Wikipedia:FLRC

This MedLibrary.org supplementary page on Wikipedia:FLRC is provided directly from the open source Wikipedia as a service to our readers. Please see the note below on authorship of this content, as well as the Wikipedia usage guidelines. To search for other content from our encyclopedia supplement, please use the form below:

Related Sponsors

BM Pharmacy Generic pharmaceuticals at unbeatable prices. Insomnia, men's health, hair health, pain control. bmpharmacy.com
Online Pharmacy Carisoprodol, tadalafil, sildenafil, vardenafil and more... xlpharmacy.com
MedBasket.com Discreet. Inexpensive. Fast shipping. Great selection. What more can we say? medbasket.com
Frugalmed 2000 reasons to shop with us first. frugalmed.com
Ads by Tiva

Removing Featured Lists in Wikipedia

If you feel a list on Wikipedia:Featured lists should no longer be featured, then this is the place to nominate it for demotion. Only lists that do not adhere to the featured list criteria should be listed. Objections raised must be actionable.

For a nomination to be demoted, consensus must be reached that it no longer meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators, as determined by the delegates who act as FLR directors, Dweller and Matthewedwards. Once a list has been nominated on this page for a minimum of two weeks, it will be removed from the list of featured lists if the consensus is to remove, and added to the list of former featured lists. All discussions will be logged at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/archive.

Do not nominate lists that have recently been promoted (such complaints should have been brought up during the candidacy period on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates), or lists that have recently survived a removal attempt—such nominations are likely to be removed summarily.

Purge the cache to refresh this page – Table of Contents – Closing instructions
Shortcut:
WP:FLRC

Featured content:

Featured list tools:

Toolbox

Nomination procedure

  • Place {{FLRC}} on the talk page of the nominated list.
  • From there, click on the "add a comment" link.
  • (If you are resubmitting an article) Use the "Move" button to rename the previous nomination to an archive. For example, Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of television stations → Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of television stations/archive1
  • Place ===[[name of nominated list]]=== at the top of the subpage.
  • Below it, write your reason for nominating the list. Note which of the featured list criteria that the list fails to meet.
  • Place {{Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/name of nominated article}} at the top of the list of nominees on this page by first copying the above, clicking "edit" on the top of the page, and then pasting, making sure to add the name of the nominated article.
  • Finally, notify the user that nominated the page for FL status, as well as any relevant WikiProjects.

Contents


Lists nominated for removal

List of Tampa Bay Buccaneers first-round draft picks

I've been working on these first-round picks series and noticed that there are older FLs that don't meet the standards of today. This one is in the worst condition among FLs, in my opinion. The problems are,

Major
  1. WP:LEAD needs copyediting and sourcing. No inline citations at all.
  2. There are 23 footnotes and none of them are cited.
Minor
  1. Abbreviations in the "Positions" column should be linked and written in full or just add a "key" section.
    Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 23:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  2. Use symbols to indicate what colors mean.
    Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 23:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  3. Fix links to disamg. pages
    Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 23:47, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I hope this list improves in the next two weeks!--Crzycheetah 22:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

List of X-Men episodes

Criterion 2 - The lead appears to be one sentence long. Y
Criterion 3 - Some episodes have one-sentence plots.
Other - What makes this and this reliable sources? Also, the only image used in the article doesn't have a rationale. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 22:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Apologies, Milk, I changed "criteria" to "criterion"; hope you don't mind. TONY (talk) 03:08, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Reserving judgement
  • Needs a copy-edit throughout; random examples—
    • A few awkward sentences, such as "The series' first 13 episodes were notable for being possibly the first time ever that an animated series had a full season of episodes flow one into the next, creating a single continuing narrative, something the series producers fought heavily for.
    • "longest running"—ambiguous without hyphen.
    • Para 3: past or present tense? Not both. ("is").
    • Each episodeS? Y Done
    • See MOS on spelling out numbers and spaced em dashes.
    • Tone unencyclopedic: "Looking back at the previous Marvel animated adaptations" (Who's looking back?)
    • "Episode 4x03"—Is that standard code for Ep 4, Series 3? Odd.
  • Cr 6: Why the grey backgound. It does make the text just a little harder to read. Y Done
  • Please attend to Milk's issues.
  • I've changed the repetitious opening. TONY (talk) 03:08, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Rewrite - There are too many X-Men episodes in multiple and different X-Men cartoon series to slap them all up on one page. I say, articles on each different X-Men series. Each has a subsection or sub-page...with one sentence descriptions for each episode. Example: Episode 4: Wolverine and the New Mutants fight rampaging space monkeys. Lots42 (talk) 10:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Neutral I'm busy in real life and have no time to work on the summaries. So if someone else wants to work on em go please do. --Gman124 talk 21:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

List of English Twenty20 International cricketers

Note: Notifed are Jguk and WikiProject Cricket. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This list currently fails Cr. 2(insufficient lead), Cr.4(no section headings), and Cr.6(empty cells in the table) of WP:WIAFL. On top of that, this list relies solely on one source and was last updated in September of 2007.--Crzycheetah 02:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delist per nom. -- Scorpion0422 03:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment regarding Criteria 6. There are empty cells in the tables because players who have never scored a run cannot have high scores or an average, and likewise players who have never bowled cannot have bowling averages or best bowling figures. I'll put dashes in the box to make it better, would that suffice? SGGH speak! 06:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Another comment CricInfo is probably the most reliable source for cricket information in the world, so there are worse sources to have only one of. SGGH speak! 06:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • And a further comment I've also expanded the lead. SGGH speak! 06:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comments Dashes are fine. A Key section is needed for all statistical abbreviations and an explanation of "*" in the "HS" column. As for the references, where did the info in the lead come from? In that Cricinfo page, all I see is a table with 11 columns of stats while in this article, there are 14 columns. My question is where did the additional 3 columns come from?--Crzycheetah 08:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Information from the lead is from the other articles, but I shall shortly cite it for you. I'll add a section explaining the abbreviations. I'll try to write it in prose but would it be better in a list? I'll check the coloumns too. SGGH speak! 10:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, I would do if my university connection is messing up my attempts to get into CricInfo at the moment. SGGH speak! 10:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I much rather see abbr. in the table and a Key section where those abbr. are explained. For example, see List of Philadelphia Eagles first-round draft picks. Right now, the table is too widened.--Crzycheetah 20:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I have added all of the abbr. into the table and written the key.Wt is this (talk) 16:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

  • More concerns
    • What is Maiden(s)? Why are they listed when everyone has 0 of them?
    • Where did you find how many innings one played? No sources available.
    • What is the difference between batting runs and bowling runs? Where did you find how many bowling runs one had?
    • References are missing for the "Balls" column as well.
    • Images are also needed.

--Crzycheetah 01:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Reply to concerns:
    • I have put what a maiden is.
    • On CricInfo it says how many innings someone has played.
    • I have tried to explain fully in the columns what the runs are. It also says on CricInfo how many runs conceded.
    • On CricInfo it says how many balls someone has bolwed.
    • I have added a picture, but what other pictures could i put on?.

Wt is this (talk) 18:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

    • Could you provide the CrivInfo page that says how many balls were bowled and how many innings players played? The CricInfo page that is cited here does not have such information. As for the images, it's fine now, but a player's image would improve this page a lot.--Crzycheetah 22:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
      • The CricInfo page with balls bowled and innings is on the players personal page.Wt is this (talk) 17:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
        • Nice weather today!
          This is a separate page, so there should be separate sources for the info provided in this page.--Crzycheetah 21:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
          • Do i need to put every personal page on this? If people want to find out that it is true they could go to the page. Wt is this (talk) 19:49, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
            • All information should be cited in this page. You have to provide links, so that readers could click on them to verify.--Crzycheetah 22:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
              • All of the other information is on the players personal page and there is only a link to the list of players for that information.Wt is this (talk) 09:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

(→)As I already stated, there is no such info in the link provided in this page. Links with such info should be provided in this page.--Crzycheetah 09:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

  • I have added the link to the pages. There still isn't a "balls" column but it says how many overs the bowler has had and you can work it out from that.Wt is this (talk) 16:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the link, but I can't "work it out". Could you add an explanation on how to find out the "balls" from the "overs".--Crzycheetah 23:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pity if this can't be saved, but the lead is totally inadequate. Do we need to contact more previous contributors to get this shaped up? TONY (talk) 03:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm happy to leave it open for another week, considering the article has been edited in response to this FLRC. I'll poke the Wikiproject and leave a message on the talk page. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Done. Let's give it a week or so. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
It has been suggested on WT:CRIC that the article as of now still needs "a lot of work" to bring it up to featured quality. However, looking at the article and the featured list criteria, apart from the table not being sortable I can't really see where it falls down:
  • The standard of prose seems fine.
  • The lead section does introduce the subject and define the scope and inclusion criteria of the list.
  • The list is comprehensive (ie lists all major statistics of all English T20I cricketers).
  • It is easy to navigate.
  • I think (but haven't studied this extensively) it complies with the MOS.
  • It seems (to me) to be visually appealing enough.
  • It is not the subject of edit warring.
The page is not that long, but I don't see why it should be. After all, it has links to all the relevant terms, such as cricket, England cricket team, Twenty20 and Twenty20 International, and if people want to know more about these things they can just follow the links. Maybe I have simply not thought of certain deficiencies which exist, in which case I would be grateful if these areas were pointed out. On the other hand, maybe my assessment is accurate and the article is essentially up to featured quality standard. Could some other people please give a comment on this? Juwe (talk) 17:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment: The table's appearance might be improved if the figures were right-aligned, as they are in the Cricinfo tables. This is the natural alignment for all numeric lists. It would be a pain in the bum to do, but it might be worth trying (first, experiment a bit with, say, the Runs Scored column). Brianboulton (talk) 23:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Comments
    • Something about the cricketers should be mentioned in the lead. Something like who is the most popular among them and why, or mention something unique they have done during their careers.
    • The explanations in the Key section should be footnoted from the appropriate places.
    • The references should be cited from the appropriate columns, as well.

--Crzycheetah 07:10, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

  • When my colleagues' issues are resolved, this looks like a retain. TONY (talk) 07:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings and structures in London

Note: Notified are Seaserpent85‎, WikiProject Skyscrapers, WikiProject Architecture, and WikiProject London. -- Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This list currently has only six references, and about 50 buildings listed. On the list, it lacks a catagory for notes, and a timeline of tallest buildings. which is standerd on United States building list. It also has, MoS violations, and lacks a few meters to feet conversions. There is an unclear divide between buildings and structures. In the case of the BT Tower, even though it is listed by emporis and skyscraperpage as a non-building tower, it is listed here as a regular building. The Croydon transmitting station is listed, envn though there is already a List of tallest buildings and structures in Croydon. Also what does "Helter Skelter", "Cheesegrater", and "Walkie Talkie" mean? Alaskan assassin (talk) 02:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I think these matters are better raised on the talk page of the article. Most of the problems noted are relatively easily fixable; it has probably drifted since its first listing. Croydon is a small part of Greater London - and should probably be subsumed into this list (ie there doesn't seem to be a reason for a separate list for Croydon). Kbthompson (talk) 09:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Remove—Pity, they're just not taking it seriously: one little edit since nomination! Worth another ping? I've left another note at the talk page. TONY (talk) 03:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment I will be working on this to try to bring it back to featured status. Please delay any delisting until I am finished. Thanks. Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 21:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Last edited by Leitmanp (talk | contributions) on 23:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm certainly prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt - I just hope you haven't left it too late. As I noted, I think many of the issues raised can be fixed. Cheers Kbthompson (talk) 22:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Me too. I don't have a problem on waiting on this. While issues are being resolved, more people can comment here. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Update: I believe that I am done with the list. The lead still needs some work, but I think I will be able to work on it in the next 24 hours. If there are any issues that still need to be addressed (other than in the lead), please let me know. Thanks. Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 01:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Still a little ways to go until it matches current skyscraper FL standards for me. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I have not worked on the lead very much. If you are referring to the lists, can you please explain so I can improve it. Thanks. Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 22:09, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Sure. At List of tallest buildings in Atlanta and every other building list this year, the first table has the following columns:
Rank, name, Height (ft / m), Floors, Year, Notes. This one should do the same, except keeping height (m / ft). The usage could be shifted to Notes or left out completely.
I have changed the table so that it follows this format. Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 22:58, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
==Under construction==, ==Approved== and ==Proposed== in the Atlanta list has Name, Height, Floors, Year, Notes
I have changed these tables so that they follow this format. Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 22:58, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
==Timeline of tallest building== in the Atlanta list has Name, Street address, Years as tallest, Height, Floors, reference
I have changed the table so that it follows this format, with one exception. Instead of using "street address", I am using "location." Some structures do not have addresses listed and (as an American) I do not understand the UK address system. If "location" is too broad/vague, please let me know and I will see what else I can do. Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 22:58, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, none of the table headings are shaded #BDBBD7, #000080 font colours, or striped rows for the entries. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 09:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, I do not see anything wrong with having a colored table. It adds aesthetics to the list and simply makes it look nicer. Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 22:58, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
But looking pretty is rather subjective. No other FLC for tallest buildings has ever said "Make the rows stripey because it looks nicer", and I would have thought that current consensus is to not do this, otherwise there'd be plenty of people asking for it. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 01:03, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
But, WikiProject Skyscrapers has only worked on lists for the tallest buildings in the United States. It is common for UK lists to have coloring. See List of tallest buildings and structures in Manchester, List of tallest buildings and structures in Salford and List of tallest buildings and structures in Croydon. Also several European lists use this format: List of tallest buildings and structures in the Paris region and List of tallest buildings in Europe. As for consensus, there is none to include colors and there is no consensus to exclude the colors as it has never been discussed. Raime, whom I consider to be the head of WikiProject Skyscrapers, even commented on the coloring during the FLC for the Manchester list. See this. --Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 02:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
OK then. You made a convincing argument for it. I'd still like to see a reference for "award-winning 30 St Mary Axe." Perhaps it could mention what award it won? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia content modification information:

  • This page was last modified on 5 July 2008, at 22:55.

Wikipedia Authorship and Review

Wikipedia content provided here is not reviewed directly by MedLibrary.org. Wikipedia content is authored by an open community of volunteers and is not produced by or in any way affiliated with MedLibrary.org.

Wikipedia Usage Guidelines

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article on "Wikipedia:FLRC".

The URL for this specific entry is:

All Wikipedia text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details). Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.