players – 1927 to 2018). I've added "It is unclear why five players with 0 points were included in the rankings." to the text, which is equivalent to what happened for the 1977/1978 list article. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:43, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

List of Billboard number-one R&B songs of 1954

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:27, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi everyone, here's my 13th nomination of a number ones list from the pre-history of Billboard's R&B/hip-hop chart. One of the most notable number ones in this year was Big Joe Turner's "Shake Rattle and Roll", which when covered by Bill Haley would be one of the most influential songs in the early development of rock and roll..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:27, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments from BennyOnTheLoose

Looks good. All the info without inline citations from the intro is cited in the table as far as I can see. A couple of points that I made on the 1953 list ("pictured in" in captions, and use of IABot) have been covered off by edits earlier this week.

• "Clyde McPhatter led the Drifters to two number ones in 1954." - They had two on the best-sellers and one on the Juke Box chart, so maybe reword? It was two songs though.

@BennyOnTheLoose: - thanks for that, I have adjusted the McPhatter image caption accordingly -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:25, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Support - I have nothing else on this one. Thanks! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:50, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Image review from BennyOnTheLoose

• Pass. Images are relevant. No issues with positioning or captions. Suitable alt text is in place. Three of the images are public domain and the other is Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0. Having looked at the WikiCommons pages, I'm satisfied that "Non-free images and other media satisfy the criteria for the inclusion of non-free content and are labeled accordingly." BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:50, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Pseud 14

• Great work on this series (as always). One very minor suggestion, perhaps you could link "1945 show tune" to Carousel (musical), since the name of the musical show isn't mentioned. --Pseud 14 (talk) 21:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

@Pseud 14: - done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Support --Pseud 14 (talk) 15:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

List of prime ministers of Australia

Nominator(s): JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 09:25, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I have expanded and improved on the lead section, added citations for much of it, and moved around sentences. Australia is one of the few prominent countries whose list of leaders is not featured, so I am taking it here. Please ping me if you have any queries or requests. Thanks, JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 09:25, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• Lead looks weird with the image at the left and the TOC forced to the upper right. Any reason for this?

The TOC was in the right when it started working on it, so I didn't change that. I have fixed that.

OK, now the TOC is being forced into the text of the lead, causing some sandwiching issues - why not just let it sit where it would go naturally? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I have fixed that. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 09:11, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

• "however the Prime Minister is still appointed by the Governor-General [....] which empowers the governor-general" - inconsistent capitalisation

Fixed.

• So the PM chooses the G-G, who appoints the PM who chose him? Have I understood that correctly?

@ChrisTheDude: Drive-by reply. I think they follow a similar system as the UK so the PM is appointed by the Queen (or in this case her representative the Governor General) if they command the support of parliament. The Governor-General is appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of ministers. They don't have a fixed term but generally serve for about 5 years, the current one was nominated by the previous PM Scott Morrison. Cowlibob (talk) 21:51, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense, but at present the wording reads like the Governor-General appoints the PM, who then selects the Governor-General who appointed them in the first place. Does that make sense? Is there a way to re-word to avoid this suggestion of a paradox.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm unsure as what to do. To make it clear to you, the Queen technically selects the Governor-General, however the Prime Minister actually selects them and sends that to the Queen. I don't know how to make it clearer in the article, perhaps someone can give a suggestion? JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 09:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Maybe the following suggestion with supporting refs of course. "The role of Prime Minister is not mentioned in the Constitution of Australia, however the Prime Minister is still appointed by the Governor-General who under Section 64 of the constitution has the executive power to appoint ministers of state. The Governor-General is appointed by the Queen of Australia based on the advice of the Prime Minister. They do not have a fixed term but generally serve for five years." Cowlibob (talk) 17:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Great way to put it. Inserted into article with an extra citation for the last part. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 23:18, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

• "however, of those who have served as the nation's prime minister, three died in office" - I think all the words between the commas here are redundant

Fixed, that was a result of moving sentences around to fit better.

• "six resigned following leadership spills (John Gorton, Bob Hawke, Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, Tony Abbott, and Malcolm Turnbull)" - Hawke and Rudd are randomly not linked here (although I have now noticed that both are linked the second time they are mentioned

Not sure what happened there, fixed.

• "(Joseph Cook in 1914, Gough Whitlam in 1975, whose dismissal caused a constitutional crisis, and Malcolm Fraser in 1983)" - Whitlam randomly not linked

Fixed.

• All the people who are mentioned multiple times in the lead should probably just be referred to by their surname on the second mention per MOS:SURNAME

Fixed.

• "The prime ministership of Frank Forde, who was Prime Minister for 8 days in 1945" => "The prime ministership of Frank Forde, who was Prime Minister for eight days in 1945"
• The table says he served for seven days, not eight

Fixed.

• Source for note a?

Fixed.

• Think that's all I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Thanks for your feedback; all fixed! JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 06:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: I think I've fixed all of your suggestions, if you have anything else, please let me know. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 03:31, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• The forced with "width:100%" in the table isn't necessary and adds white space, including around the portraits.

That was how it was when I started working, reduced to 60%.

• "with thirty-one people serving in the position since the office was created in 1901" is weird to have as a subordinate clause; just have it as its own sentence.

Done.

• Replace however with but in the second sentence (currently a comma splice)

Done.

• "the length of time a Parliament serves for" may be better as "the length of time a Parliament is elected for"

Done.

• The second paragraph is a bit weird in that it's worded to give all the exceptions to when PMs didn't serve for three years. This misses Deacon's first term of 216 days, Watson's 113 day term, Reid, Deakon's second, Hughes, Bruce, Scullin, and others whose terms are also not multiples of three years. I think it'd be better to present the reasons for leaving on their own.

I added a group for the first few, the others either happened due to being the winner or loser in a spill or had other weird exits happen that don't fit in with anything else. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 23:38, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

• The non-consecutive terms are irrelevant to the current officeholder; why are these statements combined with a semicolon?

Done.

• It says Menzies served two terms, but didn't he serve eight, even if not consecutive?

Reworded to say 'over two non-consecutive periods'.

• Columns need to be made sortable

Done.

• Please avoid WP:SMALLTEXT. There's no need to shrink the dates or ministries.

@Reywas92: There are quite a few examples of smalltext on the page. Should just the dates and ministries be enlarged or the electorates as well? JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 03:29, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

@Reywas92: I've removed all of the smalltext, except in a few places where it should be kept. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 22:32, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

• List of prime ministers of Australia by time in office should be redirected/merged here as unnecessary once this is sortable. List of prime ministers of Australia (graphical) could probably also be merged.

Reywas92^Talk 22:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Sent the former to AFD, and proposed a merger for the latter. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 03:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Done some of them, will do a bit more later. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 23:26, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

All done, as far as I can tell. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 22:32, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

List of municipalities in Quebec

Nominator(s): Hwy43 (talk) 06:11, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

After a two-year hiatus and an arduous effort on this one due to the number of municipalities (1,231!) and the French-language barrier within sources, here is the 13th and final nomination in the set of Canada's 13 "lists of municipalities in province/territory". The end-goal is in sight. Upon bringing all 13 lists of municipalities for every province and territory of Canada to featured status, a featured topic nomination will be pursued. The standardized format from the 12 other featured lists (British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Alberta, Yukon, Nunavut, the Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Prince Edward Island) has been carried forward. Suggestions received from the previous 11 nominations have been taken into account for this nomination. All suggestions welcome and thanks for your input. Hwy43 (talk) 06:11, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

Good to see this concluded!

• Row scopes should be like !scope=row, not |scope=row, which makes it a "header" cell for the row in the wikicode. Note that this means you'll need a line break after the first cell so that any "header" formatting doesn't carry over to the next cell(s).

• Done

• Col scopes are for the top of the table, which you have, but then you also have them for the summary at the bottom of the table, which isn't right. Screen reader software uses the col scopes to read out what column/row a cell is, so having extras makes it messed up. It's hard to explain in words what the change should be, but

|- class="sortbottom" align="center" style="background-color:#f2f2f2" | !scope="col" align="center"| '''Total regional county municipalities''' |{{change|3909607|3738625|dec=1|align=center|invert=on|bold=on|bgcolour=#f2f2f2}} |scope="col" align="center"| '''{{nts|553765.38}}''' |scope="col" align="center"| '''{{Pop density|3909607|553765.38|km2|prec=2}}'''

should be

|- class="sortbottom" align="center" style="background-color:#f2f2f2" | !scope="row" align="center"| '''Total regional county municipalities''' |{{change|3909607|3738625|dec=1|align=center|invert=on|bold=on|bgcolour=#f2f2f2}} |align="center"| '''{{nts|553765.38}}''' |align="center"| '''{{Pop density|3909607|553765.38|km2|prec=2}}'''

and the same for the second row.

• Done

• When a header column spans multiple columns, like in !scope="col" colspan=5| [[Canada 2021 Census|2021 Census of Population]] at the top, it should be !scope=colgroup instead of col. Same for rowgroup and rowspans, but you don't have any.

• Done

• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 13:27, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you, PresN. I believe I have properly addressed all three comments. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 19:55, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

  • It looks like I missed some things. Thank you. Hwy43 (talk) 23:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Older nominations

List of Billboard Latin Pop Airplay number ones of 1998

Nominator(s): Erick (talk) 13:41, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

"Near...far..." it didn't matter where you were in 1998. This song was inescapable even if you switched to Spanish-language radio stations. Anyways, in 1998, the chart went unpublished for two weeks because of the damage to radio monitoring systems in Puerto Rico by Hurricane Georges. So I'm interested to see if how I wrote it works. Erick (talk) 13:41, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• Firstly, how weird that Latin pop radio played that dreary Celine Dion song so much that it actually got to number one on this chart. But that's nothing to do with this review :-)
• "were not published on the weeks of October 10 and October 17" - I would change this to "were not published in the issues dated October 10 and October 17"
• "It remained on the top position for five more weeks" => "It remained in the top position for five more weeks"
• "Ponce had established himself as a soap opera actor on his entertainment career before becoming a musical artist" - I think just "Ponce had established himself as a soap opera actor before becoming a musical artist" would suffice
• "Estefan was the only female act to have more than one chart-topper" - might be worth mentioning all the acts with multiple number ones here and then point out that Gloria was the only female one. Seems a bit odd to highlight her and not mention the others at all.
• "Ricky Martin [...] was named the best-performing song of the year" - it wasn't Ricky that was named best-performing song of the year, so change the "and" after the song's title to ",which"
• "having spent three weeks on this position" => "having spent three weeks in this position"
• "Martin is the first artist in the chart's history to replace himself at number one when" => "Martin was the first artist in the chart's history to replace himself at number one when"
• "Alejandro Sanz is the only other artist with their first number one "Amiga Mía"" - he wasn't, because you then go on to say that OV7 had their first and only number one this year. So rephrase to "Alejandro Sanz also gained his first number one with "Amiga Mía""
• Missing quote mark on Te Quiero Tanto, Tanto"
• Is telenovela normally shown in italics? It looks a bit odd with that word and then the title all in italics - it makes it look a bit like the word telenovela is part of the title
• Eso es todo :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks! Yeah I remember the Titanic mania as well having the soundtrack for it and all that, lol. Anyways, I looked at the article for telenovela and you're right, it's not italicized so I removed the italics. I believe I got everything else as well. Erick (talk) 18:38, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:43, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• Billboard magazine should be italicized in the first sentence of the article.
• I also suggest adding the fact that "My Heart Will Go On" was just the second English song in the chart's history that reached the top spot. (The first one was Selena's "I Could Fall In Love".) Source

• That's it, great work! آرمین هویدایی (talk) 07:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support -- آرمین هویدایی (talk) 07:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments by AJona1992

• There seems to be an inconsistency with (pictured) throughout the images provided.
• Billboard should be italicized.
• That's all I have during my read. Once these have been addressed, I will support this nomination. Best – jona ✉ 13:47, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Not wishing to speak on behalf of the nom but presumably "(pictured)" is in the Ponce image caption because there are two people mentioned in that caption so it's to avoid the (admittedly slight but still theoretical) possibility of people not knowing which one is pictured..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:16, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude@AJona1992 True, but looking at back, there's already an image of Fernández before Ponce's, so I guess it's fine in this case. Erick (talk) 13:33, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Ah ok, just strike that comment then. Best – jona ✉ 20:05, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Source review – As with the similar lists I've looked at, the references are reliable and well-formatted, and no issues were found by the link-checker tool. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Image review – All four of the photos have appropriate free licenses. While alt text isn't strictly required, only one of the four images currently has it and it would be nice to see it added to the others. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:21, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

List of Bullfrog Productions games

Nominator(s): PresN 02:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

After a long string of animal lists, I'm taking a break to resume a project I last touched in 2019: a series of lists of games from 90s video game developers/publishers (3D Realms/id/Raven/Epic/Firaxis/Blizzard/Relic). There's not much of a theme to these lists beyond "in the right time period for me to have played at least one of their games when I was younger", but they all have their own stories. This one is part one of a duology of the rise and fall of Peter Molyneux, famous for being the creative lead behind a lot of amazing—and amazingly overhyped—video games.

This one is the rise, about the video game studio started, appropriately enough, with the money made by hyping a pack of lies about what his software company could do. They hit it into the big leagues almost immediately with Populous, the biggest seller of 1989 and still one of the best-selling PC games 30+ years later. From there they had a wildly successful 6 years, at which point Molynuex et al sold out to Electronic Arts for, to be fair, an absurd amount of money plus a vice presidentship despite having no real ability to run international businesses. Two years later Molyneux and a lot of the creative staff were gone, and Bullfrog—termed the most innovative and imaginative video game company in the world just prior to being bought—hung on making sequels for another four years before getting closed.

This list has a big section of cancelled games, because of a pair of Molyneux-isms: he announces games way too early, and also hangs on to projects even if they're not working, sometimes for years. So, we have sources and even articles on projects that never became products. If you've heard of Molyneux in this century, it's likely for what he got up to after this company—in this era, though, he was a king, who designed a series of innovative projects developed with firm technological constraints but not financial ones. I've tried to shake off the rust for this list type and follow my prior patterns, so I hope you enjoy it, and thanks for reviewing. --PresN 02:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "and lead the company" => "and led the company"
• "Bullfrog released a further five games after his departure through 2001" - as this article is about a British subject I presume it is written in British English and over here we don't use the expression "through [date]". Change this to "between his departure and 2001"
• Where the first note gives multiple genres, there's inconsistency as to whether the second is capitalised, eg we have both "Real-time strategy game, God game" and "Real-time strategy game, god game"
• That's all I got - great work as ever! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: All done, thanks! --PresN 16:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Cowlibob (talk) 17:40, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

What a pleasant surprise to see this list here, played so many of their games. I know video game sales can be difficult to find but are there any reputable sources for what was the highest selling game they produced and how much it sold? It's probably Populous, with 4 million (which I've added), but I don't have a source that says it was definitively the highest-seller they had. Did any of their games win any major awards or accolades and could the particular award be highlighted? Though not for lack of trying, the video game industry still doesn't have an equivalent to the Oscars or Grammys, and Bullfrog mostly predates even the moderately successful attempts at such, so it would just be a bunch of e.g. PC Gamer's games of the year lists, which are typically not included in lists like these. On the reverse, were there any notable critical or commercial failures? Lack of data here, but not really as far as I can tell- their last games got weaker scores, and probably sales, but nothing that was notable for being a failure. Are genres for video games normally supported by refs like music songs are? No, due to a combination of being less splintered/subjective and being part of the game's marketing descriptions Any images that could be used for article? Unfortunately not, the consensus has been that for lists like this it should be free images, so I usually go with a company logo, but Bullfrog's is non-free. This may not be relevant, but any need to mention why it closed, I seem to remember there was a perception it was due to EA imposing their corporate culture and crushing the studio's creativity like Westwood Studios. Cowlibob (talk) 20:58, 31 August 2022 (UTC) That was the perception, but EA never made a statement so I've nothing to source- I think it's likely that it was mostly that EA did what they typically did, which was buy a company, eventually put them in the mental bucket of "franchise X" developers for whatever they did last that sold well ("Theme Park / Dungeon Keeper", in this case), and then keep them doing sequels until sales got low and then close the studio. They didn't fire everyone, after all- they just merged it into EA UK and closed the office, so it was just the idea of Bullfrog being a separate entity that was ended. I've added a bit that it wasn't just Molyneaux that left, and I certainly believe that once they left EA didn't hire/support new great game designers to Bullfrog, but studios end for a lot of reasons and we don't have a good enough source for it other than the general perception that EA buys companies that make money but doesn't know how to keep them running as semi-independent studios for long. @Cowlibob: responded in-line. --PresN 16:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Cowlibob (talk) 17:40, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

List of Philippine submissions for the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film

Nominator(s): Pseud 14 (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I decided to give this article a complete rework by expanding/adding a substantial and informative lead, fixing formatting issues, and adding reliable sourcing. I've tailored the structure to FLs on submissions to the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film from countries such as Latvia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, and Vietnam. Happy to address your comments and thanks to all who take the time to review the list. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "Judy Ann Santos's two films [...] were submitted" - worded like this it indicates that she has only ever made two films, which I don't believe is the case

I've reworded the caption to avoid confusion

• Refs after "screened for the jury" are out of numerical order

Fixed order

• Same after "precursor to the current category"

Fixed ref order

• "From 1956 until the establishment of the FAP in 1981, only four films have been submitted for consideration" => "From 1956 until the establishment of the FAP in 1981, only four films were submitted for consideration"

Done

• "Since the FAP was founded, the Philippines has, on an irregular basis, submitted an entry to the Academy; Of the Flesh in 1984 and This Is My Country in 1985, with no film submissions until 1995's Harvest Home.". Not sure this really works, as it hasn't been irregular for most of the last 40 years. I would suggest "After the FAP was founded, the Philippines submitted Of the Flesh in 1984 and This Is My Country in 1985, but then made no submissions until 1995's Harvest Home. Since then, the FAP has submitted a film in most years."

Agreed, changed as suggested.

• Think that's all I got - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:03, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your review ChrisTheDude, always appreciated. I have actioned the above. Let me know if there's anything I may have missed. --Pseud 14 (talk) 14:36, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:20, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

NØ

• Brillante Mendonza seems to be a director. If true I think you could replace the sentence in the caption with this: "Two films directed by Brillante Mendoza were submitted"

Added in the caption

• "but then made no submissions until 1995's Harvest Home" - The word "then" could probably be omitted from this sentence.

Removed

• Since a picture of Mendonza has been chosen to be a part of the infobox, I'm inclined to ask if he should be mentioned in the lead too?

Good point, I have added a mention in the lead.

• Alt texts for the pictures would be recommended, if that parameter is possible for all four.

Oh right, seemed to have forgot about this. ALT texts added

• Since none of the films got nominated, is it appropriate to include it as a column? A sentence like "None of the films were nominated" could probably be used as summary, no?

The lead mentions this In total, the Philippines has made 32 submissions to the category, but none have been nominated for an Oscar; and from the Results column in the table? Did you mean an additional summary elsewhere? I've tailored the structure to the most recent promotion—Latvia

I meant the Result column is redundant and could be removed in favour of one line somewhere that says "None of the submissions received nominations". Although that would be a lot of unnecessary work and I understand if you want to stick to the last promotion's format.

That's it from me after a few reads.--NØ 08:20, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Thansk for your review MaranoFan. Above actioned the above, with one clarification on the last point. Let me know if I missed anything? --Pseud 14 (talk) 13:50, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

No other concerns. It's a support from me!--NØ 13:57, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 21:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Quick comments – Lead photo caption: "Angel Aquino were in films submitted in 2004 and 2007." "were" should be "was" since only one actor is being referred to. In general, you don't need to put "List of" in the section heading of the list as it is quite redundant with the title. A title of Submissions would be just fine. Note 2: Minor, but the comma after the first quote should be a semi-colon instead. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC) Thanks for your comments Giants2008. I have made the changes per these edits. Let me know if I missed anything. Pseud 14 (talk) 02:57, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

List of accolades received by Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Nominator(s): Chompy Ace 11:30, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Star Wars: The Force Awakens is an American film that received numerous accolades from various outlets. I nominated this list since I have reworked and expanded this list as its first nomination did not gain any support(s). Chompy Ace 11:30, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• There's some oddities when sorting the recipients column. Andy Nelson sorts between Roger Guyett and Rick Hankins. April Webster sorts between Lessons and Name. Joshua Lee sorts between Daisy Ridley and Neal Scanlan.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:49, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude Fixed. Chompy Ace 00:24, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

More comments

• "The film have received" => "The film has received"
• Star Wars: The Force Awakens – (John Boyega) - dash and brackets combo looks odd
• Star Wars: The Force Awakens (LA) - what's LA in this context?
• Think that's all I got - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude all  Done. Chompy Ace 22:44, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:43, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Film – Wide Release

Nominator(s): PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it has the potential to reach this status. This is my fifth GLAAD Media Award nomination after Outstanding Comic Book, Drama Series, Comedy Series, and Video Game. Admittedly, I did run into a few problem. By the late 90s, the separation between Outstanding Film - Wide Release and Limited Release has become solidified, but the early 90s were more mixed up. Sometimes films won and were labelled as just that; Film. At other times, one of them was labelled as having won the Vito Russo Film Award. Not sure if the latter is to be viewed as a precursor of the Limited Release category, but for simplicity's sake, if something was labelled as "Vito Russo" or "Limited", it wasn't included here. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "one of only two instances where two film won" => films
• "While the movie was recognized in 1993" - should that say "no film"......?
• "The followin year" - second word is spelt wrong
• "a distinction was between films" => "a distinction was made between films"
• "that received a wide releases" - last word should be singular
• Titles starting with "The" or "A" should sort based on the next word
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

• Man, I really suck sometimes with this grammatical mistakes. Oof. Anyway. Done with all of the above, unless I might have missed any "A" or "The" titles. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 23:29, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Aoba47

• Was there a public reason the award was not given out in 1993?

• I wasn't able to find one, but based on some of the other lists, I don't think GLAAD gave out any such statements; at least not in the 90s. If I had to guess, they probably didn't find any films from that year good enough for nomination. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:49, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

That is what I had thought as well. Thank you for clarifying this point for me. Aoba47 (talk) 15:33, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

• I would link plurality vote in the lede. I know this will sound rather dumb on my part, but I would not be 100% with providing a definition to this concept so I'd imagine other readers would be in a similar position and would like further clarification.

• Done.

• Is it worth noting in the lead that the 7th GLAAD Media Awards was the first time nominees were made public as opposed to just the winners (as done in the previous ceremonies)?

• @Aoba47: I guess there might be room to include that somewhere. Do you think it's better to include that in the lead, or have it appear as a note in the infobox during the 1996 ceremony? --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

At the risk of giving a non-answer, it is up to you. It could also be a case where this is unnecessary to note because it is not that important or it just comes as awkwardly inserted in the lede or in a note. To clarify this question was not a requirement, but more so of a clarification question and you could disagree with it. Aoba47 (talk) 15:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

All right. I think I found a good place to include it. Let me know if it needs improvement.

I do not have much to say in my review, which only consists of two clarification questions and a request to link a particular item in the lede. You have done a great job with this list. Hopefully, it will inspire other editors to work on GLAAD lists or LGBT lists in general. Let me know when everything has been addressed, and I will be more than happy to support this FLC for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 22:44, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Aoba47: Thank you for the kind words. That was actually my hope back in 2018 when I worked on the Outstanding Comic Book list; that other people would decide to work on the following lists. Then I realized that wasn't happening, so I decided to do it myself. Lol. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:09, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt responses. I really should work on one of these lists in the future. It has been a while since I last worked on a list (since 2019 actually) so it would be nice to focus on something outside of the FAC process for a bit. I appreciate that you added the Chloe Zhao image to the list. Everything looks solid to me. I support this FLC for promotion based on the prose. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any feedback on my current FAC, but I understand if you do not have the time or interest. Best of luck with the FLC! Aoba47 (talk) 19:29, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

List of Music Bank Chart winners (2016)

Nominator(s): EN-Jungwon (talk) and Jal11497 (talk) 16:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

This is the fourth Music Bank related list that I am nominating. I started working on it back in April and now I believe that it is ready to become a featured list. -- EN-Jungwon 16:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "Both singles spent a total of ten weeks at number making Twice the act with the most wins of the year" - as you literally just mentioned in the last sentence that each single spent five weeks at number one, I think this could be expressed more elegantly as "The total of ten weeks which the singles spent at number one made Twice the act with the most wins of the year"
  • Done.
• "The group ranked four singles at number one in 2016 achieved with "Sing for You", "Monster", "Lotto" and "For Life", the most of any act in 2016" => "The group achieved four number ones in 2016, the most of any act during the year: "Sing for You", "Monster", "Lotto" and "For Life"."
  • Done.
• "Member Baekhyun along with Miss A member Bae Suzy won their first Music Bank trophy for their collaboration song "Dream"." - specify first solo trophy, as Baekhyun had previously won as a group member (and Bae Suzy may have done too, I haven't checked previous years' articles)
• "A number of acts achieved their first number ones in 2016." - would this not make more sense being placed before the previous sentence?
  • Done.
• ""Monster" by Exo (pictured) earned the highest score of 2016, with 11,570 points at the June 17th broadcast." => ""Monster" by Exo (pictured) earned the highest score of 2016, with 11,570 points on the June 17th broadcast."
  • Done.
• The singer called Bae Suzy in the prose is only called Suzy in the image caption and in the table - any reason for this?
  • Done.
    • She's still just recorded as Suzy in the table.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:59, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

List of World Heritage Sites in Thailand

Nominator(s): Tone 07:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Thailand has six WHS and a further seven on the tentative list. The style is standard for the WHS lists. Italy has just been promoted (many thanks to everyone who found time to go through that massive list - the next couple of nominations will be shorter) and Cambodia is already seeing some support, so I am adding a new nomination. Tone 07:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• Sukhothai (Wat_Mahathat pictured) - lose that underscore
• "They were important in development of first distinct Siamese architectural style" => "They were important in the development of the first distinct Siamese architectural style"
• "The large sandstone rock formations in the area have inspired peoples through centuries" => "The large sandstone rock formations in the area have inspired peoples throughout the centuries"
• Buddha is wikilinked in at least two places, only needs linking once
• "It is located on a rim of an extinct volcano" => "It is located on the rim of an extinct volcano"
• "the remains of the water managements system" => "the remains of the water management system"
• That's what I got! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:55, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

  Done, thanks! I left Buddha linked because of the sortable tables, the rest if fixed. Tone 10:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Grace Kelly on screen and stage

Nominator(s): Cowlibob (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Grace Kelly was one of the leading actors of Classical Hollywood cinema, here is a list of her roles. As always I welcome all constructive criticism on how to improve it. Cowlibob (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

The only thing I can think to suggest is clarifying that Alfred Hitchcock was the director of the named films, as some people might not know what "Alfred Hitchcock thrillers" means. Other that that, nothing to mention :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:30, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Amended. Thanks. Cowlibob (talk) 19:46, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:47, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the tables.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
• 6. It is stable.
• Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 02:52, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
  • A little explanation on this edit of mine: I'm not faulting your work; you used a format that's common in featured lists of filmographies, and some people like it that way. To me, it feels like a MOS:FIRST violation, so I went with a different format that's also common in featured lists, such as Bruce Willis filmography and List of Kate Winslet performances. - Dank (push to talk) 10:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
  • And the format at List of roles and awards of Catherine Zeta-Jones also works, I think, if you prefer ... even "[numeral] productions" without breaking it down would work. - Dank (push to talk) 16:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dank: Thanks for your comments and edits. Agree it reads better now. Cowlibob (talk) 20:15, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Aoba47

• I have a few comments for the sources links for File:Grace Kelly 1956.jpg. The eBay link is dead and the links for the front and back link to a sketchy site that does not appear to support the image.
• The lead's first paragraph uses "The following year" twice which makes the prose rather repetitive.

Everything looks solid. Aside from these two comments, I believe this is ready for promotion. Once everything has been addressed, I will be more than happy to support this nomination. Best of luck with this FLC! Aoba47 (talk) 01:26, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Aoba47: Thanks for your comments. I have changed to hopefully a better pic. Made a slight copy edit. Cowlibob (talk) 20:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing everything. I'd be curious on why File:Grace Kelly Promotional Photograph Rear Window.jpg was not included alongside the High Noon image as I feel that her appearance in Rear Window is her most iconic and recognizable (at least to modern audiences), but that's more of a personal question. I've always loved Kelly, as cliché as that sentiment is. Anyway, I support this FLC for promotion based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 20:22, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Aoba47: I've changed up the photo to a promotional one for Rear Window. I agree her work with Hitchcock is what she is remembered for. Cowlibob (talk) 18:10, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing this point. I love the photo that you have chosen. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

• Source review – All of the references appear to be reliable and well-formatted, and the link-checker tool isn't showing any concerns. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:26, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

94th Academy Awards

Nominator(s): Birdienest81talk and RunningTiger123 (talk) 08:04, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

We are nominating the 2022 Oscars for featured list because we believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. We followed how the 1929, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1984, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 ceremonies were written. Birdienest81talk 08:04, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude

• "This marked the first time that three people have shared hosting duties" => "This marked the first time that three people had shared hosting duties"
• "with DJ Khaled introducing the hosts and athletes Tony Hawk, Kelly Slater, and Shaun White introducing" - this is very confusing - are all three people hosts and athletes? Just athletes? Or are just Hawk and Slater athletes? I can't figure out at all which descriptors apply to which people......
• "Will Smith walked onstage and slapped presenter and comedian Chris Rock over a joke about his wife, Jada Pinkett Smith." - unclear from this wording whose wife she is
• "Most media outlets were more critical of the show." - more critical than whom?
• "performed by muscial group The Samples" - "musical" is spelt wrong
• That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Done: I have read all your comments and made adjustments accordingly.

--Birdienest81talk 14:51, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Source review – Pass

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 06:16, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Formatting

• Generally excellent, I delinked a few works (since the scheme you were going with is only linking the first mention) but no issues now.

Reliability

• All high-quality news sources, no issues found.

Verifiability

• Checked a few, no issues.
• Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 00:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Harushiga

• "portraying Anita in the 2021 film adaption" - change "adaption" to "adaptation"
• "during an interview with producer Packer on Good Morning America" - I don't think "producer" is needed since it's already established at the start of the paragraph
  • That's about it. Good job on this! Harushiga (talk) 06:36, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
    • @Harushiga: Done. RunningTiger123 (talk) 12:30, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Harushiga (talk) 12:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments from SNUGGUMS

• "The winners were announced during the awards ceremony on March 27." is missing a citation
• Use straight quotation marks ('") instead of curly ones (’”) per MOS:CURLY
• Under "Ceremony information", the triple image caption feels incomplete to only have a "left" parenthetical for Regina Hall without adding "center" or "right" for Amy Schumer and Wanda Sykes.
• It reads awkwardly to use "citing" within "citing time constraints and the desire to avoid another disruption". You'd be better off with "due to" or "because of".
• To avoid WP:SYNTH, you should add a reference to back up "The broadcast generally received mixed to negative reviews." with something that specifically talks about overall reception.

This will need work to become FL-worthy but you should be able to handle it. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

• @SNUGGUMS: I've addressed almost all of the comments up above, but I have trouble locating the curly quotation marks. I tried copying the curly quotes syntax from the MOS:CURLY, but it highlights all the quotation marks. Is there a way to locate the curly ones from the straight ones?

--Birdienest81talk 08:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

It's something you'd have to locate with your own eyes. Look under the "Ceremony information" heading to find them. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 14:19, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

User:SNUGGUMS, User:Birdienest81: you don't have to eyeball it to locate it, at least using Firefox. Copy the left-curly-quotes character, hit Ctrl-F to "find", and check the "match diacritics" box ... it will search for just the curly quotes, rather than all kinds of quote marks. - Dank (push to talk) 14:37, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

But ... I'm not finding any curly quotes in this list article at the moment. - Dank (push to talk) 14:57, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

The first paragraph has "Will is a powerhouse producer who has enjoyed success across all movie genres! He’s already bringing a boundless energy and a focus on innovation to this year’s Oscars, to entertain the widest spectrum of fans." while the second one includes "Some are movie lovers who have seen every single one of the nominated movies, and they’ve got very specific opinions about who wins. And then you have people who are just casual moviegoers, who perhaps have not seen the awards fare but who also love movies. I’m inviting them in as well. They’re just as important to me as a viewer." Hopefully this helps. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:10, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm confused; those are straight quotes. I know both by eyeballing them and by searching for straight quotes in Firefox with the "match diacritics" box toggled. - Dank (push to talk) 15:50, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

That's quite weird. Maybe it's because I'm using Chrome, but those instances showed as curly for me while others were straight. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:54, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• @SNUGGUMS:: Okay, it looks like I was able to fix the curly apostrophes/quotes problem. I used the same "match diatrics" feature (Ctrl+F). Although it still does not distinguish between straight and curly ones, I was able to eyeball them more easily this time since I can see the highlighted apostrophes/quotes more clearer.

--Birdienest81talk 09:18, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

With that, you have my support for the nomination :) SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:09, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

List of Coppa Italia finals

Nominator(s): Dr Salvus, Foghe, Snowflake91 21:07, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Since March 2021, I have often read the second nomination and I think I have fixed every user's concern about it. (If I haven't, it may be because I had written many cazzate in it.) I hadn't nominated it before due to a fear to fail it for the fourth time, but I now think the article is OK. I couldn't find the attendance prior to the 1980s, but remember the cup didn't even have television broadcast at that moment, so I think the attendance information wasn't registrated.. Dr Salvus 21:07, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Though semi-active, I'd like to co-nominate Foghe. He's the one who made the article decent on 18 June 2020. Dr Salvus 13:07, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Goldsztajn (copy-edits to lede)

• "Since the first final between Vado and Udinese" Link Vado and Udinese

 Done

• "...the initial game ended in a scoreless draw" goalless draw.

 Done

• "to assign the cup" ... to determine the winner.

 Done

• "Inter Milan is the only team to manage to win the Serie A..."

 Done

• "From 1923 to 1925, from 1928 to 1935 and from 1944 to 1957, the tournament was not held." ... The tournament was not held in the years 1923–1925, 1928–1935 and 1944–1957.

 Done

• It was reintroduced in 1958, in the light of the UEFA project" ... It was recommenced in 1958, in conjunction with the UEFA project...

 Done

• "Juventus hold the record for winning the most titles (14)" ... holds

This article is not written in US English. However, I've changed "Inter Milan is" to "Inter Milan are".

• "the highest number of consecutive cups" ... the highest number of consecutive victories in the final

 Done

• "and of having played in the most finals" ... and playing in the most finals.

 Done

• "share the worst win–loss record with three defeats and no successes" either: "three losses and no wins" or "three defeats and no victories"

 Done

• "The teams from outside the top Italian football league system that managed to win the cup are Vado in 1922 (from Promozione[a]) and Napoli in 1962 (from Serie B)." ... Two teams from outside the top league have won the cup: Vado in 1922 (from Promozione[a]) and Napoli in 1962 (from Serie B). Unlink Vado (link at first appearance).

 Done

• "On seven occasions, the result was a scoreless draw" goalless

 Done

• "after extra time in the 2022 final." in extra time at the 2022 final

 Done

• (infobox caption+picture) "Stadio Olimpico in Rome has hosted the Coppa Italia final in recent years" Not a particularly useful picture, does not actually depict a cup final match. There are images available in Commons - either a photo of the cup, or from one of the finals itself. Depicting the stadium is not really the most prominent feature of this list.

 Done Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 04:29, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Stadio Olimpico Roma Coppa Italia 2012

This image actually depicts a Cup Final. Goldsztajn (talk) 04:35, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

• @Goldsztajn:  Done.

Comment: Are you sure that "at the 2022 final" is actually better? In many other articles, including the FL articles like List of FA Cup Finals, List of European Cup and UEFA Champions League finals etc., its "in the final", not "at"... even the top tier English sources which would definitely use correct grammar, like BBC, are using "in the (2019) final" (1, 2), and UEFA also uses "after extra time in the 2018 final" (3), so "after extra time in the 2022 final" is better than "in extra time at the 2022 final". Snowflake91 (talk) 11:33, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Snowflake91@Dr Salvus - it was the structure of the sentence that appeared somewhat jarring to me (I guess I don't like the use of "beat"). I'm not particularly wedded to one version, personally I prefer "in" over "after", but of course that means avoiding a double use of "in", hence my suggested use of "at". If there's use of the form after/in with the other articles, I'm not opposed. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn I honestly think "in" is OK. It doesn't look weird to me. I've done all the changes except the one which was not standard in UK English. Can you support my nomination if you don't have anything else? Dr Salvus 22:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dr Salvus For consistency's sake need to change "Inter Milan are" to "is". British English uses the singular for collective nouns when the entity being described is considered a singular unit - so a team wins a match (singular), whereas police are investigating (plural) a crime. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:42, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn  Done. Inter is and Juventus holds. Dr Salvus 22:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dr Salvus apologies for creating confusion - I didn't mean to suggest removing the infobox, I thought *only* the caption and image in the infobox could be improved. I think the infobox information was a very useful summary and would encourage its inclusion. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:08, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Goldsztajn I don't have my PC right now. Please, can you please insert it yourself? Dr Salvus 23:18, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Nvm, have done it myself with my phone. Dr Salvus 23:26, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

I suspect that the alleged source "Almanacco Illustrato del Calcio – La storia 1898–2004" doesnt actually have attendances information for Coppa finals, it would make no sense that they would list attendances for 1960, 1963, and then nothing until 1974, and then again nothing until 1988. Looks like those attendances are taken from Italian Wikipedia, backed up with some random football book that no one has access to verifiy. If you actually have access to that book, can you scan one page or take a photo with a phone, for example the information that 1975 final had 40,000 spectators? If not, than simply delete those unverified attendances and list only the attendances since the 1990s, with some note that attendances prior that date are simply not available. Snowflake91 (talk) 11:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't have the access to it. I've asked at it.wiki whether somebody has it. I admit I was actually cheating. Dr Salvus 12:40, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I've deleted those unverified ones. Let's whait for them to say something at it.wiki. Dr Salvus 12:55, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• Wikilink football in the first sentence

 Done

• "74 Coppa Italia trophies have been assigned" - this is wording that would literally never be used by a native English speaker. I would simply say "74 finals have taken place"

 Done

• Any reason for the inconsistent use of digits and words for numbers over 10 eg "There have been 40 single-match finals [....] On thirty occasions....."

 Done

• "Inter Milan is the only team to win the Serie A, the Coppa Italia and the UEFA Champions League in the same year, in 2010" - source?

 Done

• "Juventus holds the record [....] AC Milan have lost" - inconsistent use of singular/plural to refer to a club

 Done

• "Of the teams which have participated in more than one final, Palermo and Hellas Verona, share......" - no reason for that comma after Verona

 Done

• "with three defeats and no victories, each" - no reason for that comma either

 Done

• "Number of teams 44" (in the infobox) - presumably this is the current number of teams but I am unsure of the value of showing this as I would imagine it has changed quite a lot over the years
• It has not at all.

• "Team from outside the top Italian football league system" => "Team from outside the top level of the Italian football league system"

 Done

• Per the comment above about attendances, the figures from 1988 to 2004 still seem to be sourced to a book which you admit you don't have access to. Are you 100% certain that this book sources the figures listed?
• I'm adding the sources. No one has replied me at it.wiki. Dr Salvus 20:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

• That's what I got on a first pass -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:59, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

  worldfootball.net appears to have finals attendance records from 1987/88. I've not checked them all, but appear to match what is in the article. Each one should be referenced. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

  It was what I was doing... Dr Salvus 20:28, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude I've done them all but the number of teams. It does not change often. Dr Salvus 21:26, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

  I'm literally an idot: how was I able not to think that I would've been able to find attendances searching in archives of old newspapers? I've found much information from it. I've almost found info for all the 1980s finals. Dr Salvus 00:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

• For the La Stampa sources you have added, the title should be the actual title of the newspaper article, not "La Stampa - Consultazione Archivio" e.g. the first one should be "La Roma è finalmente prima" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:51, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude  Done. Can you support or is something else needed? Dr Salvus 10:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:38, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

1980–81 has the same link for both matches, the title and the date in the reference are correct but the URL is wrong, the second match should link to the 18 June 1981 newspaper – I dont know how to change the URL, because even if you switch to 18 June the URL stays the same at that website. Snowflake91 (talk) 11:20, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Neither do I. I've tried to do it, but nothing... However, there are still the date and the number of the page which can help Dr Salvus 11:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm done adding almost all the attendances. Dr Salvus 21:31, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

The reason I haven't added all is beacuse La Stampa had not written those particular information. Dr Salvus 21:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I have just removed the number of team information. I have done everything that you said. Dr Salvus 21:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude and @Goldsztajn is there anything to prevent you from supporting it? Dr Salvus 20:42, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Support. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 21:25, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

List of Billboard number-one R&B songs of 1953

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Here's the next of my nominations from the history of Billboard's R&B charts. Among the most notable chart-toppers this year was "Big Mama" Thornton's original recording of "Hound Dog", a song later made legendary by Elvis Presley. Anyone who has heard the recent song "Vegas" by rapper/singer Doja Cat will have heard Big Mama's vocals being sampled on that track...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Pseud 14

• Another solid work. Only comment is whether "The "5" Royales" should be sorted as the numeric 5 and not as "five"? --Pseud 14 (talk) 19:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
  • @Pseud 14: No idea if there is a rule on this. WP:SORT doesn't seem to offer any help.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
    • I don't know either. The 5th Wave (film) and The 5th Dimension are both sorted as "5" (according to their DEFAULTSORT). - Dank (push to talk) 12:37, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
      • Same reason as to my clarification too, per Chris's comments . But if we would be going by precedence, I guess Dank's examples would be the way to go? --Pseud 14 (talk) 14:37, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
        • @Pseud 14: fair enough, changed :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
          • Support --Pseud 14 (talk) 16:19, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments from BennyOnTheLoose

Looks good. Only a couple of minor questions/comments. I make no claims to being a good writer, so I'm happy to have my suggestions challenged. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:40, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

• "in the early 1960s she turned to gospel music ..." feels to me like it could be the start of a new sentence
• "Willie Mabon's" - shouldn't this just be "Mabon's", as he has already been mentioned?
• I guess you considered including all of the info about Faye Adams's "Shake a Hand" in one place and decided to keep the info about it being her first chart entry alongside the other debutants. Shouldn't it be just "Adams" at the second mention?
• "Faye Adams reached number one with "Shake a Hand", the first chart entry of her career, a feat also achieved by the "5" Royales," - consider starting a new sentence after "of her career," (there are two further bits of info about the "5" Royales in the sentence, which seems like quite a lot all in one sentence.)
• "This gave the group the distinction of having gained two number ones with its first two charting songs, but it would not achieve another chart-topper" would read better to me as "their first two charting songs, but they would not achieve another chart-topper", but there may be good reasons not to change it.
• Consider adding something like "(pictured in 1971)" to the BB King caption, and similarly for the Boyd (1968) one as they are both from a fair few years after 1953. I think the McPhatter one probably doesn't need a date in the caption as it's closer (1959) to the year the article is about.
• Should be an en dash in "1942-1988" in Joel Whitburn's Top R & B Singles, 1942-1988
• The "Paul McCartney, Bob Dylan Recordings Added to Grammy Hall of Fame" Rolling Stone link takes me to a 404 page. Consider running IABot, which might provide a link to an archived copy.
• I think it should be 'Over the Rainbow' rather than "Over the Rainbow" in "National Recording Registry Picks Are "Over the Rainbow""

@BennyOnTheLoose: - many thanks for your review, all sorted I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Support. Thanks for your work on the list. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. I checked only the captions on images, since you've got an image review above.
• 6. It is stable.
• Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 21:02, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

• Source review – As Dank said above, the sources are reliable throughout. They are also well-formatted and the link-checker tool isn't detecting any issues. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:27, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Barbie's careers

Nominator(s): Antihistoriaster (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Antihistoriaster

I am nominating this for featured list because it is comprehensive, thoroughly documented, well-organized and, to me at least, pretty fascinating as a window into culture and toy history.

Antihistoriaster (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Antihistoriaster

Comments from Lil-Unique1

• Oppose - Clearly this has taken a lot of time, well done on your dedication and committment. I do have some concerns though. The article lacks context, it is in essence an index of jobs that Barbie has had. I also have trouble with that very terminology. Is it about the doll or about the character as she has appeared in anime/Tv/movies? If its about the doll, then dolls do not have professions people do. Dolls are inanimate objects. Therefore is this not about the costumes/outfits and accessories Barbie comes with? as e.g. Barbie dressed as a doctor NOT Barbie as a doctor. All of that aside, I don't think it passes our quality standards either:

1. Barbie's Careers sounds awkward. Is there a better title?
2. Does this pass WP:NLIST? Has the topic of the careers of Barbie received significant coverage?
3. At the moment, almost everything is matter of fact - primary sources saying there's a doctor barbie etc. but no context.
4. The second paragraph is one sentence and reads According to Mattel, Barbie has had over 200 careers, recently including more STEM fields. The word recently is without context, recently according to when?
5. Reference one (The Times article) is missing information like its author etc.
6. Reference five Barbie.mattel.com/shop is a WP:VENDOR source which are frowned upon
7. What makes Barbiedb.com a reliable source? There's no editorial information and its borderline WP:VENDOR / akin to eBay?
8. Is there not an over-reliance on WP:PRIMARY sources? Where its not Barbiedb.com, its all almost Mattel Global Consumer, which is clearly related to the topic very close.
9. None of the current sources are archived.

Unless I've missed a notability guideline that applies specifically to toys, its my understanding that the WP:RS and WP:MOS would frown upon primary sources, vendor sourcing and it may even border on WP:INDISCRIMINATE. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 21:24, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback! There are a couple of things I'm confused about. When you say "primary sources saying there's a doctor barbie etc. but no context.", what do you mean by context in this sense? Like, more information on why the doll exists, or what sort of context are you looking for? Same with when you say the article overall lacks context, I guess I'm not sure what sort of context you mean. I suppose I'm also confused about why Mattel would be a bad source when the material at hand is about types of careers Barbie has been portrayed as having (I do think "List of careers Barbie has been portrayed as having" would be a better title, fwiw), wouldn't it be good to directly cite the manufacturer? Antihistoriaster (talk) 18:12, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Antihistoriaster Well primary sources are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved. Mattel are the makers of Barbie so of course they will cover their own products. What has not been established is why the careers of Barbie are of notability beyond the fact they exist. That would require independent third party sources.

In terms of context, just because something exists doesn't mean its notable to be written about, WP:NLIST says Notability guidelines also apply to the creation of stand-alone lists and tables. Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. - although you could argue that Barbie having STEM careers has received independent coverage, NLIST goes on to say Because the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles.

In a nutshell, Wikipedia does not allow content to be sourced from Vendors, and if a list or article only exists to be an index of all of the entries in a topic then it probably isn't notable. It's certainly not a FL in my eyes to be sourced almost entirely from Primary sources related to the topic, and certainly not Barbiedb.com which is not a reliable source. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 15:26, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. !Year becomes !scope=col | Year. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.
• Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. |1959 becomes !scope=row |1959. If the cell spans multiple rows with a colspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 18:19, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Member states of the International Labour Organization

Nominator(s): Goldsztajn (talk) 22:30, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it contains a comprehensive overview of the member states of the ILO. I've been working on the list on and off for 18 months and believe it is probably now the most complete article on the member states of any international organisation on Wikipedia. This is my first FLC. It was nominated for peer review, but received no feedback. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:30, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• Per MOS:COLOR, a background colour alone cannot be used to indicate something, you need to add a symbol as well -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

  Done. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 09:58, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

  A different option might be to add a column with a green tick or yellow tick denoting founding member or invited, respectively...? Goldsztajn (talk) 10:13, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

  The ticks would have to be in different columns, as having ticks of different colours in a single column would also violate MOS:COLOR.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:42, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

  That'll be a no, then. :) Thanks, again. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 10:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.

• Done.

• A few rows seem to be missing their rowscope- for example Republic of Vietnam and People's Democratic Republic of Yemen in the Former members section, and State of Palestine in the next section.

• Done. I've done a check of every row, throughout all the tables, it should be there for all now.

• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 18:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you for spotting these and brining to my attention. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 03:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "presently has 187 member states"- per MOS:CURRENTLY, change this to a statement along the lines of "as of August 2022"

• Done. Revised paragraphs one and two of the lede to accommodate.

• "The ILO was founded in 1919" - you only just said that

• Done.

• Third para of the lead is unsourced

• Only first sentence of the paragraph is not sourced elsewhere, added source for that sentence. Acceptable?

• "Prior participation as part of the Soviet Union." - this is not a complete sentence so shouldn't have a full stop. Check for other such cases.

• Done

• "citing the organisation's lack of support to anti-colonial liberation movements" - here the British spelling of organisation is used, but earlier the American spelling was used

• Done (technically, use here is Oxford English, but still a mistake in consistency nevertheless!)

• Image caption "Visit of Haile Selaisse of Ethiopia to the ILO, August 1924." is also not a complete sentence

• Done

• Nor is "Stamp issued by the GDR (East Germany) commemorating the 50th anniversary of the founding of the ILO."

• Done

• "in the northern Spring of 1990" - spring is not a proper noun so doesn't need a capital S

• Done

• Ref 116 gives a Harv error (the date is wrong)

• Done

• That's what I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:16, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you for spotting these! Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:26, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Kavyansh

• "Created in 1919" — Established would be more appropriate word, I think.
• "of the Versailles Treaty" — Well, the official name is "Treaty of Versailles". We should be using that.
• "Joseph Stalin (left) and Franklin Roosevelt (right)" — the WP:COMMONNAME is Franklin D. Roosevelt.
• Ref#52: "Shtylla 1967, pp. 385–6." should be 386 for consistency
• Suggesting to hyphenate ISBNs, using https://anticompositetools.toolforge.org/hyphenator/

That is all I have! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 19:31, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Kavyansh.Singh, all done. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Support – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

• "The ILO's rules allow admission without membership in the UN, but the conditions to be satisfied in this case are more complex than for a UN member state." There are several unreferenced statements in the lead. Most do not require refs as they are summaries of the table, but this statement does need a ref.
• A list of 187 items should use Template:Compact TOC for ease of searching, as in List of municipalities in Arkansas.
• I do not think it is necessary to give full formal names, such as "Bolivia (Plurinational State of)", but that is a matter of personal preference.
• "Founding members appear with "+" and a blue background; states invited to be founding members appear with * and a khaki background." I do not see that the distinction is justifified. They all joined on the same date. The fact that some were signatories to the Versailles Treaty is not relevant so far as I can see.
• Republic of Korea and Republic of Moldova. They should be listed alphabetically under Korea and Moldova, not Republic. Ditto United Republic of Tanzania.
• Where a country has resumed membership, you should say readmitted, not admitted. Ditto with the heading in the withdrawals table. You say "Since establishment, 19 states have withdrawn from membership, although all were subsequently readmitted. You sometimes imply a distinction between a former member being admitted or readmitted, but this is unclear and confusing.
• " After the Second World War, the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) was admitted in 1951". Is there a reason you do not also mention the GDR here?
• There are several cite errors showing up, particularly that the Frauman source is not used. For the script to show errors, see User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:32, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

List of accolades received by Drive My Car (film)

Nominator(s): Harushiga (talk) 08:45, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Drive My Car is a Japanese film that received numerous accolades from various outlets. This is my first FLC, and I believe this list meets the criteria. Any feedback is appreciated. Harushiga (talk) 08:45, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "while taking inspiration from "Scheherazade" and "Kino,"" - the comma should be outside the quote marks
  • Done.
• "two other stories from it" =? "two other stories from the collection" would read more elegantly IMO
  • Done.
• "The film had its world premiere [.....] on 11 July 2022, and was released in Japan on 20 August" - how is this possible? 20 August is still three weeks in the future
• On that note, if the film only had its world premiere 19 days ago, how can it have already been nominated for all these awards? Can we assume that you meant to write 11 July 2021?
  • Yep, I meant to write 2021. Fixed.
• Was it really the entire country of Japan that was nominated for the Academy Award?
  • Other tables for films nominated for Best International Feature Film also use the country in the recipient section, so I assume this to be the standard?
• That's what I got on a first pass -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:49, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Hi, I gave some comments above. Harushiga (talk) 02:24, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:59, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments by RunningTiger123

• In citations, if you choose to rewrite titles using italics instead of quotations (example: source 3, "'Drive My Car' Cannes Review..." to "'Drive My Car' Cannes Review..."), the quotations can be removed ("Drive My Car Cannes Review...").
  • Done.
• Nikkan Sports Film Award is in the wrong spot alphabetically (move two spots down)
  • Done.
• Check if the Newcomer of the Year award is directly tied to the film – it may only recognize Miura as an individual without citing the film in the nomination. This is supported by the citation saying the film won 8 awards when 9 are listed.
  • The article directly cites Drive My Car for Miura's win. The award was given to multiple people, which is possibly why it was not counted towards the total.
• Source 53's reference has issues with italics
  • Fixed.
• The New York Times should be marked with |url-access=limited
  • Done.

Overall, this is really good for a first nomination! RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:39, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments! I addressed them above. Harushiga (talk) 19:18, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Cowlibob

Initial thoughts

• That is a very short lead that wouldn't even meet the criteria for a DYK. Could this be expanded to mention more important awards/nominations that it has received.
  • Expanded a bit.
• What makes AwardsWatch a reliable ref?
  • I've seen it used in other featured accolade lists, such as The Tragedy of Macbeth and A Star Is Born. The owner and editor-in-chief, Erik Anderson, seems to be an expert on film-related topics as well. According to his profile on the website, he is a "Rotten Tomatoes-approved critic," and is a member of two critic groups (ICS and GALECA).
• Box Office Mojo is ok on its own, it doesn't need IMDb next to it and the same with Rotten Tomatoes in the refs. Cowlibob (talk) 19:51, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
  • @Cowlibob: Done. Other comments above. Harushiga (talk) 06:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Birdienest81

This is a good list. The only thing I can think of is that it is missing three awards.

• AARP Movies for Grownups Awards (18 March 2022) - Won Foreign Language Film
• Palm Springs International Film Festival (7 January 2022) - Nominated for Best Foreign Language Film
• Santa Barbara International Film Festival (5 March 2022) - Tied for Outstanding Director of the Year Award with Paul Thomas Anderson for Licorice Pizza, Kenneth Branagh for Belfast, Jane Campion for The Power of the Dog, and Steven Spielberg for West Side Story

If you have time would you care for reviewing the 94th Academy Awards regarding its featured list nomination?

--Birdienest81talk 04:59, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for finding these! I've added them to the list. (P.S. AARP is actually not a win) Harushiga (talk) 07:19, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

List of international cricket centuries by Babar Azam

Nominator(s): CreativeNorth (talk) 15:47, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because pretty much every other cricket century list is featured and I have worked to get it to the standard where I feel it could be featured as well. Thanks in advance. CreativeNorth (talk) 15:47, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• I am aware that names from the Indian subcontinent don't necessarily work the same as western names, so can you confirm that it's correct to refer to him as simply "Babar" per MOS:SURNAME?

I'm pretty sure he is refered to as Babar. This tweet from the Pakistan Cricket Board seems to confirm this. Could be wrong though. CreativeNorth (talk)

• "Babar Azam is an Pakistani cricketer" => "Babar Azam is a Pakistani cricketer"

YChanged. CreativeNorth (talk)

• Full stop at the end of the Vaughan quote should be outside the quote marks

Y Done

• "He has been named in the ICC Men's ODI Team of the Year on 3 occasions" => "He has been named in the ICC Men's ODI Team of the Year on three occasions"

Y Done.

• "four different opponents at five cricket grounds" - I think just "grounds" would suffice, as he's not likely to have scored a century at a football ground

Y Removed

• "His first century came in 2016 where he scored 120" - against.....?

Changed to "His first century came in 2016 where he scored 120 against the West Indies"

• Think that's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments @ChrisTheDude:, I think I have adressed them all, anything else? CreativeNorth (talk) 14:44, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:48, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

• Quick comment – This isn't a full source review from me as of yet, but ref 6 needs a publisher (ESPNcricinfo). Giants2008 (Talk) 21:22, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Giants2008: Corrected. CreativeNorth (talk) 14:17, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• It's mostly fine, but I question why the second column of the tables (score) is being set as the "primary" column, rather than the "number" column, seeing as the score is not unique and does not "define" its row. --PresN 18:10, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@PresN: I think have changed it so that the primary column is the number column. Can you have a look and confirm? Thanks. CreativeNorth (talk) 14:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Yep, looks good! --PresN 16:02, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Z1720

Prose

• "Babar made his ODI debut in May 2015 against Zimababwe and scored 54 before being dismissed." Since this list is about Azam's centuries, I do not think this sentence is necessary and can be removed, with the subsequent sentence modified to mention his ODI debut.

Done.

Source review

Version reviewed

• Publication dates are typically included in the references, per WP:CITEWEB. I suggest going through the news articles and adding this information if provided.
• I suggest archiving the websites

Done, now all the websites have been archived and dates have been added where possible.

Image review

• The link to the video has been terminated, and the account was terminated. How do we know that the image is not a copyright violation? This image might have to be removed.
• Use upright rather than px for images. See MOS:IMAGESIZE for more details
• I don't think that information is needed in the caption, as the image is introducing the person the list is talking about. I suggest something like, "Babar Azam, pictured in 20xx" (replace 20xx with the year the image was taken) or something similar.

Done. I have changed the image to a different one used on Babar Azam, changed to upright, and used the suggested caption.

Those are my thoughts. Please ping me when the above are addressed. Z1720 (talk) 02:01, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Z1720: I think I have addressed your comments, can you have a look and confirm please? Thanks CreativeNorth (talk) 17:38, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Support. My concerns have been resolved. Z1720 (talk) 18:12, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

List of Music Bank Chart winners (2015)

Nominator(s): EN-Jungwon (talk) and Jal11497 (talk) 14:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

After taking the 2020 list to FL status and nominating the 2021 list (which will hopefully be closed soon), here is the 2015 list. This is the third Music bank related list that I am nominating for FL status. Looking forward to your comment. -- EN-Jungwon 14:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "actor and singer Park Bo-gum and Red Velvet member Irene became the host of the show" - host should be hosts (plural)
• "The single, along with "Lion Heart" by Girls' Generation ranked" - need a comma after Generation to close off the clause
• "The year began with "December, 2014 (The Winter's Tale)" by Exo" - doesn't read brilliantly, suggest "The first winner of the year was "December, 2014 (The Winter's Tale)" by Exo"
• "Super Junior's sub-unit Super Junior-D&E consisting of members Donghae and Eunhyuk won their first ever music show trophy" - source?
• "Girl group Red Velvet achieved their first music show win" - source?
• That's what I got on a quick first pass -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:10, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude, all done. Thank you for the review. -- EN-Jungwon 18:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:29, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

List of FIA World Endurance champions

Nominator(s): EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 19:57, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

This list is about all the drivers who have won a title in the FIA World Endurance Championship, an endurance auto racing championship that has been run since 2012. I have recently expanded and redone the list and I believe it meets the necessary requirements to become an FLC. EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 19:57, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude

• Which version of English is this article in? I can see both "co-organised" (British) and "center" (American)
• In the World Endurance Drivers' Championship table (and subsequent tables), what does the "margin" column mean?
• Using the grey background in the World Endurance GT Drivers' Championship to indicate something contravenes MOS:COLOR. You also need to use a symbol.
• If the grey background relates to the season as a whole, how come in 2014 and 2016 there is one person with it and one without?
• In fact, how come some rows in that table have multiple people listed generally?
• Similar comments to the above on the World GT Manufacturers' Championship table
• "The championship is open to all manufacturers participating in the LMGTE categories, although only entered manufacturers are eligible for points" - what is an "entered manufacturer"?
• "The Trophy for LMP2 Pro/Am Drivers was introduced in the 2021 season for LMP2 driver crews featuring at least one bronze-rated driver" - what's a "bronze-rated driver"?
• Notes a and b are not complete sentences so don't need full stops
• That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:54, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
  • @ChrisTheDude: Changes have been made based on the above points EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 10:48, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:52, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments by RunningTiger123

• 6 LMP1 Private Drivers' Trophy winners → six LMP1 Private Drivers' Trophy winners (MOS:NUMERAL)
• in either of the Pro and Am categories → in either the Pro and Am categories
• A grey background... – this is a complete sentence and should have a period in both locations it occurs.
• Alexandre Imperatori sorts incorrectly
• Signatech Alpine earned their second LMP2 teams trophy in the 2018–19 season, – wrong punctuation at end?

Overall, this seems like a really solid list. RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:28, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

• @RunningTiger123: Have made changes based on the above points EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 19:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:21, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

List of World Heritage Sites in Cambodia

Nominator(s): Tone 06:49, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

I know I still have to work on some lists of WHS in Europe, but I'll take a detour to Southeast Asia now. Cambodia has 3 WHS and 8 sites on the tentative list. Most of the sites are ancient cities and temples. The style is standard for WHS lists. The list for Italy, which is currently nominated, is seeing some support already (I know that list is massive, so this one is on the shorter side). Tone 06:49, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "The site was immediately placed to the" => "The site was immediately placed on the"
• "was the site of the capitals of the Khmer Empire" - is capitals (plural) correct?
• "along a 800 m (2,600 ft) axis" => "along an 800 m (2,600 ft) axis"
• "Koh Ker was the capital of Khmer Empire" => "Koh Ker was the capital of the Khmer Empire"
• "king Jayavarman II declared the independence" => "king Jayavarman II declared independence"
• "and then often took to the nearby execution site of Choeung Ek" => "and then often taken to the nearby execution site of Choeung Ek"
• "The temple is decorated with Buddhist motives" => "The temple is decorated with Buddhist motifs"
• That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:12, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

  Done, thanks! Yes, capitals, plural. I added the word "different" to make it clearer. Tone 09:40, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:41, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Concerns by Z1720

Thanks for nominating this FLC. I want to raise my concern that the only publication used in this article is UNESCO. Since this list is selected by UNESCO, I think they would be considered a primary source and thus some secondary sources would be necessary to help verify the information. Furthermore, the description section has lots of information that can be verified in other sources that would be of a higher quality than UNESCO such as academic sources. I am not saying that the UNESCO references should be removed, but that secondary sources need to be added to this article. I am not posting this as an "oppose" because I want to give the nominator and others a chance to respond or make changes to the article. Please ping me if there are any questions or responses. Thanks, Z1720 (talk) 00:37, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware of the issue, it has been raised in some previous WHS nominations. There seems to be a rough consensus that the UNESCO is the reliable source that is sufficient here. Of course, most information could be sourced to other sources but the key thing is why some site is on the list (or tentative list), and this is always according to the UNESCO justification of outstanding universal value. I sometimes add third-party sources when the UNESCO one is lacking information, though. Tone 08:15, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I am reading through the descriptions more closely, and the text is doing a great job describing the site, but it doesn't explicitly mention why it was picked to be a WHS. I suggest adding secondary sources for the descriptors and a brief, one sentence explanation that says something like "UNESCO chose to recognise this site because..."

I also think that most, if not all, of the statements currently in the description section should be cited to higher-quality, academic sources. Statements like, "The Angkor area, one of the largest archaeological areas in the world," can probably be verified to a better source. It makes sense for the UNESCO data column to be cited to UNESCO, but I find it harder to support the descriptions using only one source. Z1720 (talk) 13:44, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Citing each detail to academic sources is probably an overkill. The UNESCO sources are considered reliable and everything is there, so this should be sufficient. The justification is in the descriptions, if you look at the sources, this is under criteria i-x, when writing, I am always paying attention to that part and try to summarize it in the description. The description ideally always states what the site is and why it is important, so we don't need specifically state that "UNESCO chose to recognise this site because...". In the 20 or so previous nominations, the sources were always fine, so I think we can keep it as it is. Tone 14:03, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

• "due to its remote location, is well preserved". The source says mainly due. The qualification is important and should be retained.
• "the concept of God-King, a government system that existed in Cambodia and Thailand until the 20th century". This wording is confusing. The source says "It remained a concept that was fundamental to the political and governance systems of Cambodia and Thailand until the beginning of the 20th century." The concept was fundamental to the system, but it could not be the system.
• " It was the site where king Jayavarman II declared independence from Java in 802, from the city of Mahendraparvata." Also confusing. Perhaps "It includes the city of Mahendraparvata, where king Jayavarman II declared independence from Java in 802." Dudley Miles (talk) 22:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

  Fixed all, thanks! Tone 17:53, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support. Looks fine now. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:59, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments from BennyOnTheLoose

I'm happy to have my comments challenged. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

• Seems to me like the "Cultural heritage consists of monuments..." and "Natural features..." should mention that these are UNESCO definitions, but perhaps it's already obvious enough from the context and references.
• I suggest adding a few words to explain "tentative list" in the intro. (I know it's already explained in the Tenative list section.)
• Some refs are out of numerical order ([7][4][5])
• I am in sympathy with Z1720's comments about adding secondary sources. WP:SOURCE says "Base articles on reliable, independent, published sources" (emphasis added by me). I guess there could be some incentive for countries to add to their tentative lists for reasons of tourism, so I think the argument for tentative lists being reliable is weaker than for the WHS list. However, I have no evidence for this, and if there's consensus that these type of articles can be based just on UNESCO/state sources then I'm not going to oppose on this point. (I see from the UNESCO site that "The sole responsibility for the content of each Tentative List lies with the State Party concerned")

• Thanks for checking! I fixed the refs order. As for the first two points, yes, it is kind of clear that this is UNESCO terminology, and stating what tentative lists are would be repetitive. As for the sources, it will always be either UNESCO or related ICOMOS sources that primarily state why something is of outstanding quality, and this is the relevant part. All other sources will be directly derived. Of course, we could source the fact that X temple was constructed in the Y century to a scholarly paper or a book, but this would be adding extra references to an already valid and reliable one, so it is redundant. Speaking of, yes, the tentative list sources are often of lesser quality than the main list ones, because several nominations are old and have not been updated. Yet still, this is the place where it is explained why the property is nominated. --Tone 19:04, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Fernando Alonso

Nominator(s): Radioactive39 (talk) 19:28, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it seems like a very informative list about arguably both one of the best and most popular Formula One drivers of this sport. In my opinion, this list also gives a detailed overview about the driver's statistics and achievements (in this case: Grand Prix wins) throughout the driver's career. This could attract the attention of the readers, mainly because he is a popular Formula One driver, as I said before in my brief text. Radioactive39 (talk) 19:28, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:43, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

*"currently competing for Alpine, who won 32 Formula One Grands Prix and two world championships." - is it Alsonso or Alpine that won this? "moved to Renault after just one season for initially being a test and reserve driver => "moved to Renault after just one season, initially to be a test and reserve driver" "before he was being promoted as a regular driver" => "before he was promoted to a regular driver" "managed to win consecutive world championships" => "won consecutive world championships" "in 2005 and 2006 as he won each seven races in both seasons" => "in 2005 and 2006, winning seven races in both seasons" " the then-youngest world champion in the history " => " the then-youngest world champion in history " "Alonso signed for the McLaren team in 2007 following a contract expiry with Renault[5]," => "Alonso signed for the McLaren team in 2007 following his contract expiring with Renault[5]," - also the ref should go after the punctuation, not before "narrowly losing out the title" => "narrowly losing out on the title" "due to a split between him and the McLaren team[7]," - ref should be after punc "first Spaniard to win a Formula One race.[8][c]." - why are there two full stops there? "including his both victories" => "including victories" "In all, Alonso won a total of 32 races at 19 different circuits" - has he retired? If not, this should be "In all, Alonso has won a total of 32 races at 19 different circuits" "achieved with cars being designed and powered by Renault" => "achieved with cars designed and powered by Renault" "subsequently making him the most successful Spaniard" => "making him the most successful Spaniard" "He was most successful at the Bahrain International Circuit in Bahrain" => "He has been most successful at the Bahrain International Circuit in Bahrain" "he curiously never achieved to win in Brazil." - "curiously" is not NPOV so remove "Alonso took a controversial victory at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, after his teammate Nelson Piquet Jr. was ordered to crash deliberately." - source? Refs 23 to 28 are not correctly formatted, missing almost all parameters Other refs are inconsistent in how works/publishers are shown eg 21, 40, 41, 43, 45 are all from the same site but show the work/publisher five different ways That's what I got on a first pass -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC) Hello ChrisTheDude, thank you very much for both taking a look at the list and subsequently making suggestions of improvement. I have amended the list based on your suggestions. Hopefully, the list fits well now. Regarding to your last suggestion in terms of the inconsistent refs, I need to look at it later closely, but the remaining errors have been fixed. Please feel free to comment again if I might forgot to edit something. Radioactive39 (talk) 14:48, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Further comments

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:43, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

*Piquet Jr image caption - ref should be after punctuation, not before "Fernando Alonso is a Spanish racing driver, who won" - has he retired from the sport? If not, then this should be "Fernando Alonso is a Spanish racing driver, who has won" Image caption: "Fernando Alonso in 2016, winning a total of 32 races and back-to-back world championships with Renault." He is not winning them in the picture, so this should probably be "Fernando Alonso in 2016. He has won a total of 32 races and back-to-back world championships with Renault." No need to mention Kimi Räikkönen's full name both times he is mentioned in the lead - just use his surname the second time -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:30, 8 July 2022 (UTC) Hello ChrisTheDude, the further comments have been added as well. Thank you very much for giving me your feedback and your suggestions in order to improve the list. Radioactive39 (talk) 17:23, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• 'He won consecutive world championships in 2005 and 2006, winning each seven races in both seasons.' last part of the sentence doesn't make sense. Change to 'winning seven races in each season.'
• 'At the time, he became the first Spaniard to win a Formula One World Championship...' at the time would suggest there's been another F1 champ from Spain since his victories which I don't think there has. Suggest having the pain bit in a separate sentence from the two records that have been surpassed by Vettel, as it currently reads like all three have been surpassed when one hasn't.
• ' two of three records that had been previously held by joint-record seven-time world champion Michael Schumacher.' what's the other record held by Schumacher he didn't beat? Not sure we need to mention two out of three as it leaves the reader wondering what the third record is when it's not made implicit in the sentence what that record actually is.
• 'beating the previous record of Bruce McLaren and also making him the first Spaniard to win a Formula One Grand Prix.' also making him is redundant here, remove it and keep the remaining bit
• 'After being winless in 2004...' -> After a winless 2004 season,
• 'before having a disappointing 2009 season...' remove having
• 'In all, Alonso has won a total of 32 races at 19 different circuits.' Again, not sure we need 'in all' here. Sentence works fine without it.
• ref 3, Sydney Morning Herald needs to be in italics as it's a publication. So change publisher to work in the cite template
• What makes maxf1.net a reliable source? I'm not convinced it is. Those refs should be easy to replace with BBC refs or the official F1 site
• ref 5 has autosport.com while ref 43 has Autosport. As Autosport is a publication, I think ref 5 should change to mimic ref 43.
• ref 33, what makes The Versed a reliable source? I think we can find a more reliable source from a news outlet to reference one of the most controversial races in F1 history.
• Likewise with ChicaneF1, I'm not convinced it's a reliable site. It can easily be replaced by BBC or the F1 site.

That's all from me. NapHit (talk) 10:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

List of The Book of Boba Fett characters

Nominator(s): ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 23:53, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because for the last review I got a pass from the article reviewer and a pass from the source reviewer, but the article only got two votes, therefore not having enough to pass. I am sure this meets the criteria per the last review and am renominating the article in hopes of getting more votes. See last review here ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 23:53, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

• Lead is a little brief for such a long article, per MOS:LEAD.
• "amount" -> "number"
• "that appear in the series are " include, rather than "are"? And why cherry pick these ones?
  • If I do not cherry pick wont the list of name become quite lenghty
• "before in The Mandalorian and has also" overlinked.
• "back to life.[21][11] Rich " ref order.
• " ship Slave I back and" overlinked.
• "Ming-Na Wen portrays" ditto.
  • Another editor and I in the last review agreed that it is ok to keep this link here in case someone reads just that section
• TV Insider's -> TV Insider's (check the markup here if it's confusing.
• "protagonist in the series The Mandalorian.[39] In" overlinked.
• "and Salvador Larocca for Marvel Comics" overlinked.
• "Comic Book Resources' Brenton Stewart" overlinked, and see formatting with the {{'s}} template here and elsewhere.
• "Lucas' film American Graffiti.[128][129][19]" ref order and "Lucas's".
• "two or less episodes in The Book of Boba Fett and are considered to play a significant part" fewer, not less, and considered by whom?
• "of ComicBook.com described" italics or not? Be consistent. And don't overlink.
• "comedian Amy Sedaris performs" overlinked.
• "Britt of Inverse said that " ditto.
• "the Star Wars: The Bad Batch series" ditto.
• "considered to be minor characters or make a significant cameo" considered by whom?
• "conversation with ComicBook.com, Rodriquez" unlink this dab.
• Plenty of spaced hyphens in the references, should be spaced en-dashes.

That's it for now. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 11:45, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Everything has been fixed except for ones I put responses under and I'll get to the last one later. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 00:11, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Question where is the guideline that says I should change the hyphens to dashes in citations. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 11:39, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

MOS:DASH. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:36, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 17:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

@Kaleeb18: - are you able to resolve the issues across this article and List of The Mandalorian characters? Another editor is attempting to (badly) merge all the content from this article into the other one and this one isn't likely to get promoted to FL if all of its content has been merged elsewhere...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:58, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude Do you think the best way about this would be to remove the content from over there because it is not the list of The Book of Boba Fett characters, but it is the list of The Mandalorian characters. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 11:41, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

That would be my preference. I tried to sort out the other article earlier, but I didn't realise quite how much of a mess it was and I ran out of time before I had to go out..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:42, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: I have finished all you have said except for the ones I had questions for. Also @ChrisTheDude: I have fixed the issue at the List of The Mandalorian characters. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 17:36, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:24, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

List of United States Military Academy First Captains

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 — Maile (talk) 16:34, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

This is being nominated as featured list because it includes significant American military figures, as well as others who went on to successful civilian careers. Instituted in 1872, First Captain is a leadership position, the senior ranking member of the 4,400 Corps of Cadets at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. (Not to be confused with the salaried Army enlisted rank of Captain (United States O-3).) Note that the PDF United States Military Academy sourcing for the list of names is only a chronological list of all who have held the position . — Maile (talk) 16:34, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

• After reading this list, I still have no idea what the first captain is. How are they selected and why? What is "overall performance" of the Corps – academic performance, military preparedness, general campus concerns? What is the "class agenda"? Is this basically a student body president? At most universities the students elect a leader of the student government who runs on a platform and works with the administration to ensure student-focused programs are funded, expanded, inclusive, and transparent. Does West Point have such a representative student government or how does this compare? You describe the brigade that the first captain leads as being divided into battallion and companies but don't answer the so-what: do each of them have a leader that the first captain herself directs or what?

  @Reywas92: @Hawkeye7: can answer this better than I can, but comparison to a student body president is not adequate. This is war college, and the First Captain is the Brigade Commander, with graduates often going directly into combat zones. In short, please see United States Military Academy#Rank and organization. War is their business, so any comparison to student body president at some civilian school, is not workable. All that academic stuff aside, the First Captain is charged with making sure they are prepared for war. But, as I said, Hawkeye7 can probably explain better. — Maile (talk) 14:19, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

  @Reywas92: @Hawkeye7: I found an answer, and a press release, and have posted the info in the first paragraph of Selection and Organization of the Cadet Corps The Academy selects the First Captain, as well as its other leadership positions. It doesn't give the details, but it most certainly was via an established criteria set by the Academy itself. Hope this helps explain somewhat. — Maile (talk) 21:33, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

• Pratt should be recognized in the lead as the incumbent but her post-graduate majors are irrelevant here

  Removed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• "Establishment of the university" section doesn't seem relevant, please tie in better to the article's subject or remove.

  I think it provides background. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

  I completely agree on the background info, which is why I put it here. Without that section, non-Americans are not likely to know the why and how of the institution's establishment. And I think it's really important to note when the first women were allowed into the academy. That was a really big deal in American history. It also provides the background as to why no women were named First Captain until 1990. — Maile (talk) 23:58, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• If you're not using US-style MDY dates, a comma doesn't ever belong between a month a year.

  How right you are! I had done a pre-nom sweep to catch such things, but must have blinked. I believe they're all taken care of now. — Maile (talk) 22:06, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• "Global influence" is a pretty vague header. Of course top military brass have a global influence, but how does that mean this position has global influence? It's great to note that high achievers at the military academies are often high achievers in the military and that many former officeholders later become generals, but there should be a bit more tying of them together than details like what Pershing did.

  Headings are normally vague. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

  Removal of "global" still ignores the rest of the comment. This shows that a number of have had significant roles decades after being FC, but not the "influence" of the position itself. Reywas92^Talk 18:45, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

  The position itself has little influence per se outside the Corps of Cadet, where it is a highly-sought after honour among highly competitive people. (This is particularly notable nowadays as the corps is very large, so they tend to be over-achievers). However: the appointment marks the cadet as a likely candidate for future greatness, and this is seen by the high proportion who achieve general officer rank. I created the list because it kept cropping up in biographies. It is also not unknown for First Captains to become patrons of other First Captains, which is important because the US Army runs on a system of patronage. In particular, Pershing took an interest in the careers of other First Captains, hence the run of them as his successors. Graduates are normally ranked on graduation, but this refers to academics, whereas the position of First Captain is based on scholarship, sportsmanship and leadership. As the quote in the article indicates, by first year the cadets have been assessed for a long time. It is not unusual though for them to also rank high in the class, often first like MacArthur. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

• "Pershing, MacArthur, Malin Craig and William Westmoreland all served as Chief of Staff of the United States Army" helps with that, but it's missing Summerall, Clark, and Rogers as listing in the table.

  Who was Clark? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Francis William Clark — Maile (talk) 23:38, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Fixed I rechecked the source on Clark via his obit. He was Chief of staff of only the Third division at Fort Lewis. I have so noted on the list. — Maile (talk) 11:38, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

• Are there any other notes about the first captains' actual service beyond the examples in "Interrupted terms"?

  Hawkeye7 answered this with the section "Selection and Organization of the Cadet Corps". Each First Captain has that set of responsibilities, that does not vary from one year to the next. — Maile (talk) 23:16, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

• "All Ameican" typo

  Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• "WW I, WW II" isn't spaced

  Removed abbreviations. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• Salzman is the only "Brigadier-General" with a hyphen, please check for consistency in the formatting of these comments in general.

  Alas not; corrected them all. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• Lots of inconsistency of U.S. vs. US

  Standardized on "US". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:41, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• Inconsisency like a simple "Rhodes scholar" for Morales and a wordier "Recipient of a post-graduate Marshall Scholarship" and then "Rhodes scholar scheduled to attend the University of Oxford" that's redundant since Rhodes scholars by definition attend Oxford.

  True, but not everyone knows that. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:41, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• With the comments column, there is value in recognizing their later achievements and major positions, but there shouldn't be comments merely for the sake of being comments for each one. Lots of people get an "MBA from Harvard Business School" or "MBA degree from Stanford Graduate School of Business" (another inconsistency with "degree"!) and that's just not as relevant here.

  Removed some. Will do another pass through.Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:41, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

  Also I altered the column heading a bit to say "Comments/post-cadet career" This could probably be tweaked. — Maile (talk) 00:51, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

• Why is "who retired three times" meaningful? Retired from what?

   Done Note that this is re George H. Olmsted. It's a bit complicated, but I hope I've expanded it adequately now. — Maile (talk) 22:47, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• I'm really confused why the comment for Robert S. Brown is "AKA Capt. Robert (“Todd”) Sloan Brown", what does this add to spell out his middle name?

  West Point tends to have similarly-named relatives also attending the academy, especially in the cases of fathers and sons. This one has name variations from source to source. I wanted the reader to understand that this is the same individual who, for reasons unknown, used alternate variations of his name in different time periods. As a cadet, he was listed as Robert S. Brown. But he wrote a journal for West Point under the name Todd S. Brown. And depending upon the published editon of that journal, his name is listed both ways. Sometimes as Robert (“Todd”) Sloan Brown. No explanation of why. It's confusing, but the only way I could indicate they are one and the same person. — Maile (talk) 22:19, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

• Why is The class the stars fell on a relevant see also?

  Because it's an FL about the 1915 Academy cadets, 36% of whom rose to the rank of general. — Maile (talk)

There's potential here but there's a way to go, namely that it needs more than "these people who did things after attending USMA held a leadership position at USMA". Back to the student body president question – student body president is *not* a Wikipedia notable position! This being a service academy and the success of many alumni can justify this article, but it doesn't really show it. Reywas92^Talk 21:23, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

We'll keep working at it. It would be WP:OR to find their student records while at the academy. Which the academy would not give us access to, even if Wikipedia had no dictate against that. We can only go by existing public information. What makes them notable, is what they achieved after the academy. The whole point here is that a leadership at the academy gave them the skills to achieve notability otherwise.

@Hawkeye7: Do you have time to eyeball the Comments column, and help add pertinent info beginning around 1900-15, if lacking? I've started to add brief blurbs about their military careers. Once we get into the 21st century, cadets serve out their required post-cadet military service, and then go into financially successful careers in the private sector. I think it's important to note that. — Maile (talk) 16:08, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

✓@Hawkeye7: The ball is in your court now. I've given this all I can find, and I think the format and general information is what it ought to be. If you think you can improve on it, then full steam ahead. My intent with the notes column, has been to give a little blurb about the post-West Point path the First Captains took. Overall, that column tells an incredible story of the calibre of people West Point chose for that resposibiliy. @Reywas92: if this works for you, fine. If it doesn't, ah well, you hit the boards running with an Oppose - but overall, you raised some really valid points that led to much improvement and clarity therein. — Maile (talk) 20:35, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7 and Reywas92: FYI - I stepped back from this a couple of days and then read it cold. Coming back to it, I do believe anyone who never before heard of West Point, needed a little more information as to why this is such a big deal. Especially if this is being read by non-Americans. I added a little paragraph at the top of the "Background" to explain its attachment to the US Department of Defense, and how requests for enrollment are handled. I think the application process alone might make the Army, Navy and Air Force academies a little unique. I also expanded the lead section. — Maile (talk) 00:52, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• "Holland is one of only seven women cadets...." - per MOS:SURNAME, individuals should not be referred to by their forename in this way -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:18, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

  Fixed - Nice catch there. — Maile (talk) 11:18, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

  Hasn't been changed as far as I can see...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:46, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

  Fixed for the second time. It was fixed. An editor changed it back while doing other editing. I've made the change again. — Maile (talk) 17:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --Pres<sp an style="color:blue">N 19:53, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

 Done*@PresN: If I understand, you are simply talking about the one line right below |class=. If that's what you meant, thanks for reminding me - taken care of. If you meant something else, please let me know. — Maile (talk) 21:19, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing

FYI for @Hawkeye7: and also whoever does the sourcing review. YouTube is not necessarily a reliable source. But per WP:RSE regarding that matter, "official channels of notable organizations, such as Monty Python's channel, may be acceptable as primary sources if their authenticity can be confirmed". First captain Austin C. Welch - I just linked him to a YouTube interview video from WCIU-TV in Chicago. The interview was conducted in Dec 2014, the first half of the 2014-2015 academic year. Wikipedia's YouTube guidelines might be a little out of date, inasmuch TV stations and other legitimate entities use YouTube as an outlet. — Maile (talk) 14:00, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Kavyansh

• "The First Captain is responsible for the overall performance of the 4,400-strong Corps of Cadets" — Exactly 4400, or approximately?

  It is approximate. Cadets come and go over time. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• "or to the President or Vice President of the United States" — Review MOS:JOBTITLE

Fixed — Maile (talk) 13:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• "were John J. Pershing, Douglas MacArthur and William Westmoreland." — We'd have an Oxford comma in the general American English usage

Fixed — Maile (talk) 17:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• Why is first women started from a new para?

• Open to suggestions on this, as it was part of an expansion of the lead. Do you think it should be combined with the paragraph above it? If so, that's fine with me. Originally, Hawkeye7 had a paragraph about the latest woman First Captain Holland Pratt. While expanding the lead in general, I just included the other women, as Pratt is the latest, but not necessarily the most significant of women First Captains. I do believe that inclusion of women in the position have been so new - and so few - that they should be mentioned in the lead.— Maile (talk) 12:35, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• Yeah, continuing it in the previous para would be better, in my opinion. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Fixed — Maile (talk) 11:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• "The USMA is" — define the the prose the full form of USMA

Fixed — Maile (talk) 13:54, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• "to US congressional representatives and senators, as well as to the US President and Vice President" — Review MOS:JOBTITLE, and do we have to repeat US that many times?

Fixed I rewrote the sentence. — Maile (talk) 17:52, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• "USMA was founded in 1802, through the Military Peace Establishment Act signed into law by President Thomas Jefferson." — This should have been told before describing what USMA does.

Fixed Switched the paragraphs around. — Maile (talk) 17:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• "on 7 October 1975" — Do we have to be this precise. Will it matter to the reader if we just say 1975?

  Yes, it follows from our prime objective, which is to gather knowledge. Also, it someone trying to paraphrase the Wikipedia. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

  • Not big deal for me. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• "the current Commandant of cadets" — our article capitalizes 'C' in 'cadets'

Fixed - Good catch! We seemed to go both ways from one mention to another. — Maile (talk) 13:11, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• " John J. Pershing, was 1886 First Captain" — Why comma?

Fixed That was an error. Thanks for catching. — Maile (talk) 13:06, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• "In 1916, he led 10,000 men" — I may be nitpicky, but exactly 10,000 or, most probably, approximately?

  With such figures, it is always understood that rounding occurs. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

  • But it is always better to specify. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• Do we need that background info about Pershing?

  The point is the importance of the officer and future career. First Captain can be seen as a prophecy of future significance, but it has often been a self-fulfilling prophecy.Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

  • But why is it important to the reader that he taught in a school in Missouri? – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:01, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

More to come. The article might benefit from a copy-editing. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:39, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: in regard to this comment, I would welcome copy-editing from an uninvolved individual. WP:GOCER looks backed up. Anyway to fast track this? — Maile (talk) 13:41, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes. I will see if I can get one. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:02, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• "Pershing, MacArthur, Malin Craig, William Westmoreland and Bernard W. Rogers" — Oxford comma?
• "as Chief of Staff of the United States Army" — add the definite article, and lowercase 'c'
• "the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force" — lowercase 'c'
• "He was court martialed" — our article hyphenates, it. I'm not sure which one is correct, though.

  Depends on WP:ENGVAR. In this case, no hyphen. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• "There were some unusual cases" — we can start without specifying thin, in Wikipedia's voice.
• "First captains 1872–present" — Add "1872–present" inside parenthesis.
• "List of United States Military Academy first captains of the cadets" — The table caption is repeating the nearby heading. Shift it inside {{Sronly}}
• "Comments/post-cadet careers" could be "Notes"
• Okay, firstly, 'Consistency is the key'. Now, how are we naming the first captains? There is a conflict here. We have "Amos A. Jordon Jr.", but "Carl Columbus Hinkle Jr" (without dot) v. "Ralph P. Swofford Jr.". We have our article calling him "Pete Dawkins", but we have "Peter M. Dawkins" (with middle name). Then why not same for Westmoreland?

  Per WP:COMMONNAME. Names are as they appear on the roll. The MOS rejects the concept of consistency. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• If Ref#3 is repeated in almost all the reference cells, why not just put it in the head of the "Sources" column and not repeat it multiple times?

  Because in the future it will be supplemented with other sources as new first captains are appointed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• The references need to be consistently formatted. We have no retrieval dated for many web sources. What makes https://generals.dk/ a WP:RS? "Washington Post" should be "The Washington Post". Why is https://valor.militarytimes.com/ a RS? "Second page can be viewed at Newspapers.com/clip/105068924/horowitz/" — should be a link than bare url. Ref#92 needs a retrieval date. Ref#132 has a page number, why do we not have it for Ref#136 and many others? Many source titles, which are in ALL CAPS, needs to be in title case. All these sourcing issues are really just over a quick read.

  Generals.dk has been removed, as has the Horowitz note. Military Times is a RS, and it reprints the actual citations of awards. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

That is it on a quick read. I am not convinced by the sourcing (formatting, and reliability for few as well). Thus I would not support until a source review has been passed. Currently, I'm leaning oppose. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:37, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: I'm going to kick this sourcing issue over to you. With the exception of the original PDF source you used to create the list, I think I did most of the sourcing, so it takes a second pair of eyes address the above-mentioned issue. Can you follow through on this item, please? — Maile (talk) 11:46, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Sure. I have made some changes. Will be back with more tomorrow. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Kavyansh.Singh, I just looked at this one and I'm a little surprised that it seems to be stalled, because both nominators have a lot of experience with these things and are happy to work with reviewers. I see that they requested and received that copyediting you asked for (from Chris_the_speller, a very experienced copyeditor, in August). If one of the experienced source reviewers can work with them and give them a pass, and if they pass my review (which is pretty standardized, I think you've seen what I do), then how close would they be to getting your support? I don't want to step on your toes here ... if there's something that's just not working for you, please tell me so that I can take a look before I do my review. - Dank (push to talk) 16:12, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Coldplay videography

Nominator(s): GustavoCza (talk) 18:53, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Good afternoon, this is my first FL nomination since the List of awards and nominations received by Coldplay. It's the listings of the band's visual work, as their music videos section on Coldplay discography was getting way too big. All old sources were checked, corrected and replaced. Please feel free to note any detail I might have forgotten.

Comments from ChrisTheDude

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:41, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

*"appearing on many television shows throughout their career as well" - this should probably be "as well as appearing on many television shows throughout their career". However, the Television section further only down only lists four appearances. Four is not "many" "with the former receiving a MTV Video Music Award for Best Art Direction." - unsourced ""Strawberry Swing", which received three UK Music Video Awards" - unsourced "The record spawned "Princess of China" and "Hurts Like Heaven" as well" => "The record also spawned "Princess of China" and "Hurts Like Heaven"" "The former won a MTV Video Music Award for Best Rock Video, while the latter received two silver prizes at the Clio Awards. " - all unsourced "Harvey (pictured in 2021) guested on numerous music videos as an easter egg" - show (and link) his full name The captions to all the images beside the table are complete sentences, so they need full stops Some of the captions say that something happened "on [video title]" - the "on" should be "in" "A man enters an elevator" = "A man enters a lift" (UK subject so UK term should be used) "The band performs the song" => "The band perform the song" (appears more than once) "on a slow motion sequence" => "in a slow motion sequence" "Coldplay performs the song" => "Coldplay perform the song" (appears more than once) "enhanced to appear as Coldplay were performing the song" => "enhanced to appear as though Coldplay were performing the song" "The band climbs a hill and reaches" => "The band climb a hill and reach" "It features numerous footage" - "footage" is singular, so it can't be "numerous" "Both versions of the music video has" => "Both versions of the music video have" "at Viva la Vida Tour" => "on the Viva la Vida Tour" "with Jay-Z appearing trough a television screen" => "with Jay-Z appearing through a television screen" "the band appears as puppets" => "the band appear as puppets" "Harvey appears as one the parents" => "Harvey appears as one of the parents" "in front of River Thames" => "in front of the River Thames" "The band plays across various backdrops" => "The band play across various backdrops" "meets up his girlfriend" => "meets up with his girlfriend" "where the band is playing" => "where the band are playing" "where sound and colour is completely forbidden." => "where sound and colour are completely forbidden." "who performs on a traveling circus" => "who performs in a traveling circus" "As their work continue" => "As their work continues" "(including Harvey dressed as a koala" - you open a bracket but don't close it "an aspirant ballerina" => "an aspiring ballerina" "Black and white footages of the band performing the song fade into each other" - "footage" can't be plural, so maybe replace with "shots" "An animated version the Ghost Stories (2014) album cover" => "An animated version of the Ghost Stories (2014) album cover" "come across a Beats Bill" - isn't it called a Beats Pill.....? "Each one of them were designed" => "Each one of them was designed" "two silves prizes" - silver is spelt wrongly "The Chainsmokers performing on a festival" => "The Chainsmokers performing at a festival" "while Coldplay performs the song." => "while Coldplay perform the song." "Inspired on George Orwell's Animal Farm" => "Inspired by George Orwell's Animal Farm" "Martin explore its cities and meet" => "Martin explores its cities and meets" None of the descriptions in the TV section should have full stops Same for the films "Commercials" => "Advertisements" (UK term) "Martin took part on the "Garth & Kat" segment" => "Martin took part in the "Garth & Kat" segment" That's what I got........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:26, 21 June 2022 (UTC) Hello Chris, I'll see the other stuff later once I arrive at my house, but the awards are not unsourced, the references are on each video's description. GustavoCza (talk) 16:46, 21 June 2022 (UTC) Gotcha. This sentence is wrong, though: "It was followed by the singles "Shiver", "Yellow", "Trouble" and "Don't Panic" from Parachutes (2000), with the former receiving a MTV Video Music Award for Best Art Direction." In that sentence "the former" is "Shiver", but according to the table it was "Trouble" that won the award -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:13, 21 June 2022 (UTC) Thank you for the notes, I can't believe I let some of this stuff get past me. You left me with one doubt though: one editor at Coldplay's main article said photos don't need a stop/period on their captions, but you're saying they do. So_what_is_the_truth_oprah.gif GustavoCza (talk) 20:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC) See MOS:CAPFRAG, which says "Most captions are not complete sentences, but merely sentence fragments, which should not end with a period or full stop. If any complete sentence occurs in a caption, then all sentences, and any sentence fragments, in that caption should end with a period or full stop." Hope this helps -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:43, 23 June 2022 (UTC) I feel like Wikipedians should just put a period in all captions and call it a day. But anyway, just edited the page according to what you said. Any further notes? -- GustavoCza (talk) 11:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Further comments from ChrisTheDude

• I found it very hard to believe that Coldplay have only appeared on TV seven times in a career spanning more than 20 years, and needless to say they haven't. Here for example is them appearing on The Graham Norton Show in 2021, here is them appearing on the same show in 2016, here they are on it yet again (unsure of year), here they are on The Voice in 2021, here they are on The Tonight Show in 2021. I bet there are dozens more. Were you intending this section to only include occasions when they did more than just perform one song? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

• Yes! I want to make a List of Live Performances page in the future, but that is going to take A LOT of work. Coldplay has performed live an insane amount of times, Everyday Life was their least promoted era and you can still find a lot of stuff, including the broadcast in Jordan (that one was included in Videography due to being a film, and their films are easier to track). GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 12:14, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

• In that case maybe change the section header to something like "Major television appearances" or "notable television appearances" or something like that, as currently it does kinda imply that these are literally the only times Coldplay have appeared on TV...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:07, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

  I changed it to "Television appearances", in contrast with "Television performances". Anything else? GustavoCza (talk • contribs) 11:20, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Pamzeis

Hopefully, I will not screw this up

• "released 64 music videos, four video albums and four films," — consistency is needed per MOS:NUM
  • "Integers greater than nine expressible in one or two words may be expressed either in numerals or in words". The guidelines don't prohibit me from writing like I did. In fact, it's the most used way I have seen around discography and award pages.
• "appearing on multiple television shows throughout their career as well" — while I understand what this bit is trying to say, it feels quite awkward to me. Can it be reworded?
  • I've tried before, nothing good so far.
• ""In My Place" and "The Scientist", which was nominated" — which one was nominated?
  • Solved. It's "The Scientist".
• "campaign was then completed" — removed then as redundant
  • Solved.
• "anticipation for their fourth album Viva la Vida" — comma after album
  • Solved.
• "two versions of "Viva la Vida" available" — I think more context is needed for what "Viva La Vida" is, as I thought it was the album before clicking on the link
  • Album titles are in italic and song titles are in quotes, I think that's very much clear already.
• "The record also spawned" — ...what is "the record" referring to?
  • "The record" is always referring to the album last mentioned. The Mylo Xyloto record spawned "Princess of China" and "Hurts Like Heaven".
• "an interactive project" — can you clarify whether it's just the last one or all of them or something?
  • Solved.
• "(1979) which had its final" — comma before which
  • Solved.
• "following it with" — is "it" the song or the album?
  • I wrote that thinking about the song, but it also applies to the AHFOD album since "Adventure of a Lifetime" is the only video released prior to 4 December 2015.
• "The record's marketing campaign" — what is "the record"?
  • "The record" is always referring to the album last mentioned. The A Head Full of Dreams record had its campaign finished with "A Head Full of Dreams" and "Everglow".
• "Everyday Life (2019) had six music videos" — kinda awkward
  • Solved.
• Per MOS:CONFORMTITLE, titles of works (such as albums, films or television shows) should be italicised in citations
  • I'm pretty sure all of them are in this list. --GustavoCza (talk) 18:34, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Hope this helps :) Pamzeis (talk) 04:49, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Nominations for removal

List of Moonlight episodes

Notified: Example user, Example WikiProject

I am nominating this for featured list removal because the episode list was merged to the main article and this article is now a redirect. Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#Another_WP:FL_One-Season List of Episodes That Should Be Merged... Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:57, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support should never have been split off per MOS:TVSPLIT. One season's worth of episode is not enough to justify a separate list of episodes article. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:22, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support delisting — Pretty sure an implicit criteria for an FL is that the page has to exist on its own, and I don't see this merge being undone. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:26, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

List of unreleased songs recorded by Michael Jackson

Notified: WikiProject Michael Jackson, WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, original nominator: User:Pyrrhus16, notable contributors to the article: User:Reelcase, User:Bobimj, User:The Rambling Man and User talk:Popcornfud

I am nominating this for featured list removal because I find it hard to believe that we consider this the best in what we have to offer when it comes to lists. Although the topic is certainly worthy there are numerous issues such as:

• choice of colours used to highlight the songs are not WP:ACCESSIBLE (HELP:COLOR)
• some songs are tagged with 1993 deposition but this isn't mentioned in the prose or explained anywhere
• Some songs are highlighted as both deposition and registered with the US copright office - so what? What's the relevance.
• Quality of referencing isn't always strong for example Discogs is used which is unreliable as its user generated, there's bare references prone to LinkRot, there's no archiving of the sources
• I find it hard to believe that all of the "facts" about the songs are included in the source(s) such as alternative names for the songs, the specific details of how complete the songs are or are not, who sings what verse etc.
• At least one non-sourced entry
• Lots speculation such as "A demo version/mono acetate is known to exist" and "Original full-length demo of "I Am A Loser" leaked onto the internet in September 2013"

The list goes on. Its full of speculation, poorly sourced and possibly synthesised material, no navigational aids like anchors to jump to different parts of the list by letter and poor prose such as "This list, however, only documents the songs explicitly cited as unreleased and therefore does not contain every unreleased Jackson song registered with such bodies" which makes no sense. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 11:38, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Delist. All the speculation and poor sourcing means this is not FA-worthy. Popcornfud (talk) 12:04, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Wait a month. If all of these issues are resolvable, and they are, what is the point of delisting? Why not just fix the existing issues? Wouldn’t delisting be too much of an intrusive next steps for such minor issues? There are some claims above that are just not true. There is no synthesized material, the sources are not that bad and also easily replaceable, delisting is such an extreme and awkward next step when no one has even attempted to fix the issues. Fix the issues, it really is that simple. If while fixing the issues it’s concluded that they for whatever reason can’t be fixed, then consider delisting. I will never understand why editors will point out fixable issues and decide to take the most extreme step, than just spending time to fix it. It doesn’t make sense.TruthGuardians (talk) 14:50, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry you disagree about my assessment of the sourcing and and synthesis of material. Had I access to the publications (the books) I would have gone through and verified all of the claims in this article. For example some of the songs listed as sourced from Michael Jackson: For the Record seem to have lots of detailed information available but other times its just the song and the writers. That aside, layout and accessibility do not meet the standards of FL. There are some really poor sources here like onmymjfootsteps which half the content is dead and is a fansite. There's no evidence as to who the owner Rachel or, or what her credentials are that mean this website is reliable. The inclusion of the 1993 deposition isn't even mentioned in the lead or what the significance of the songs mentioned here were. There are lots of unsourced or unverified claims like Rough vocal demo known to exist. for the song "Bomb Detonation". "Get Your Weight Off of Me" has a tonne of information about it that isn't in the source, speculation about other names of the song (WP:FANCRUFT) etc, not forgetting to mention its a retail source. I could go on but there's a lot of issues meaning the article requires a complete re-write. The reason I am requesting a de-list is that it was previously listed for delisting and some of these issues have prevailed without being addressed. In its current format, it would not pass and ascend to FL status without an entire copy edit and re-write. Its also telling that none of the other articles in the Category:Lists of unreleased songs by recording artists category are FL. It would be worrying to keep this as an FL in its current state as it sets the standard for other similar articles and its a waste of everyone's time if other unreleased songs lists got nominated because they copied this style and format which clearly isn't FL standards. You are saying you don't understand why editors spend time pointing out fixable issues - this is akin to saying there's no point having a delisting process. FLs need to be maintained not just high quality once to pass the review. Its also about the knock on impact and how they end up being viewed by the wider editor base. Sorry you disagree with my assessment but I do think its harmful more than anything to wider quality standards across these types of articles to keep this an FL even if it could be fixed (we can disagree on the size of the job). >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 15:12, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I want to make clear that I agree in its current form the article does not meet FA. No question about that. I do have access to some of the sources. However, all I am saying is that if I am wearing a nice shirt and it get food stain on it, I wouldn’t just throw it away. I would try to wash it to get the stain out. Then if I could not get the stain out, then consider throwing it away or replacing it. The article needs work. No question. I would like to see an effort put forth in fixing the issues first. If not fixed in a month, I’ll support downgrading. TruthGuardians (talk) 16:15, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I can get behind that. Tbf if it had improved significantly since the last nomination I wouldn't have bothered nominating. It is an issue with any FA or FL article tbh. There are occasions where the original nominator doesn't continue monitoring it or the community allows it to fall into disrepair. Its compromise I'd support if someone wants to have a go at improving it but after a month, if it appears that no one cares enough then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 18:00, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by 30 Rock

Notified: Jamie jca, WikiProject Television, WikiProject Awards

I've been working hard to update this list's formatting, but there are some major gaps in sourcing, and it does not appear to cover all awards the show received. Therefore, the list currently fails FLCR 3a and 3b. I'm still working on this and I'd like to get this back to an FL-appropriate state, but since I can't guarantee that in a reasonable amount of time, I feel I should nominate the list for removal. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:30, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

• I really don't think this should be demoted that easily. I found a website covering all the Emmy Awards that the show was nominated for from the official Television Academy website. [1] Birdienest81talk 09:35, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

• Emmys aren't hard, but a quick scroll through IMDb's awards page shows there are a lot of awards that should be added. Even for the currently included awards, many later years are missing. The work to source all of those will take time, which is why I'm starting this nomination in case I can't find sources quickly. RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:33, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

List of Cathay Dragon destinations

Notified: Nobody (I really don't know who to notify)

This list is nominated for featured list removal (mainly) because of failing to meet attribute 2 of WP:FLCR. The lead of the list is too short for a featured list (even for a featured list of the same type like List of Braathens destinations). It is also notable that there are some (permanent) dead links in the references which may also indicate its failure to meet attribute 3b of WP:FLCR (although it may not be a main point). Sanmosa _Outdia 06:01, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

• Delist – the lead is awful and fails to provide sufficient context for the list. I don't know why it was changed so much from how it passed FLC, but this is wildly different and does not meet FL requirements. Notifying Aviator006, WikiProject Aviation, WikiProject Hong Kong. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

  @RunningTiger123: Looks like the whole lead section was deleted by a single edit back in November 2019. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 21:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

• Keep – Thank you RunningTiger123 for the notification and I can see that another user has re-updated/replaced the lead. The deadlinks are because the airline has now defuncted and merged to the parent company, Cathay Pacific, perhaps the links should be checked and linked against archives instead. Nevertheless, the list still demonstrates a level of standard a featured list should or aim to be. Aviator006 (talk) 07:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

  Lots of those links do not seem to have proper archives; in many cases, the archived pages seem to just redirect to old route booking pages. I also have issues with the inclusion criteria for items on the list – the introduction says the list includes all passenger routes that were being flown when the airline shut down, but then it includes several routes that were "terminated", i.e., not being flown at that time. The lead was the most obvious issue at first, but I still support delisting due to issues with sourcing and inclusion criteria. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

  I've just run IABot. Seems fine, not checked one by one though. Sun8908 _Talk 08:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

  IABot isn't always accurate; sometimes the archived pages don't have the same information as when they were added, and a few lead to completely different pages (compare the URL for source 46 to the archived link as an example). The new IABot links in particular seem to be bad, which makes sense since the Cathay Dragon website doesn't exist now. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:58, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

  Maybe the permanent dead links can be replaced. Sun8908 _Talk 08:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

• Brush up per Aviator006 and keep. 1.64.44.196 (talk) 10:15, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

  To be clear, if the list needs to be "brushed up", that implies it's not currently in a suitable state for FL status. We shouldn't say "it will probably get better, so we should keep it"; if it's not good now, it should be delisted until it returns to FL quality. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

• To be clear, it means its current state is still good for FL but it's better to improve it according to what Aviator006 suggested. I think what I said was clear enough. Please do not distort to make a point. 1.64.44.196 (talk) 07:52, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

• Since this is a defunct airline, the destinations would require as a column date ranges (when Cathay Dragon flew those routes, instead of "notes"), or are we to assume that these were the routes at the end when they merged? But that doesn't make sense since some are listed as "terminated". Either way, Delist until this issue is resolved. The lead could use more information as well (what was/were the first routes, when did they start flying, etc..) Mattximus (talk) 15:55, 19 June 2022 (UTC)