Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The closure log
edit · history · watch · refresh

Comments from Giants2008 (talk · contribs), PresN (talk · contribs), and Hey man im josh (talk · contribs), and other notes of pertinence. Should you wish to contact the delegates, you can use the {{@FLC}} ping facility.

FLC
  • FLCs of special note
    • We now have many lists in need of more attention. See here for the oldest ones. Please do what you can to contribute to these nominations!
FLRC
  • FLRCs of special note
    • None
Shortcut

For a "table of contents"-only list of candidates, see Wikipedia:Featured lists/Candidate list and Wikipedia:Nominations Viewer. To send a message to the FLC director and the FLC delegates, use the {{@FLC}} template.

List of Boston Bruins seasons not appearing?

[edit]

It's been nominated, but it seems to not be listed on the FLC page. The Kip (contribs) 00:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@The Kip: You need to manually transclude the nomination page you created to WP:FLC. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a new FLC delegate

[edit]

Hi everyone; traditionally, the FLC process has had at least three people running it, but for the last 2 years it's been just me and Giants2008. In order to spread the load out a bit and keep the process from relying so much on individual editors, we are proposing to add Hey man im josh as a Featured List delegate. Over the past year or so they have been extremely active as a nominator and reviewer, and have been visible helping out other editors with the process both here and on the WP:Discord server (as well as having a successful RfA), so we think they would make a good delegate. Before we make it official, in order to be transparent we wanted to post the proposal here for feedback. --PresN 17:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like those above, I Support this! I have seen nothing but great work and care from Josh's contributions to this site and particularly in these FLCs. He would be a perfect fit to help tackle this process! Trailblazer101 (talk) 03:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, with no objections raise and discussion concluded, I'd like to welcome Hey man im josh on as our newest Featured List delegate! They're now authorized to close nominations, and can be summoned along with Giants and myself with the {{@FLC}} template. If, now or in the future, anyone else is interested in becoming a delegate, feel free to reach out to any of us for consideration. --PresN 14:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How long does it take

[edit]

@WP:FLC director and delegates: How long does it takes to complete nomination. I made a nomination about one and a half month ago-it has received three reviews now, but still pending...Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Women's Premier League (cricket) captains/archive1 Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 14:25, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vestrian24Bio: Typically we expect at least three reviews with supports, one of which would needs to be a source review. When PresN leaves the accessibility review message, it's not typically counted in this figure, as they're typically just evaluating whether the list meets accessibility criteria at a glance. It's more or less a reminder/explanation of a requirement that we have in place, as opposed to a regular review. For what it's worth, the key in your list still does not meet accessibility criteria (it needs the accessibility formatting as well). If you want to get more reviews on your nomination I encourage you to review nominations of other users. Even if you're not confident enough to do source or image reviews, prose reviews of other nominations can still be helpful. Lastly, this wasn't necessarily urgent enough to ping the coordinators, as I believe we all have this talk page watchlisted already. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:37, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I was just curious as its my first nom; I'm not exactly familiar with the review process but, I will get to it. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 15:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair @Vestrian24Bio, we all start out somewhere. That's why I typically suggest prose reviews for those new to the process. Most people can read through and call out when something sounds strange or a sentence just makes no sense. If that's all you can contribute while still learning the ropes, that's totally fine! Every bit helps. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Got it! Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 15:29, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Format ideas for an FLC project

[edit]

I am thinking about bringing IFSC Climbing World Championships to FL status. It is a biennial event with 3-4 disciplines in male/female categories running since 1991. I would love to get suggestions of existing Featured Lists whose format/layout/standard would be a good example for me to aim for? thanks in advance. Aszx5000 (talk) 01:39, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some parts seem to resemble the just-promoted World Figure Skating Championships cumulative medal count, so I would suggest that for those sections. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That looks interesting - thanks for that. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source reviewer needed?

[edit]

Hi everyone, I noticed that List of cities in Donetsk Oblast does not have a source review but also isn't in the list for those needing a source review. Is it possible to add it so everyone can see? Thanks! Mattximus (talk) 19:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Josh seems to have done this. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator makes personal attack and closes nomination

[edit]

In the nomination Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Women's 400 metres hurdles world record progression/archive1, coordinator @User:PresN posted a suggestion, ignored my argument that his suggestion was not in line with WP:ACCESS, posted a personal attack, ignored my note about this attack, didn't come with any alternatives even though I kept looking for ways to resolve this including giving in to his suggestion, and closed the nomination appealing to tradition and saying there was no resolution possible. I find this incomprehensible. – Editør (talk) 13:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks were made. Additionally, all Wikipedia tables are required to conform to the MOS per MOS:ACCESS. Your refusal to incorporate column and row headers is downright baffling. Reading through that nomination, I found your behavior toward numerous reviewers argumentative and hostile. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:07, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad that it's all documented, so people can read it for themselves. – Editør (talk) 14:12, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, since there's a lot of text on the nomination page, what Editør considers a personal attack is "Row scopes on the "primary" column for each row in combination with column scopes let screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Purposely not including them is the same as saying "I don't think readers with limited vision need as good an experience when reading this article as fully-sighted readers", which isn't okay." --PresN 16:47, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
None of what you wrote is in the same hemisphere as a "personal attack". Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:22, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Examining that table, the date column should be moved to the first position and made the dates be made the row headers. Then the athlete, followed by the nation, then the time, then the location, and finally the reference. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have adjusted the table so that it now conforms to MOS:ACCESS. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:00, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't review the article, but it's duplicative of 400 metres hurdles#Milestones. It seems like a WP:CFORK that doesn't need to be a standalone page (criterion 3c) and should be merged there. Reywas92Talk 16:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have NLIST quibbles here as well -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 16:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was a lot of different things I wanted to address based on this post and your comments at your nominations, such as you stating that PresN's mention of the requirements was merely a suggestion, but I'm going to keep it short. I (as one of the other two coordinators at FLC) support and endorse PresN's close, and, as I mentioned at the nomination, I also had intentions of closing that and your other nomination for the same reasons. PresN was very patient, thorough, and clearly did not make a personal attack directed at you. Accessibility is not a suggestion, it's a requirement. If you do not intend to meet the featured list criteria, specifically 5(c) in this case, then the list(s) will not get promoted. Let's not waste the time of reviewers and coordinators if you do not intend to meet the criteria. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Featured list or not, WP:ACCESS is not a suggestion and all Wikipedia tables are expected to be in compliance, period. I am confident Hey man im josh is in agreement with that. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Editør, please stop beating a dead horse. Seriously though, your behavior has been bizarre, and as was noted, outright argumentative at times, in these nominations. I'm not sure how many different editors need to state something for you to grasp the possibility you may be wrong. And hiding behind an accusation of a "personal attack" appears as either disingenuous or is some breakdown, maybe in language, in what truly constitutes a personal attack.
On a related note, I would strongly encourage our coordinators to police the rule on multiple nominations. The regulars at FLC all observe this rule (I have like 7 more lists ready to be nominated) and the only way for a new nominator to learn it is to have their nom auto-archived when a reviewer brings the issue up.
Lastly, I want to clearly state my support for our coordinators in both this issue and in general. It is a thankless job and both PresN and Josh were clear, polite and patient in this case. Your service is truly appreciated by the community. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 23:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm approaching things cautiously as I learn the ropes of helping out here, but I'll work to keep an eye out moving forward. For what it's worth though, you can absolutely throw a second nomination up if you want @Gonzo fan2007. You have a good history of addressing concerns and you have two supports at your current nomination. I see no reason you can't put a second one up and basically always have two up like I do. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if anyone would oppose encouraging nominators to link to a couple of (recent) FLs that are similar to their current nomination. That way, a reviewer would find it easier to compare and contrast. In the cases, where there is no other similar FL, then the reviewer knows to pay greater attention to the structure of the list and whether information needs to be added/eliminated, since that FLC might be used as a template for future FLCs. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:17, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Featured_list_candidates&oldid=1235627620"