Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/August 2023

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [1].

---

William S. Hart filmography

Nominator(s): Jimknutt (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because William S. Hart was a major star in the early days of cinema and remains an important figure in the development of film in general and the Western genre in particular. The majority of his films were made over a century ago, but remain entertaining. I have done several other filmographies in the past (Gene Kelly, Mary Pickford, Tom Mix, John Ford, Michael Curtiz) and I believe I have reached near featured status with this one as well. Have a look! Jimknutt (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• " In 1917 Hart accepted a lucrative offer from Adolph Zukor to join Famous Players–Lasky, which merged into Paramount Pictures. In the films Hart began to ride a brown and white pinto he called Fritz." - this sentence doesn't seem to have a source
  • Sourced the Famous Players-Lasky fact. Can't find any source for the Fritz item, so I dropped it.
• The date for A Bullet for Berlin looks decidedly odd......
  • Doggone! I thought I fixed that! Well, it is now.
• That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:07, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments.Jimknutt (talk) 22:27, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:13, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Many thanks! Jimknutt (talk) 17:03, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

• I would add {{abbr|Ref.|Reference}} in the table header for the Ref column
  • Added
• While not an FLC requirement, suggest adding alt text to the lead image
  • Added
• Suggest moving the gallery after the table, since it appears to be more decorative. (similar to Clint Eastwood filmography)
  • Moved
• That's all from me, the prose is well-written and I enjoyed reading his work on this era of films. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Many thanks for the suggestions.Jimknutt (talk) 20:31, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 21:47, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments from MyCatIsAChonk

I'll do a review (probably) tomorrow; just some first things I spot: MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Jimknutt, finished with my review for now. I shuffled around my comments and added small headers, so they're in a mildly comprehensible order. Once the comments below are addressed, I'll do a spotcheck. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:27, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Formatting/Templates

• Add Template:Use American English (or otherwise appropriate template) and Template:Use mdy dates
  • Added
• {{Talk header}} and {{WikiProject banner shell}} need to be added to the top of the talk page; add wikiprojects to the banner shell. See Template:WikiProject banner shell for instructions.
  • Added
• I noticed that the whole first paragraph of the lead is copied directly from Hart's own article, which explains the citation errors. Please add {{copied}} to this article's talk page.
  • Added to talk page
• File:Bill Hart - Who's Who on the Screen.jpg needs an international PD tag
  • I'm not sure how to do this. Can you help?
    • It's all good- added c:Template:PD-anon-expired. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Prose

• In the gallery below the table, "White Oak" links to a disambig page
  • Now properly linked
• Add spaces then endash to "(1864-1946)", per MOS:ENTO
  • enash added
• The third paragraph of the lead is uncited
  • Citation now added
• Much of para two is uncited as well. Unless ref 6 supports everything there, some more need to be added.
  • Citations now added
• In 1917 Hart accepted... - comma after 1917
  • Comma added

Citations

• Ref titles should still use italics for titles of films and other works, per MOS:CONFORMTITLE
  • Ref titles are now in italics
• Also per MOS:CONFORMTITLE, ref titles should use consistent casing (sentence case or title case). As most refs use title case, some need to be corrected to match (e.g. ref 2)
  • Titles are now consistant; ref 2 has been corrected
• Publishers/work names should remain consistent throughout (e.g. ref 13 lists the work as "American Film Institute (AFI)" but many other refs list it as just "AFI"; pick one and keep it consistent- same with "Library of Congress" in ref 10 but "LOC" in ref 40)
  • All are uniform now; all American Film Institute listings are under "AFI" whereas are Librar of Congress listings are "LOC"
• In some cases, the works listed in citations should actually be under the "Publisher" parameter, so that it isn't italicized. Specifically, I'm talking about the AFI, but there may be others I'm missing.
  • All changed to publisher where appropriate
• In citations, all the publishers/works should be wikilinked or none should be wikilinked. Seeing as most are not linked, remove wikilinks from refs 3 through 6.
  • Wikilinks have been removed in refs 3 thru 6.
• Ref 1: I have numerous problems with this citation. It's not correctly formatted, convert it to {{cite magazine}}. Additionally, it fails Wikipedia's verifiability requirement. After investigating numerous websites and Variety issues via Internet Archive, I cannot find this obituary (unless I simply missed it, which is always a likely scenario). I suggest replacing it, or adding a link.
  • The format has been corrected; the reference is there, so please look again
• Ref 2: "LA Times" should not be in the "via" slot- move to "name of publication" or similar. Also, spell it out fully (Los Angeles Times)
  • This has been corrected
• Refs 3, 4, 5: add page numbers
  • page numbers added; also merged into one footnote to make it more consist with the rest of the article
• Ref 6: lowercase, per MOS:CONFORMTITLE
  • Are you sure of this one?; the ref is to "harvnb|Koszarski"
    • I think what was ref 6 has been changed since the other edits- regardless, it was fixed in another edit. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
  • I think that's all. 21:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
    • Excellent work. I'll do a spotcheck now. AGF on offline sources, choosing refs at random. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Spotcheck

• Ref 2 (King 2011): good
• Ref 8 (The Mercury 1942): good
• Ref 11 (Hollywood Walk of Fame 2019): good
• Ref 13 (National Film Preservation Board): good
• Ref 36 (for The Disciple): good
• Ref 41 (for The Apostle of Vengeance): good
• Ref 54 (for The Silent Man): good
• Ref 78 (for White Oak): good

All come up good. I'm not particularly worried about any of the AFI or LOC citations, which is why half the checks were on citations in the lead.

@Jimknutt: One more thing, unrelated to the spotcheck: I notice that for a number of films in the table, Hart is not listed as a director, writer, or producer, and the notes do not clarify his role. How was he in these films? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

• • Hart was an actor and the star of these film. There is no need to list anything in the notes since the character he played is clearly listed in the "Role" column. Jimknutt (talk) 15:32, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

    Now I understand. Happy to support- great job! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

    Thanks for the support! Jimknutt (talk) 03:14, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

• Image review – All of the photos used are valid public domain images and the lead photo has alt text following the request earlier in the FLC. This aspect of the article looks okay to me. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:43, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:19, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [2].

---

List of storks

Nominator(s): AryKun (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, the number of mammal species FL's is making me embarrassed about the state of the bird species lists, and I feel somewhat responsible for improving the situation. This is a pretty short list with a single order of rather famous birds, so it feels like a good place to start. AryKun (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

That is a fine-looking list layout! Happy to see it being used. Not doing a full review, but some thoughts:

• For mammals, I went with titling them at the scientific name because many mammal families don't have a unified common name and I wanted to be consistent, and for this list that seems true as well- 7 of 20 species aren't "storks". Should this list be at List of ciconiids, with List of storks redirecting? Birds in general aren't consistent- List of toucans vs. List of Falconidae vs. List of sunbird species, so I guess its up to you what pattern you want.
  • The common name for Ciconiidae as a group is definitely storks; if you look up the family on every taxonomy (BirdLife, IOU, and Clements) they refer to the family as storks. I don't really think that every single species in a family needs to have the name in its common name. Lots of the Thraupidae are called finches, grassquits, or honeycreepers in their common name, but the common name for the family is unquestionably tanagers.
• Some of the bird images stretch the row down- the "|image-size=" parameter lets you scale it down if you want; I scale mine so that it doesn't go taller than 180px, but it's up to you
• Speaking of images, they need alt text- see the "|image-alt=" parameter, for which e.g. "white stork", "brown stork", etc. is sufficient
  • Added alts.
• I see you exclude the "ecology" column - presumably because they all have similar habitats, sizes, and food?
  • More or less all the species are generalist waders (in the American sense) that inhabit wetlands and agricultural areas; the only really unique ones are the open bills which eat exclusively snails. In general, I think the ecology column in less useful for birds than mammals, because every group of birds with a unique ecological niche is probably already in its own order or family (there are no bird orders like Artiodactyla, which pretty much would need to have the ostriches, penguins, and storks together).
• You're inconsistent on if it's "700,000" or "700000" for populations- I'd go with commas
  • Added commas.
• There's a parameter to chop off the "DD" and "NE" categories from the redlist template if they're unused - I added it, feel free to revert. --PresN 17:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

• PresN, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 15:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments by SilverTiger

• Disclaimer, I am using the various Featured mammal lists as a guide, since I've already reviewed some of those but no bird lists at all.
• First off, I believe that I agree with PresN above in that I would prefer "List of ciconiids" or "List of ciconiiforms" rather than "List of storks" (and for other bird lists to be moved to be consistent).
  • See my response to PresN above: birds in general have their common names used much more than any other taxonomic group, and "stork" as a unified common name for Ciconiidae is pretty well-established. I understand that the mammal lists all have scientific names in the title for consistency, but I don't see any reason for that to be carried over to bird lists. Readers are much more likely to search for "List of storks" or "List of sunbirds" than "List of ciconiids" or "List of nectariniids", so this is the title I think the article is best placed at.
    • Then, not really as part of this review, I'm going to suggest that going forward all bird lists be made at or moved to "List of <common name>" for consistency's sake. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

• Is there no cladogram of the genera in the family at all, to accompany simple list in the Classification section?
  • The exact relationship of genera to each other is contentious, so I think it would be better to avoid having a cladogram until a couple different studies corroborate each other.

• Please rename the "List" section to "Ciconiids".
  • Done.

• Why is the ecology column completely omitted? I understand if their diets are all similar, but surely they are of different sizes and different habitats?
  • No, they're pretty similar in terms of ecology; they all mostly live in fields and wetlands, although the exact dependency of each species on a particular habitat naturally varies (but would be too long to put in the list). As for sizes, I'm not really sure how that's useful in the list; the reader could just go to the main stork article if they want to know the relative sizes of the species.

• Are the yellow-billed stork, African woolly-necked stork, saddle-billed stork, and lesser adjutant missing range maps on purpose?
  • Yeah, there aren't any range maps on Commons.

• Overall, an excellent list, and I am happy to see the birds getting attention too. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 01:59, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
• SilverTiger12, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 15:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Support, though I have reservations about the missing ecology column. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments (in addition to the above)

• "underestimating the ability of species to used agricultural land" => "to use"
  • Changed.
• Notes b to e are not complete sentences, so don't need full stops
  • Removed.
• Think that's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:58, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
• ChrisTheDude, I've replied to all your comments. AryKun (talk) 15:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

• PresN, SilverTiger12, and ChrisTheDude, the IOU has accepted a new phylogeny based on the one by de Sousa et al., so I've added a cladogram that Geekgecko graciously made for stork to the Classification section. AryKun (talk) 09:37, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

  It could stand to be a bit less squished, but very nice. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 17:13, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:47, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Source review from MyCatIsAChonk

No spotcheck needed, will look at formatting/reliability. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

• Add Template:Use list-defined references to the top
  • Done.
• Convert Winkler et al. 2020 to a cite journal template to match the other citations
  • Done.

AryKun, I see no other issues, great work! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

MyCatIsAChonk, I've addressed both of your comments. AryKun (talk) 10:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Support. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

(Non-expert) Image review

• I haven't done one of these before, so here goes nothing.
• All images have alt text, though I'm not sure how useful repetitions of "black stork, white stork" are. Consider adding a bit about what they are doing, i.e. "white stork flying", "black stork wading in muddy water". That is not a requirement, though.
  • The mammal lists seem to have similar alt texts for the ones I checked. The point of alt text is just to give a relevant caption about what the image portrays, and the actions that the storks are performing aren't really important in this context.
• All images are appropriately licensed.
• Not part of the image review, but pertaining to the cladogram- consider paring the cladogram down to just the genera and not every species. As it currently is it appears horizontally squished and vertically elongated. Most of the mammal lists use genus-level cladograms as well with good results.
  • There's only twenty species in the family as is, so I'd like to keep the whole cladogram as is. It's not too squished, and I'd unsquish it if I could figure out what the proper parameter for that is.
• I already supported above, so... pass? --SilverTiger12 (talk) 13:21, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
  • SilverTiger12, see my replies above. AryKun (talk) 10:46, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

    Hm, the mammal lists' alt text I checked had a little more, but I don't think its a big deal. I don't know how to fix the cladogram either. That all said, I think this list can be promoted whenever the FLC coordinators notice I gave it an image review. SilverTiger12 (talk) 00:16, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:08, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [3].

---

List of Best Selling Soul Singles number ones of 1972

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:35, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi everyone, here's #30 in this series of number one lists. In this particular year, the top chart performer was the future Reverend Al Green. As ever, feedback will be most gratefully received and swiftly acted upon -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:35, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

• Just one comment. In the references you have the dates in two different formats. For the issue date of Billboard, it is ordered as DD-MM-YYY, but for the retrieval and archived dates, they are done in MM-DD-YYYY. Shouldn't the format be consistent (MM-DD-YYYY since Billboard is a US-based publication)?

-- Birdienest81talk 07:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

@Birdienest81: - fixed. No idea how that happened...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: Support -- Great job. Could you proofread 95th Academy Awards for its own featured list promotion in exchange for my feedback?

--Birdienest81talk 08:07, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Sure, I'll take a look when I get a sufficient chunk of time -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

NØ

• "The following week, it was displaced by Al Green's "Let's Stay Together" - I haven't usually seen the usage of "displaced" in this context. Are you sure this shouldn't be "replaced"?
• "Beginning in the issue of Billboard dated July 8" - I might have written this as "beginning with" but my Grammar checker isn't catching anything wrong with the current usage so this is completely optional.
• "It was one of six of 1972's soul number ones" - Very nitpick-y but this could be slightly tweaked to eliminate the repetition of "of"
• "It was one of six of 1972's soul number ones to also top the Hot 100, along with Sly and the Family Stone's "Family Affair", Al Green's "Let's Stay Together" - Do these artists' names need to be repeated in this sentence? These songs have been introduced as being by them in prior sentences.

That's it. Phenomenal work and this is up there with the other lists in this series in terms of quality! Great pictures too.--NØ 08:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

@MaranoFan: - thanks for your review and kind words, all points actioned I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support--NØ 09:16, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

• For the table header, add {{abbr|Ref.|Reference}}
• I think per WP:WOULDCHUCK: would achieve -> achieved; would prove -> proved
• Perhaps for the Staples Singers caption, suggest tweaking to something like: The Staple Singers with TV host Don Cornelius (second right), as having the parenthetical within a parenthetical seems awkward.
• That's all from me. Great work! Pseud 14 (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Butting in: I get that "would" is a potential problem. Pseud, Future in the past gives the example "She said she would return" ... does that "would" work for you? Or would (!) you say it a different way? (This is not, of course, a trick question ... some people never use future-in-the-past tense, some use it only in certain expressions, some use it to avoid giving the reader the false impression that the narrative has just jumped 5 years into the future. Some probably use it to sound pretentious, like that essay says, but I haven't seen that at WP:FLC, I think.) - Dank (push to talk) 21:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
  • @Pseud 14: - done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:13, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
    • Support. Another fine addition to your series. Hope you had a nice break. If you're not too occupied and have spare time, could I get your comments on the other side for my current FAC. Pseud 14 (talk) 13:10, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
      • @Pseud 14: - sure, I'll aim to take a look over the weekend! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:24, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
        • Much appreciated sir! Pseud 14 (talk) 13:27, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

• Source review – Reference reliability and formatting look okay, and the link-checker tool shows no issues. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:23, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

• Image review – All photos used have appropriate free licenses and alt text. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:37, 22 August 2023 (UTC)Im

BennyOnTheLoose

• Whitburn (2004) is not cited, so should be removed from Works cited.
• I made some trivial date tweaks suggested by a script, hopefully uncontroversial.
• Optionally, maybe start the caption "Lean on Me" was a number one for Bill Withers. with the singer rather than the song, as that's what the image depicts?

Nice work! BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

@BennyOnTheLoose: - thanks for your review, both points addressed! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:51, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Support. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:00, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:13, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [4].

---

Kyla discography

Nominator(s): Pseud 14 (talk) 02:01, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

After bringing Kyla's list of songs and awards to FL status, here's another related list I am nominating. I've reworked her discography by adding a concise and readable introduction/lead, formatted the tables, and thoroughly searched for RS (publications, newspapers, etc.) that are available online. Happy to address your comments and thanks to all who take the time to review the list. Pseud 14 (talk) 02:01, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

• Quick question - presumably (based on the absence of such info) there are no music charts in the Philippines........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:35, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: Yes that's correct. Unfortunately, it's kinda lousy that they don't have this. Sales tracking or chart rankings aren't published in the way that other countries have Billboard or similar publications that rank albums or singles in Asia like Oricon in Japan or Gaon in South Korea. We did have Billboard Philippines that launched around 2015, but seized publication after two years. It was announced to be revived this year, but so far no word. I've tailored how the tables are done to other Filipino discography FLs like Regine Velasquez discography and Ben&Ben discography that also do not have music charts info. Pseud 14 (talk) 13:27, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• "She signed with EMI Philippines and released her debut studio album Way to Your Heart in 2000.[1] It spawned three singles: "Bring It On", "One More Try", and "Hanggang Ngayon"." - I would consider combining these two short sentences as "In 2000, she signed with EMI Philippines and released her debut studio album Way to Your Heart in 2000,[1] which spawned three singles: "Bring It On", "One More Try", and "Hanggang Ngayon"."

Done

• "It also produced the singles "Because of You", "If The Feeling Is Gone", and "Till They Take My Heart Away". The album was certified double platinum by the Philippine Association of the Record Industry (PARI)" - same sort of thing here, consider "It also produced the singles "Because of You", "If The Feeling Is Gone", and "Till They Take My Heart Away", and was certified double platinum by the Philippine Association of the Record Industry (PARI)"

Done

• "Kyla's eight studio album" => "Kyla's eighth studio album"

Goodness, this is my second time messing up eight --> eighth. Thanks for catching again. Fixed now

• "In June 2014, Kyla released her debut EP, Journey.[8] It contained a duet, "My Heart", with American singer-songwriter Brian McKnight." => "In June 2014, Kyla released her debut EP, Journey,[8] which contained a duet, "My Heart", with American singer-songwriter Brian McKnight."

Done

• I think I understand that all the notes are saying that you don't know the specific sales figures, but you know it must have hit a certain level based on the certification it received. If that's the case, does that mean the threshold for platinum has reduced over time?

Correct. In a similar fashion where a Platinum is equivalent to 1 million sales on Billboard. However, as these are only data for certifications and not sales, I added the thresholds required (with notes) under the Sales column for an album to achieve a gold or platinum status and added sourcing (Ref 15) from IFPI as the thresholds have lowered over time and I have indicated which year that certain threshold of sales apply. i.e. a Platinum until 2006 is 40,000 shipped, 2007 it was lowered to 30,000, by 2008 to 25,000 until the most recent one I have available.

• BTW those notes aren't complete sentences so don't need full stops

You're right. I have removed them.

• That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:52, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks very much for taking the time to review ChrisTheDude. Addressed and actioned all comments and provided my responses. Let me know if there's anything I might have missed or if any needs clarification. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:27, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:47, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your support ChrisTheDude. Appreciate it. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:26, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

NØ

• The lead did look a bit large to me for a list. However, cutting it down may be a time-consuming process so you can consider that later, and it does not have a bearing on the outcome of my review.

Thanks for this. I've trimmed and removed some trivial sentences to make it concise.

• It seems like Kyla's first eight albums were released in a joint deal with EMI and PolyEast from reading the later parts of the list. Do you think PolyEast's involvement is notable enough to include in the lead too?

I've revised this to avoid confusion. She was signed to EMI Philippines in 2002 and the label changed it's name to PolyEast Records around 2009. I've removed PolyEast on the years that the albums were released under the EMI label. Her 2010 releases I listed under the PolyEast name.

• "She signed with EMI Philippines and released her debut studio album Way to Your Heart" - There should be a commas right before and after the album name.

Done

• Was "Buti Na Lang" only performed at the festival and not released as a single? I see it mentioned in the Music videos table but not in the Singles table. If this was just a performance it may not be notable for inclusion in the lead

It was released much later in her fourth album. But I've removed this bit as suggested.

• The lead does not seem to mention I Will Be There is her third album

Revised.

• "Kyla's fourth studio album Not Your Ordinary Girl (2004)" should be "Kyla's fourth studio album, Not Your Ordinary Girl (2004),"

Done

• "from her tenth studio album The Queen of R&B" should be "from her tenth studio album, The Queen of R&B"

Done

• Not sure about the inclusion of the iTunes chart per WP:SINGLEVENDOR. I had the same comment about its inclusion on Kyla's biography which I have been reading for an FAC review.

Ahh, didn't know this, but thanks for bringing it up. Learned something new. I have removed it. Will to do the same change on there too.

Apologies for becoming a comma nazi after my last few FACs, lol. Incredible work but you are an FLC whizz so it does not surprise me anymore!--NØ 14:46, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

No need to apologize, I should have known to always abide by MOS:COMMA as a standard in editing. Thanks very much for the review MaranoFan. Comments have been actioned. Let me know if I missed anything. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:27, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

• Support--NØ 17:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Abacusada

• This is just a drive-by comment. I spotted an accessibility issue in the Music videos section. Consider removing column headers: "As lead artist" and "As featured artist" and sort all of them by year, per MOS:COLHEAD.

• Col headers removed. Thanks. Pseud 14 (talk) 13:45, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Source review from MyCatIsAChonk

I don't believe a spotcheck is necessary, so I'll just focus on formatting. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:23, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

• Unrelated to sourcing, but add Template:Use American English or otherwise appropriate tag

Added

• Watch for false titles in the lead (looking specifically at Jonathan Manalo)

I removed mention as I replaced AllMusic with a Spotify source which supports it was solely written by Kyla.

• All sources must use the same casing (title case or sentence case) per MOS:TITLECONFORM

Done for source titles, should be in Title case (except for proper names, album titles, etc)

• Using AllMusic is questionable per WP:ALLMUSIC; in this case, the ref is supporting a statement regarding a person as a producer. Is there a better alternative for this one?

Removed this one and replaced with a Spotify source, which is of higher quality I believe (as it is not user-generated) Also says Kyla is the sole writer, so I tweaked the sentence.

• Ref 9 needs author (it's listed at the bottom of the prose)

Thanks for catching. Added

• Ref 12 is incorrectly listed as dead

Fixed

• Ref 13: There are cite errors with the 2007 and 2009 certification source

Fixed

• Ref 13 also: put "none" in the ref> parameter of all the individual cite templates

I'm not sure I follow, have a bit of trouble how to go about this (if you can elaborate, I'll update as you suggested)

• Ref 15 (and any other refs that pull from Google Books) should have "Google Books" in the via parameter

Done

• Ref 16 needs date

Added

• Ref 42 needs author (also listed as bottom, Pocholo Concepcion)

Thanks for catching, also added.

Pseud 14, all done, very nice work, not too many comments on the sourcing. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:23, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your review and going through the sources swiftly MyCatIsAChonk. Have actioned your comments and provided responses. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:16, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Support on sources, all the big issues have been addressed. As for the ref parameters- currently, all the "cite news" templates (or similar) are lacking any sfns pointing towards them. Users who have the harv error detection bot installed (like myself) will see an error message next to cite templates that lack any sfns. The practical use for this is to highlight sources ina bibliography that are present but not actually referenced. Fro a group citation like ref 13, this does not apply, so "none" should be added to the ref parameter to ensure such an error doesn't pop up. In source mode, this is done by putting |ref=none somewhere in the cite template. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 15:34, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

MyCatIsAChonk I see what you mean. I think a came across a similar source review with Aoba47 I believe, who uses the same script. That makes sense now re the harv errors. Nonetheless, added the parameter as suggested. I really appreciate your time and thank you for the support. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:40, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Pamzeis

I'll probably be able to complete this review in the morning, but one thing I noticed:

• Notes d and h say "equivalent of platinum certification" (emphasis mine), but the list states their respective albums were certified double platinum and gold. Is that something I'm misunderstanding or...? Pamzeis (talk) 15:30, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

That is my bad, yes you're right and thanks for catching that. Should be updated now. Thanks for your initial comments. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:05, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

I've read the article a few times, and there's nothing really big to comment on; I've made a few tweaks that you can revert if you don't like, but the only comment I have is:

• "Her subsequent releases were the cover albums Heartfelt (2007) and Heart 2 Heart (2009)." — IDK, but I just find this wording really awkward...........

Also, I need to shove a line about screwing up into every review I do, so there we go. But in all seriousness, another FL for you :) Pamzeis (talk) 01:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your review and edits Pamzeis. I tried to simplify the wording, let me know if it reads better. Pseud 14 (talk) 02:39, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

• Looks better to me. Supporting :) Pamzeis (talk) 02:42, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

• Image review – The photo used in the intro has an appropriate free license and alt text. No problems in this regard. Giants2008 (Talk) 17:48, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [5].

---

Pit Stop Challenge

Nominator(s): EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 09:58, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

The Pit Stop Challenge is a single elimination, pit stop contest held two days before the Indianapolis 500. It is a "race within a race" for pit crews in their preparation for the race. I have been redoing the list for the last six months and believe it is ready to be reviewed at FLC. All comments are welcome. EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 09:58, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Comments by RunningTiger123

• Alt text in infobox contradicts caption
• Use American English: "practise" → "practice", "cancelled" → "canceled" (occurs twice in lead and twice in table)
• "followed by Scott Dixon" should not have a comma after it
• "Time" column should be labeled "Time (s)" (mobile viewers won't see the alt text, so they need a way to identify the unit)
• Split 2020 and 2021 into two rows for consistency (the current text to the right can span both rows)
• For consistency, use "Event canceled due to..." or "Canceled due to..." for both 2008 and 2020–21
• If no external links are needed, remove the section

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:49, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

All points have been addressed EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 08:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

FOARP

• I'm a newb at FLC so please forgive any mistakes.
• Going down the criteria I get:

1. Prose - good.

2. Lead - OK, maybe the criteria gets a little bit lost in the description but that's understandable given that this is both the main article and the list.

3.a) Good

b) Good. I AGF on checking every source but they appear relevant and to sustain notability.

c) OK, not a fork (since it is also the main article).

4. Format is OK. Maybe would see if there's a better way of organising the "statistics" section but I have not clear suggestions. Could potentially move down some of the text to be a lead for the statistics section to give it a bit more context I suppose? But this is purely optional.

5.a) Visual appeal - OK.

b) Photos - the pictures are OK, licensing is OK in as much as I can check it (I'm going to assume the personality rights of Team Penske are not infringed by the photo). Ideally there would be a photo in every section so perhaps you could move one of the pictures to the winners section.

6. No stability issues.

• I'm OK to Support. FOARP (talk) 09:56, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

This nomination has stalled out for quite some time! In the interest of getting it off the bottom of the page, I've gone through it myself (and adjusted some wording in the lead) as another reviewer. Source review passed, promoting. --PresN 13:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [6].

---

List of World Heritage Sites in Yemen

Nominator(s): Tone 09:51, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Yemen has 5 WHS and 9 sites on the tentative list. Four sites are listed as endangered, in particular because of the ongoing conflict. The style is standard. The nomination for Panama WHS is already seeing some support so I am adding a new nomination. Tone 09:51, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Comment

• "The country served as a member of the World Heritage Committee in the years 1985–1991" => "The country served as a member of the World Heritage Committee from 1985 to 1991"
• "The characteristic feature of the city are" - noun is singular but verb is plural?
• "12-th century mosque, and a 15-th century hammam." - there should not be dashes in 12th and 15th
• "The mosque and madrasa date to 1504 and is a masterpiece" - subject is plural but noun is singular?
• "where new generation of artisans" => "where a new generation of artisans"
• That's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Comment

• "The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) designates World Heritage Sites of outstanding universal value to cultural or natural heritage which have been nominated by countries which are signatories to the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, established in 1972." ---------> "The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) designates World Heritage Sites of outstanding universal value to cultural or natural heritage, which have been nominated by countries signatories to the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, established in 1972."
• "Natural features (consisting of physical and biological formations), geological and physiographical formations (including habitats of threatened species of animals and plants), and natural sites which are important from the point of view of science, conservation or natural beauty, are defined as natural heritage." ----> "Natural features (consisting of physical and biological formations), geological and physiographical formations (including habitats for threatened species of animals and plants), and sites that are important from the point of view of science, conservation or natural beauty are defined as natural heritage."
• "As of 2023, Yemen has five sites on the list. The first site, the Old Walled City of Shibam, was listed in 1982." ---> "As of 2023, Yemen has five sites on the list. The first site, the Old Walled City of Shibam, was designated in 1982." (this is a recommendation, but you use the word "listing" a lot in this short text)
• "All four cultural sites are listed as endangered." ---> "These four cultural sites are endangered. "
• "Shibam and the Old City of Sana'a were listed in 2015 and Marib in 2023 due to the threats posed by the Yemeni Civil War." ----> "Shibam and the Old City of Sana'a were listed in 2015 and Marib in 2023 due to Yemeni Civil War threats."
• "The country served as a member of the World Heritage Committee in the years 1985–1991." ---> "The country served as a member of the World Heritage Committee in 1985–1991."

I'll review the remaining text over the weekend. Good list, like the topic - something different from the rest! :) --TheUzbek (talk) 13:00, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

• I have to say I disagree with TheUzbek's last point. "...served as a member of the World Heritage Committee in 1985–1991." is not valid English. It's equivalent to saying "Barack Obama was president of the US in 2009–2017", which nobody would ever say..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:52, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

  If you disagree, then I'll retract my point... but written English and spoken English is not the same, but I'm not a native English speaker. Are you? If so, the case is closed already :P TheUzbek (talk) 20:41, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

  Yes, I am a native English speaker. Even in written (as opposed to spoken) English it is not natural to write "The country served as a member of the World Heritage Committee in 1985–1991" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:31, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: Then I defer to you, Chris! --TheUzbek (talk) 19:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

• "The characteristic feature of the city are several multi-storey mudbrick houses which represent one of the oldest examples of urban planning based on high-rise buildings." ---> "The city has several multi-storey mudbrick houses, representing one of the oldest examples of high-rise urban planning. "
• "It is also the best example of the traditional architecture of the Hadhrami people between the 16th and 19th centuries. The city is threatened by floods due to gradual abandonment of traditional water management systems. " ---> "It is also an example of the traditional architecture of the Hadhrami people between the 16th and 19th centuries. " (neutrality)
• "The city is threatened by floods due to gradual abandonment of traditional water management systems." ---> "Floods threaten the city as traditional water management systems have been gradually abandoned."
• "Furthermore, installation of modern water supply with inadequate drainage and changes in livestock management have contributed to deteriorating condition of the city. " ---> "Furthermore, installing a modern water supply with inadequate drainage and changes in livestock management have contributed to the deteriorating city condition."
• " It played an important role in the early years of Islam, with the Great Mosque being the first mosque constructed outside Mecca and Medina, and the city being one of the centres from which the faith has spread. " ----> "It played a crucial role in Islam's early years, with the Great Mosque being the first mosque constructed outside Mecca and Medina. The city is one of the original centres from which the faith spread. "
• "The walled city comprises many traditional multi-storey houses built of rammed earth and burned brick, they are decorated by patterns made in brick and white gypsum. The city is threatened by new constructions and improper conservation practices. " ---> "The walled city comprises many traditional multi-storey houses built of rammed earth and burned brick, decorated with brick and white gypsum. New constructions and improper conservation practices threaten the city."
• "The coastal town of Zabid was the capital of Yemen from the 13th to 15th century. " ----> "Zabid was Yemen's capital from the 13th to the 15th century. "
• "It was an important centre of learning during the early Islamic period from the 7th century on, with a large number of mosques and madrasas. " ---> "It was a prominent centre of learning during the early Islamic period from the 7th century on, with many mosques and madrasas. "
• "The architecture, in particular the Tihamah-style courtyard house, was influential in the southern coast of the Arabian Peninsula." ---->"In particular, Tihamah-style courtyard houses influenced the southern Arabian peninsula's architecture."
• "The town is threatened by the newer constructions in concrete and steel and by installation of overhead electrical cables." ---> "The town is threatened by new concrete and steel constructions and overhead electrical cables. "
• "The islands support land and marine bird populations while the marine areas are home to coral reefs with numerous species of fish, crab, lobster, and shrimp" ---> "The islands support land and marine bird populations while the marine areas are home to coral reefs with numerous species of fish, crabs, lobsters, and shrimp"
• "Marib was the centre of the Sabaean Kingdom which was possibly the Kingdom of Sheba." ---> "Marib was the centre of the Sabaean kingdom, possibly the Kingdom of Sheba."
• "The kingdom controlled much of the incense trade across the Arabian Peninsula and in turn played a major role in cultural exchange with the Mediterranean and East Africa." ---> "The kingdom controlled much of the incense trade across the Arabian Peninsula and played a major role in cultural exchange with the Mediterranean and East Africa. "
• "The monuments date from the 1st millennium BCE to the arrival of Islam around 630 CE and include the Barran Temple, the Awam Temple (pictured), the ancient city of Marib, Old Marib Dam, and the ancient city of Sirwah. " ----> "The monuments date from the 1st millennium BCE to Islam's arrival around 630 CE. They include the Barran Temple, the Awam Temple (pictured), the ancient city of Marib, the Old Marib Dam, and the ancient city of Sirwah."
• "Saada was founded by Imam AI-Hadi Yaya in the 9th century and became the cradle of Zaydism, a powerful spiritual school of Muslim thought in Yemen." ---> "Saada was founded by Imam AI-Hadi Yaya in the 9th century. It became the cradle of Zaydism, a powerful Muslim spiritual school in Yemen."
• "The mosque and madrasa date to 1504 and is a masterpiece of the Tahirid architecture of Yemen." ---> "The mosque and madrasa date to 1504 and is considered a masterpiece by ? of the Tahirid architecture of Yemen. " (neutrality?)
• "The city is located in a mountain setting with river gorges and well integrated into the environment, forming a cultural landscape with terraces and small hamlets. " ---> "The city is located in a mountain setting with river gorges and is well integrated into the environment. It forms a cultural landscape with terraces and small hamlets."
• "The houses in the city are decorated with stucco patterns and the doors are made of carved wood." ---> "It forms a cultural landscape with terraces and small hamlets. The city houses are decorated in stucco patterns and doors are made of carved wood."
• "The mountainous region of Jabal Haraz was a caravan stopping point during the Himyarite Kingdom and a stronghold during the Sulayhid dynasty in the 11th century. " ---> "The mountainous region of Jabal Haraz was a caravan stopping point during the Himyarite Kingdom. It was also a stronghold during the Sulayhid dynasty in the 11th century."
• "The cultural landscape comprises fortified villages on the mountain slopes and the terraces in these slopes that were used to grow alfalfa, millet, coffee, khat, and other crops. " ---> "The cultural landscape comprises fortified villages on mountain slopes and terraces used to grow alfalfa, millet, coffee, khat, and other crops."
• "Settlements include Manakha and AI-Hajjara that both date to the 12th century." ---> "Settlements include Manakha and AI-Hajjara, which date back to the 12th century."
• "Jabal Bura is a mountain where the western side is covered by dense tropical vegetation and the eastern side comprises a cultural landscape of hamlets and terraces used for farming." ---> "Jabal Bura is a mountain where the western side is covered by dense tropical vegetation. The eastern side comprises a cultural landscape of hamlets and terraces used for farming. "
• "There are five vegetation zones spanning over 2,000 m (6,600 ft), with bananas being grown at the bottom levels, coffee in the middle, and durum wheat at higher altitudes. " ---> "There are five vegetation zones span over 2,000 m (6,600 ft), with bananas growing at the bottom, coffee in the middle, and durum wheat at higher altitudes."
• "The area is threatened because of logging and firewood harvesting, as well as because of construction of new roads in a fragile environment." ---> "The area is threatened by logging, firewood harvesting, and the construction of newly constructed roads in a fragile environment."
• "The area comprises the oasis of Balhaf, Qana, a major port of the Incense trade route since the period of the ancient Hadhramaut Kingdom, a volcanic crater lake (pictured), a fishing port of Burum, and the surrounding landscape." ----> "The area comprises the oasis of Balhaf, Qana, a key port of the Incense trade route since the ancient Hadhramaut Kingdom. It also comprises a volcanic crater lake (pictured), a fishing port of Burum, and the surrounding landscape."
• "The area in Hawf District, together with the Dhofar Governorate in the neighbouring Oman, is important in view of plant diversity." ---> "In terms of plant diversity, the Hawf District and the Dhofar Governorate in neighbouring Oman are highly valuable."
• "In contrast with the rest of the country that is mostly arid, Hawf is covered by trees and also home to several animal species. " ---> "While most of the rest of the country is arid, Hawf is covered with trees and is home to several animal species."
• "The area is threatened by expansion and intensification of agriculture." ---> "The area is threatened by the expansion and intensification of agriculture."
• "Ash-Shihr is a small ancient city with remains of buildings that were built in a mixture of Yemeni, Arab, and Hindu styles. The area is popular with tourists. There are hot spring baths in the village of Bada." -----> "Ash-Shihr is a small ancient city with the remains of buildings built in a mixture of Yemeni, Arab, and Hindu styles. The area is popular with tourists. Bada village has hot spring baths."

@Tone: These are all suggestions! If you disagree with one or more points, all I ask for in return is an explanation :) --TheUzbek (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I went through the comments and incorporated most of them. In some cases, I left the text as it is because the suggestion either changed the focus and in one case it was grammatically sub-optimal. Still, great comments :) Tone 14:34, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@Tone: OK, I hereby support. If you have time, please review my FL nom: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Alternates of the 12th Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam/archive1. --TheUzbek (talk) 17:55, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

• "The architecture, in particular the Tihamah-style courtyard house, was influential in the southern coast of the Arabian Peninsula." The source says typical of rather than influential.
• "The town is threatened by new concrete and steel constructions and overhead electrical cables." How threatened? If it to its historic character you should say so.
• "The kingdom controlled much of the incense trade across the Arabian Peninsula and in turn played a major role in cultural exchange with the Mediterranean and East Africa." Why "in turn"?
• "a 12-th century mosque, and a 15-th century hammam". 12th and 15th should not have hyphens.
• "The mosque and madrasa date to 1504 and is a masterpiece" "are masterpieces"
• "Sharma/Jethmun coastal area. Something has gone wrong here. The description is of a cultural site, but it is shown as a natural one. The description of the site at [7] is of a natural site, but it is not clear that it is a reliable source. Does the source have the wrong description? This needs investigating. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks! I fixed them all but the last. This one is weird. The source says pretty much what is in the list, which indeed looks like it would fit a cultural site. The source mentions sea turtles, but on the Oman side, which I cannot use here, but would qualify it for natural properties. I guess I'll blame it on a bad nomination text, some nomination with older dates tend to be sloppy - I've seen several of those for some other countries. Tone 15:24, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Support. Sorry overlooked this. Dudley Miles (talk) 08:36, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Source review from MyCatIsAChonk

No spotcheck needed; focusing on formatting/reliability. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

• Unrelated, but add Template:Use American English or otherwise appropriate
• Ref 4: remove author, put the work into the publisher parameter
• Ref 7: remove the name of the centre from the title

Tone, I see no other issues, very nice job. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Fixed all. I am usually using British, except for the US list :) Tone 08:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Support. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:43, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 13:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [8].

---

List of World Heritage Sites in Panama

Nominator(s): Tone 09:15, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Panama has 5 WHS and two tentative sites. The style is standard. The list for the US has just been promoted and the list for Pakistan is seeing some support already. This time I am nominating a bit shorter list because those two were quite lenghthy. Tone 09:15, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• "The first sites in Panama added to the list were the Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo, in 1980" - it's only a single site, so the verbs should be singular
• "In 1978-1985, Panama has served as a member of the World Heritage Committee." => "Panama served as a member of the World Heritage Committee from 1978 to 1985."
• "Most of the land is covered by tropical rainforests, however, there are also" => "Most of the land is covered by tropical rainforests, however there are also"
• "The Costa Rican part of the site has been initially listed independently in 1983" => "The Costa Rican part of the site was initially listed independently in 1983"
• "The area is a refuge for the species that have disappeared from the rest of Panama" => "The area is a refuge for species that have disappeared from the rest of Panama"
• Think that's it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:45, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

  Fixed all, thanks! Tone 09:02, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

  Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

FOARP

• Is the sourcing all from UNESCO? It would be nice to see some sourcing from elsewhere to provide, e.g., the descriptions, to help support notability.
• "This nomination is a proposed boundary and name modification of the site Archaeological Site of Panamá Viejo and Historic District of Panamá which was listed in 1997. The ruins of the Casa de los Genoveses in Panamá Viejo is pictured." - this isn't really a description of the site, is it? Seems to be more a description of the nomination.
• Happy memories of going to the old fort at Portobelo in a rickety taxi from the cruise terminal at Colon for my honeymoon... FOARP (talk) 09:51, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  These lists typically use UNESCO references because they are the best to establish notability, and, in particular, reasons for inclusion on the list. As for the tentative list, sometimes it happens that the nominations are used to extend the boundaries, include additional sites, or, apparently, in this case to change the name. Which sometimes gets messy - if you see the 2017 nomination, it aims to include a bunch of sites, including the existing WHS, together. But, such are the sources :) Tone 10:58, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I think for featured status these places ideally should actually be described, if we have a section labelled "description". I do see there being coverage in other sources about these sites (e.g., this) that describe the locations where the description from UNESCO does not actually describe the site. Are there really no other sources that could be referred to? We should try to avoid have situations like the featured article about a totally non-notable (and un-named) baseball player that ended up getting deleted. For that, it would be great to have multiple sources giving significant coverage to the subject of UNESCO sites in Panama per WP:LISTN. FOARP (talk) 09:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

The thing is, these sites are already described on the main list, so this would be repetitive. As for sources, we've agreed in the previous WHS lists nominations that the UNESCO sources are fine and superior to others. Tone 13:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

OK, gotcha, you're right about the descriptions - I was thinking there must be some difference between the submissions but if one of them really was just a name-change/combination of others then fine, no need to describe. Regarding sourcing, it would still be better to use more than just one source if possible. If no other sources actually treat this topic as notable (but I think there probably are other sources that do) then you're putting a questions mark over the notability of the topic. FOARP (talk) 22:11, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Sources. In previous nominations, UNESCO sources were typically considered sufficient since other sources are kind of derivative (reporting that something is listed because of ...) Let's see if there is any more input from other editors on this one. Tone 13:30, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

@FOARP and @Tone, see my source review below. In my (unprofessional) opinion, the usage of only UNESCO sites is ok. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:30, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

• "remarkably reach in biodiversity". presumably "rich".
• It would be helpful to give the area of Darien and Talamanca.
• I would prefer a photo of an animal in Darien, not a zoo photo.
• "Despite being isolated for a relatively short time". Why has it been isolated and for how long?
• "This serial nomination" What is a serial nomination? Dudley Miles (talk) 21:23, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

  Fixed all. The isolation appears to be because of the sea level rise, which is not in the original source, not is souced in the wiki article, so I rewrote that part. Thank you for checking! Tone 11:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support. Looks fine now. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:18, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Source review from MyCatIsAChonk

No spotcheck necessary, will look at formatting/reliability. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:12, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Support on sources - can't find anything wrong, very nice work! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:12, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 13:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [9].

---

List of Colorado ballot measures

Nominator(s): ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 02:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

One year and one month ago today, my nomination of List of Washington (state) ballot measures was successful. I've finally reached a point where I'm happy with this follow-up and, after a productive peer review and a final copy-edit, I think this is in good shape. I'm looking forward to hearing y'all's feedback! ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 02:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• Headings which are a date range should use an ndash, not a hyphen -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

• Fixed. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 16:53, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• "and the decriminalization of some pscyhadelics in 2022" - "psychadelics" is spelt incorrectly
• "voters supported a women's suffrage ballot measure by a 54-45 margin" - that doesn't add up to 100%, is this a rounding issue?
• "In 1970, The International Olympic Committee" => "In 1970, the International Olympic Committee"
• Marijuana image caption needs a full stop, as it is a complete sentence
• If the General Assembly (which appears to be the source for all the tables) lists the women's suffrage vote as taking place in 1892, what's your source for the statement that it didn't?
• " A constitutional amendment relating to the eight-hour work week" - should that say "day"? Or is the working week really short in Colorado.....?
• "requiring 3/4 of jurors agree for a verdict to be reached" => "requiring 3/4 of jurors to agree for a verdict to be reached"
• That's what I got as far as 1920, back for more later..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:20, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you! Logging that I've seen this but am out of town thru Friday. I will get to these once I'm home. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 23:18, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

  These have all now been fixed. Two specific notes - For the women's suffrage vote, it's listed in the now-cited book and several newspaper sources that I don't cite as being 1893. I cannot explain why the General Assembly doesn't list it as being 1893 except that it's a bit unusual to have the referendums in an off-year, so it was probably just an oversight on their part. For the eight-hour work week, the General Assembly only specifies that it's about "eight-hour employment," but I added a contemporary newspaper source confirming that it's about the work day. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 21:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

  Although you added a new source, the article wording is the same and still makes reference to "the eight-hour work week", which cannot possibly be correct. The newspaper source specifically states that it was to do with making eight hours the maximum working day.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:20, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

  My bad, I thought I corrected that. The wording should be updated now. I could update the wording to specify "for those in dangerous professions" if you think it's necessary.ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 14:58, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

  Go for it. Regardless, I'm happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:17, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Further comments

• "the ad valorem tax" - is there a link to explain this? Maybe it's a well-known term in the US, but personally I have never heard this phrase in my life
• There's a few instances where you use "gas" - I feel this is a bit slangy and you should write "gasoline" in full
• "allowing county commissioners to modify other elected official's salaries" => "allowing county commissioners to modify other elected officials' salaries"
• "requiring that ballot measures placed via petition be confined to a single-subject" => "requiring that ballot measures placed via petition be confined to a single subject"
• "for the purpose of improving I-70" - what's "I-70"?
• All notes are complete sentences, so B, C and D also need full stops
• Think that's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: All of these should now be fixed, although I think "gas tax" is just an Americanism and not really slang, but I actually used "fuel tax" in a few other places so I corrected it to that. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 21:43, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support--金色黎明 (talk) 04:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Source review from MyCatIsAChonk

On the market for three months with no source review, whew... happy to help! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:12, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

• All sources must use the same casing (title case or sentence case) per MOS:CONFORMTITLE
• It looks like all the archived links are labeled as dead, but they're not dead to me... also, I suggest running it through IABOT once you've fixed these
• It only looks like some of the publishers are linked- either wikilink all or dewikilink all publishers/names of works, since overlinking does not apply
• Ref 16: what makes NORML reliable? I question it, since my browser isn't letting me open it due to an improper security card
• Ref 19: Quotes in quotes should use apostrophes. Also, there's a cite error.

Otherwise, looks good. Ping me in replies please! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:12, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

• @MyCatIsAChonk: In order of appearance:
  • These should all be using title case now but there's a lot of sources, let me know if I missed any there.
  • I'm not sure where you're seeing those dead link tags, I don't see them on my end and I don't see them as being marked dead in the template either. It should be run through IABOT now.
  • All the publishers with pages to link to should now linked. I prefer to avoid redlinks but am happy to add them for the couple sources left if you'd like.
  • Again, not sure about the error on your end because it loads fine for me on Firefox. NORML is a well-established international advocacy group but I think it's reliable for this simple statement of fact as it's just a secondary reporting of the marijuana measure result.
  • Fixed and fixed.

Let me know if there's anything else! ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:20, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Support - How odd for NORML and the dead links- regardless, very nice work. Hope this can finally get through the barrier! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:28, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Comments Support by Gerald Waldo Luis

Hey there! I won't comment on the tables content since I don't have knowledge on this topic and based on a quick scroll it looks pretty neat, so I'll mostly be adressing the prose. Apologies if I make any errors in understanding the topic. GeraldWL 11:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Resolved comments from GeraldWL 04:27, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

* I noticed some inconsistencies in the refs. Woman's Journal isn't linked in ref 6 but linked in ref 7. The Denver Times in ref 24 should be in italics like the other news sources, so is Rocky Mountain News in ref 25 which should be linked too for consistency. Per MOS:LAYOUTEL, ""Inline" templates are used when box-type templates are not good, either because they result in a long sequence of right-aligned boxes hanging off the bottom of the article, or because there are no external links except sister project ones." Right now the sister box is being kinda awkward just hanging by the side there, without other normal links. Are all the See also links standard of ballot articles? "to place new legislation, legislation recently"-- repetitive legislation, in my opinion changing the latter to "those" would suffice "kicked off" is informal if I remember correctly Link medical cannabis Should prob link women's suffrage both in img caption and first mention in prose Link grassroots and General Assembly "After the 1876 constitutional convention in Colorado"-- is this referring to the 1876 Constitution procedures for the GA? Because "the" usually denotes it has been covered previously, and prior to this there's no mention of any "conventions". "voters voting against it"-- another but subtle repetition. Omitting "voting" won't change the sentence's essence. "nearly 60% of Coloradans"-- no exact numbers? "1984's Amendment 3"-- just remembered one of my failed GANs, where the reviewer told me it is generally discouraged to start a sentence with numbers. Might be good to put a year bracket after the court case title Why does this section specify it as psilocybin mushrooms but in the lead it's psychedelics? Link veto Do ref 20 21 cover both bullet points? @Gerald Waldo Luis: Thank you for these notes! I have fixed all of these issues with the following notes: The Denver Times isn't italicized in ref 24 because it's the publisher, not the publication. I am not sure how to italicize it since the template does that automatically - If there's a way to override it I don't know it. I linked Rocky Mountain News but again, the template is setting it as plain because I have it attributed as the agency since it's a quote from their story in the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel. I might be able to just remove it from the template entirely. I do not think the links are standard across articles. I could probably limit it to these three articles if you think it would be cleaner: History of Colorado, Initiatives and referendums in the United States, and Law of Colorado. I updated the "nearly 60%" number to just say 60% because when I did the math, it was 59.957%. Thanks again! ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 21:51, 22 August 2023 (UTC) It looks much better now to me! And yeah I can understand the Denver Times thing now. And yes, I prefer that revised See also list, since geography has least to do with the ballot measures, and the others are just indexes. GeraldWL 03:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC) The see also list has been updated! ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 11:45, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

• It looks much better now to me, I just did a minor edit to remove a weird gap in the See also section but that's all for me. Support -- great job on this and the other state listicles! Alsooo if you're interested maybe, I have a peer review on eye for FAC that's still looking for people to comment on. GeraldWL 04:27, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 13:06, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [10].

---

List of lorisoids

Nominator(s): PresN 14:23, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Alright, back to animal lists! With this list (#30 in our series of animal FLCs) we start on the first of the four biggest mammal orders, the primates. This list is one of the six-ish subgroupings, the superfamily Lorisoidea, containing 35 species split between the loris family and the galago/bushbaby family, aka "small little nocturnal primates with giant eyes". As always, the list follows the pattern of the previous lists and reflects previous FLC comments. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 14:23, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments by SilverTiger

• I'm surprised you didn't start Eulipotyphla before Primata, but good job starting the primates.
• They are found in Asia and Africa, generally in forests, though some species can also be found in shrublands and savannas. The second half the sentence here reads a little wonky. Are the species found in shrublands and savannas also found in forests, or are some species shrubland- and savanna-dwellers while others live in forests? If the latter, I suggest rephrasing to They are found in Asia and Africa, generally in forests, though some species are found in shrublands and savannas.

• It's both- some are forests + savannas, while some are just savannas. Dropped the "also".

• Several extinct prehistoric Lorisoidea species have been discovered,... I'd suggest changing that to "extinct prehistoric lorisoid species".

• Done.

• The Classification section and the list itself are all fine. No further comments, save that the picture of the East African potto is a bit disconcerting. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 15:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

• @SilverTiger12: Done! --PresN 16:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support, and good luck. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• There's a typo in "Gum and sap, asd well as" against the Brown greater galago
• That's it, and I echo SilverTiger's comment about the East African potto, which can apparently shoot lasers from its eyes :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: Done, thanks! --PresN 13:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:46, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Dank

• File:Galago senegalensis.jpg: The link to the source is broken for me, and I can't verify the license.

• Updated to archive link.

• I can't read (I'm guessing) Chinese, but I see a "CC" logo so I'll assume it's okay. - Dank (push to talk)

• File:Galago alleni.jpg: the {{PD-Art}} template may need a license parameter. FWIW, the book containing the image was published in 1894.

• Updated.

• File:Nycticebus menagensis.png: seems to be published in an open access journal. There's no specific tag saying that, but I'm not sure if one is needed.

• Don't think one is needed.

• "Philippines in southeastern Asia": the map is highlighting Borneo.

• Updated to "Borneo and nearby islands" - it's technically not just Borneo, which is why I saud Philippines

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. I skimmed the prose; no problems found. There are no sortable columns. I 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 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. At a glance, the images seem fine, except as noted above.
• 6. It is stable. - Dank (push to talk) 14:11, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

• @Dank: Responded inline, thanks! --PresN 00:15, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Support. - Dank (push to talk) 00:48, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

AK

• "40 individuals to 500,000 " → "40 to 500,000 mature individuals" or similar would be better

• It's intentional so that it doesn't read like "40 (thousand) to 500,000"
  • I Still would like it to mention that population estimates only include mature individuals.
    • @AryKun: Done. --PresN 17:11, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

• "divided between six" wouldn't the species be divided into genera?

• English is weird and both are fine- you can divide something "between" two groupings.

• Southern needle-clawed bushbaby seems to have an illustration available.

• Added, thanks! I had dropped it because it looked like an off-color duplicate of the one for the Northern needle-clawed bushbaby, but looking again the artist just drew it like that, the face is slightly different
  • And looking at the caption now, I realize that it is actually of pallidus, so I've removed it. I did find a photo on iNat, so I've added that instead.
    • Thanks!

• Makandé squirrel galago has a range map available.

• Added, thanks! Looks like it was added to the article two days after I made the list, so I just missed it.

• That's all I have. AryKun (talk) 15:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

• @AryKun: Responded inline, thanks! --PresN 00:21, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

• Support. AryKun (talk) 17:54, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

• Source review – The reliability and formatting of the cites are both rock-solid, and the link-checker tool isn't showing any issues. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:17, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [11].

---

List of Hot Soul Singles number ones of 1973

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi everyone, me yet again! With 1971 recently promoted and 1972 making good progress, 1973 seems like the next logical step. In this particular year, the longest-running number one was a track by Marvin Gaye which must be one of the most sensual songs of all time. Feedback as every gratefully received and swiftly acted upon...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Pseud

• Perhaps it's just me or how I read this line were debut number ones -- should it be were number one debuts?
  • Both are valid -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
• For this one, a clarification: Sylvia made her first appearance -- does Robinson go by a mononym as her stage name when referred to as an individual artist?
  • Yes, she was always credited as simply Sylvia during her performing days -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
• For the table header, add {{abbr|Ref.|Reference}}
  • Darn, I always forget that! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
• That's all from me. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
  • @Pseud 14: - thanks! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Another solid work. Pseud 14 (talk) 12:42, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

NØ

• "Wonder returned to number one for a single week in September" - The last year mentioned before this sentence is 1972, so it might be helpful to mention that it is the September of 1973 that is being referred to here.
• "The year's longest unbroken run at number was achieved by Marvin Gaye" - number one...?
• "who spent six consecutive weeks in the peak position" - "peak" is already implied by the use of "number one" earlier in the sentence so you could just say "who spent six consecutive weeks in the position"
• That should be all from me!--NØ 12:38, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
  • @MaranoFan: - thanks - done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:06, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Support--NØ 19:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• "the title Best Selling Soul Singles": looks like this clashes with MOS:LINKINNAME
• The Ohio Players should probably sort under "O".
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. Nothing is jumping out at me as a prose problem. I checked sorting on all sortable nonnumeric 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. At a glance, the images seem fine.
• 6. It is stable.
• Close enough for a support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 04:14, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
  • @Dank: - thanks for your review. The first point was a legacy from when the lead was worded differently and that was the first use of the word "soul". I changed it around but clearly forgot to remove that link...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:15, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
    • Looks good now, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 12:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Source review from MyCatIsAChonk

No spotcheck necessary, will focus on formatting and reliability. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:33, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

• Ref 9: using AllMusic for a biographical detail is questionable per WP:ALLMUSIC; got a better source?
• Unrelated, but there's a false title in the top image caption

ChrisTheDude, that's all I got, very nice job keeping consistent formatting. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:33, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

@MyCatIsAChonk: - done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:39, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Support. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 16:22, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:23, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [12].

---

List of awards and nominations received by Last Week Tonight with John Oliver

Nominator(s): MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Known for being the sources of such iconic things such as Mickey Mouse, "Donald Trump", "SLAPP Suits", Our Lady of Perpetual Exemption, and the John Oliver Memorial Sewer Plant, Last Week Tonight is one of the most iconic late-night shows of our time. Excited for everyones comments! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

EN-Jungwon

• In the infobox the total number of wins listed is 56 but adding every individual win listed in the infobox gives 58 wins. But in the awards and nomination table, there are 57 wins mentioned.
• Same as nominations. Infobox says the total is 127. Adding everything mentioned in the infobox gives 132.
• In the lead, the second paragraph it says 61 Primetime Emmy Awards (21 wins). In the infobox, Primetime Emmy Awards has 26 wins but in the main table, I counted 25 wins.

That's all. -- EN-Jungwon 10:57, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

I think I forgot to include "pendings" in the noms- my bad, it's been recounted. Thanks for your review! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Forgot a ping for @EN-Jungwon. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Support -- EN-Jungwon 01:55, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• "HBO announced the comedian" => "HBO announced that the comedian"
• There's a 2023 Primetime Emmy row with a blank "nominee" field
• That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:39, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude Fixed, and the empty cell is because the nominees have not yet been announced- added a statement to clarify that. Thank you for the review! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Gotcha. In that case I would suggest changing the wording to "individually named nominees not yet announced", as I spent a few moments thinking "how do they know that the show has been nominated if nominations have not been announced.........?" But then I am a bit dumb........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:54, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude That makes more sense- fixed. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:05, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Pamzeis

Screwing something up is an option, so tell me if that happens

• "The half-hour-long show was created by Oliver, who also serves as an executive producer," — sounds a bit awkward. Can it be reworded?
  • I just cut it, since the exec producers are already mentioned below. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
• The first paragraph is a bit confusing for me. It seems to jump from point to point... so, basically, this is what I'm reading (ignoring the opening sentence because I want to): its creation → executive producer → its airdates → its hiatus → its creation → the executive producers. Can it be reorganised with a more..... um, what's the word....... I'm thinking "cohesive", but that's not right. Um... I think you'd get my point? Lemme know if you're confused because I definitely am.
  • I see what you mean- shuffled some things around, let me know what you think now. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
• "received critical acclaim" — this is sourced to Metacritic from what I'm seeing, which gives it a score of 76. However, 76 is "generally favourable reviews", not "universal acclaim", so I think a source that explicitly states it received critical acclaim will be needed.
  • I can't find any other sources that state "critical acclaim"- the number of reviews is surprisingly limited, particularly since rotten tomatoes has no critics score up. Changed the sentence appropriately. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Think that's it from me. Ping me in any replies! Pamzeis (talk) 09:56, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

@Pamzeis: Think I've gotten everything. Thank you very much for the review! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

• Support. BTW, I'd appreciate any comments at this FLC. Pamzeis (talk) 12:08, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Source review — pass

• Sources are all highly reputed and compliant with WP:RSPSS, Deadline Hollywood and The Hollywood Reporter are the main ones used and they are both okay.
• Spotchecks passed.

The source review is an easy pass. Congrats on the nomination going really well! I need a prose review on my Julia Michaels discography FLC if you're ever up to it. Cheers!--NØ 16:24, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Question for coords: May I open another candidacy, since there's three supports and a passed source check on this? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:32, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

• This director says yes you may. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

• Image review – The lone image used in the article is the title card, which is public domain because it consists of simple text. It also has alt text provided, which is nice. No problems here that I can see. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:17, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [13].

---

Julia Michaels discography

Nominator(s): NØ 00:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Julia Michaels is a songwriter-turned-singer (I know, I have a type lol) whose career was so screwed over by record label politics that she was stuck releasing EPs instead of albums through most of it. I've put a lot of work into this discography, and it might just be my best list yet! Thanks a lot to everyone who will take the time to give their feedback here, and after gaining some confidence I'll try do QPQs for this one :) --NØ 00:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• "She released her self-titled debut EP in 2010 and the second one, Futuristic" => "She released her self-titled debut EP in 2010 and a second, Futuristic"
• Sophie Muller has an article, so can be linked
• Think that's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

• Both done. Thanks for the swift review! Hope you are having a great week so far.--NØ 17:15, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

I could not find any issues with the prose, I do have some minor (nitpick-y) comments on the references (note that this is not a full source review)

• Since you have quite a few sources that require paid subscription, suggest adding a flag (subscription required) per Template:Subscription required

• I've utilized "subscription=limited" instead and I would guess the use of both might be redundant.

• I would recommend archiving citations (i.e. some Billboard charts history aren't archived while most citations are). It is not required for a FLC, but I think it would be helpful to avoid any future headaches with link rot and death, as well as for consistency.

• Odd that the bot isn't picking these up. I've manually added archives to some of these.

• That's all from me. Hope this helps. Pseud 14 (talk) 18:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

• Thank you for the review, Pseud 14! This was very helpful indeed and I have actioned your comments.--NØ 20:35, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support --Pseud 14 (talk) 20:49, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Source review

I'm unfamiliar with a lot of the article's sources, so alert me if I screw anything up. Version reviewed

Formatting

• I believe Rolling Stone's url-access is limited, not subscription
• fn 109: is "NYLA" an acronym? If not, then it should probably be reduced from all caps per MOS:ALLCAPS

• Seems to maybe stand for New York & Los Angeles.

• Per MOS:CONFORMTITLE, be consistent with the citation titles' capitalisation; either use title-case (refer to MOS:5LETTER) or sentence-case

• Should be consistently all caps now except few certification template-generated refs that produce the words "single certifications" in lowercase

Reliability

• What makes the following high-quality reliable sources:
  • Atwood Magazine

• They seem to have a lot of editors and are used to source fairly uncontroversial claims here.

• • auspOp

• Seems to be the only source covering certain editions of the Australian chart, commonly in use on proactively maintained high-profile FLs like Taylor Swift singles discography, Lady Gaga discography and Rihanna singles discography.

• • Stereogum

• James Rettig, the author used, has written for Billboard, Spin, iHeartRadio, etc.

• • Uproxx

• Reputed source with multiple editors

• • All Access Music Group

• Adds on All Access come directly from record labels and it is thus a premium source to cite single releases, recommended for making the distinction between singles and promotional singles per WP:SINGLESCRIT.

• • Idolator

• Reliable source per WP:RSPSS and Mike Wass has written for Billboard, Variety and Yahoo!, etc. Citing Billboard itself would have been my first preference but they seem to have erroneously referred to this song as a "single" instead of the more accurate "promotional single".

• • Sounds Like Nashville

• Not that familiar with the site but Chris Parton has written for the Rolling Stone, CMT and Taste of Country, etc. and seems to be a Country music journalist in good standing

Verifiability

• Spotchecks clear

I think that's it from me! Ping me in any replies. Pamzeis (talk) 06:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Much thanks for the review, Pamzeis. Responses above. Cheers!--NØ 07:57, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey Pamzeis, does the source review pass after the explanations for reliability? Regards.--NØ 03:35, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

• Sorry for wait. I think that's a pass from me! Pamzeis (talk) 05:08, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

MyCatIsAChonk

Support- Can't see any issues, very nice work! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

• Image review – The lead photo (the only one in the article) has an appropriate free license and alt text. No issues here. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:23, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:07, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [14].

---

World Video Game Hall of Fame

Nominator(s): PresN 00:31, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Taking a break from the animal lists for a minute, here we have something totally different: the World Video Game Hall of Fame. The Strong National Museum of Play has been around since 1969, took on the National Toy Hall of Fame in 2002 from a children's museum in Oregon, and started the International Center for the History of Electronic Games in 2009. So as far as I can tell, when they announced that they were going to make a hall of fame for video games in 2015, everyone felt that it sounded pretty authoritative and just ran with it without further comment. Every year since, announcements of the finalists and inductees get widely reported in video game websites, trade magazines, and newspapers... so now this is "the" authoritative video game hall of fame. Apparently that's how all halls of fame work- if you have money and a building and get there first, you win. So, here we are. I've worked on articles for games that have been inducted before, and decided that the list could use some improvement last month, so I guess I followed the same thought process as all those sources—which I've tried to include a broad spectrum of, as an indicator of its implied authority. I think the list is much improved, and hopefully you do too. --PresN 00:31, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• "The set of final nominees is typically announced each year in March, and the inductees in May. In its first two years of operation, the hall named six inductees from fifteen finalists; since then, it has named four inductees each year from a set of twelve." - is this part sourced by one of the refs earlier in the paragraph? It just jumps out at me that there's no ref at the end of the para......

• It's not- I was trying to get it in under WP:SKYISBLUE. The numbers of inductees/finalists are just a summation of the table- it's clearly what happened (WP:CALC). The March/May thing isn't remarked on anywhere or explicitly stated in the rules, it's just that every year since the first, they announce the finalists in March and the inductees in May (which can be seen by the publication dates of the references), so I thought I'd mention that. I'm open to dropping it though if you think it's too far.

• "40 games have been inducted out of 74 nominated, many multiple times" - wording is arguably ambiguous as to whether games have been inducted multiple times of nominated multiple times. Is there a way to reword?

• Broke into two sentences.

• That's it, I think :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:49, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: Thanks for reviewing; responded above. --PresN 13:54, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:01, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
• With entries such as NBA 2K and FIFA, are they referring to the first entry in the series, or the series as a whole. The pictures they use, particularly with this source make it unclear. (Oinkers42) (talk) 01:48, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

• @(Oinkers42): As I put in the lead (because it is unclear): "In some cases, the hall may list the first game in a series of similar titles as a proxy for the entire series, such as with The Oregon Trail series or the FIFA International Soccer/FIFA series." Basically, nominations are always for a single, specific game, but then sometimes the associated description talks about the impact of the series as a whole. They only do it in some cases, though – like, they don't do it for games that just have sequels like Doom or Super Mario Bros., they do it for games were the various releases are seen as iterations on a common theme- NBA 2K and FIFA, as you mention, where each release is just "the version of FIFA for <year>" rather than as a wholly new sequel. Personally I find it a bit blurry where the line is, but they didn't ask me. --PresN 02:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

FOARP

• Good varied sourcing, nice presentation and picture licence appears OK. I could list the criteria but quicker to say they all appear met. Good job. Support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FOARP (talk • contribs) 07:23, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

• Per MOS:GEOLINK, I would unlink United States.
• Nothing more to quibble. A very fine work! Pseud 14 (talk) 20:06, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

@Pseud 14: Unlinked, thanks! --PresN 20:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:13, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

• Source review – All of the references are reliable and well-formatted. The link-checker tool seems to have trouble accessing the museum site's links (this happens with some sites for whatever reason), but it's not detecting any issues that are worthy of concern. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:43, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

• Image review – The one photo used in the article has an appropriate free license. Giants2008 (Talk) 18:19, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:13, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [15].

---

Municipalities of Sinaloa

Nominator(s): Mattximus (talk) 19:37, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Here is another list of municipalities with a standardized format that now includes 41 (!!) lists in North American jurisdictions. Inspired by real encyclopedias with consistent formatting and high standards, I'm helping to achieve this for lists of municipalities. I tried to incorporate changes from previous nominations but I'm sure I've missed some and there can always be improvements. Thanks for your reviews! Mattximus (talk) 19:37, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Comment

• In the interests of not supporting without picking up anything at all, I would suggest that "Culiacán is the capital and largest city by population." needs a source. The table confirms that Culiacán Municipality is the largest municipality by population, but it doesn't support the statement that Culiacán (the city) is the largest city or that it's the capital. Other than that, all good! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:01, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

• Added a reference. Thanks for the review! Mattximus (talk) 15:37, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

• Straight-forward Support from me as well. Sources are varied and on-point, photos appear (in as much as it is possible to confirm through brief inspection) to be appropriately licensed. FOARP (talk) 10:56, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
• Support ... But I have one questions... Why not archive the URL references? --TheUzbek (talk) 12:39, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

• This is a good suggestion, can you point me to a link for how to do this? Mattximus (talk) 14:15, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

  You can use iabot to add archive links easily -- EN-Jungwon 16:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

• Thank you, I've run the bot and it worked perfectly! Is there any reason to not run this on all my featured articles/lists? Mattximus (talk) 19:12, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

• No reason at all! Also note there's a link to the bot in the history page of every article- the "Fix dead links" in the "External links" bar of links. --PresN 18:24, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support: Good enough--金色黎明 (talk) 12:11, 10 July 2023 (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

• 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. You're mostly good here, but: the km / sq mi columns need the scope as well, so e.g. !scope=col | sq mi Also, if the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.

• Done

• 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. Yours are slightly off- it needs to be !scope="row", not |scope="row", so that it's a "header" cell, not a regular one.

• 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 18:24, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

• All done, no questions. Thanks for the review! Will take me a while to apply these to all other lists though... Mattximus (talk) 20:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Source review – Reliabiilty looks okay throughout and the sources are in working order according to the link-checker tool. There are a couple small formatting that could stand to be taken care of:

• Refs 1 and 7 have hyphens in the title that should be en dashes per the MoS.

• Done

• The ISBN formatting is all over the place: three formats for three numbers. I believe the 13-digit variety with hyphens is most preferred according to the style guides, but whatever format is used should be consistent.

• Done

Giants2008 (Talk) 22:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! I've completed all recommendations! Mattximus (talk) 18:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 15:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [16].

---

List of National Football League annual passing touchdowns leaders

Nominator(s): Hey man im josh (talk) and ULPS (talk) 18:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

The style and format for this article was based on a few other NFL record FLs such as List of National Football League annual receptions leaders and List of National Football League annual receiving yards leaders. This is my first FL nomination so please bear with me, but I will do my best to address any concerns or suggestions that are brought up :) ULPS (talk) 18:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• My only comment is that there's no explanation of what the AFL is/was, how it differs/differed from the NFL, and why its stats are included in an article the title of which only mentions the NFL...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

   Done Added a sentence to the lede explaining it. ULPS (talk) 22:26, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Jake

• Support Very well written, good sources and the tables are easily readable with included keys, Nice Job!! Jake Jakubowski (Talk) 14:42, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

EN-Jungwon

• Ref 2 and 3 are dead
• Ref 6; link Sports Illustrated
• Ref 7; add author "Philip Marsh" and link DAZN
• Ref 9 requires a subscription so add |url-access=subscription and link author Richard Goldstein (writer, born 1942) and link The New York Times
• Ref 10; link The Athletic and add |date=Jan 9, 2023. Replace |last=Staff |first=The Athletic with |author=The Athletic Staff
• Ref 72 requires a subscription so add |url-access=subscription and link author Richard Goldstein (writer, born 1942) and link The New York Times
• Link Pro-Football-Reference.com in the references.
• Use a consistent date format. There is a mix of dmy, mdy and ymd

That's all. -- EN-Jungwon 15:12, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done all I believe. Is it fine just to use the dmy template? ULPS (talk) 03:42, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

I think it's alright to use that template. You could use User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates to change the dates quickly. Support. If you have time could you have a quick look at my nomination Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Music Bank Chart winners (2019)/archive1. Thanks. -- EN-Jungwon 07:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 15:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [17].

---

Eiji Tsuburaya filmography

Nominator(s): Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Eiji Tsuburaya is considered one of the most important and influential figures in the history of cinema. I've worked had to make this comprehensive list of all works in film and television (cited in accessible documents) as featuring his contributions. I'm looking forward to the comments from other users on how to improve this article that I have dedicated myself to completing with the help of other users such as Armegon. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:34, 22 March 2023 (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. !Cinematography becomes !scope=col | Cinematography. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, like "Credited as", 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. | 1919 becomes !scope=row | 1919. Your choice if the first column (year) or the title column is the "primary" one. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, 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 18:10, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for the suggestions, I read MOS:DTAB and added these things to the page. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 22:04, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• Original titles should in my view appear, specially for the films that have no article on the English WP.-MY, OH MY! (mushy yank) 15:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

  I could make hidden notes for all the films without official English titles (in its native title) if you want. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 05:03, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you. You don't think it would be a good idea to do it for all films or at least for all films with no article? -MY, OH MY! (mushy yank) 00:13, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

  Do you want me to link the ones with pages on the Japanese version of the site as well? Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 01:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

  If you think this is the best way to identify the films quickly, sure. -MY, OH MY! (mushy yank) 01:39, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

• LS: worked on roughly 250 films. Can't we have a more detailed counting specifying how many films he made as director, as cinematographer and as SED?. I understand it would be better if based on a quote.
• LS: ...exhibit for the Expo '70. Although he continued to plan to work on productions such as Space Amoeba, Japan Airplane Guy, and Princess Kaguya, he passed away a day prior to his return to Tokyo in order to begin work for ensuing the year in January 1970. Is it me or the use of "Although" is awkward? Shouldn't we also mention he was indeed in Osaka but stopped in Shizuoka-ken on his way back to Tokyo, to explain the fact that he didn't die neither in Osaka nor Tokyo? Or maybe it would be better to simplify, and not mention places and simply mention his date of death and the fact that he was still making work plans despite his health problems. But I think it needs a bit of rephrasing.

-MY, OH MY! (mushy yank) 00:42, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

(reply to LS 1) Well, as much as I'd love to make an estimation of how many films he worked on in each position, there wouldn't be any source available to back up the claim and btw last time I checked the page only listed 200 of his films. (reply to LS 2) I'll clean that bit up sometime soon. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 01:31, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your tremendous ongoing work on the page. Adding just one thing: if the end of the LS future version still quotes the titles of his final film projects, maybe add that Princess Kaguya is (obviously) (yet another) (a) remake of the film or at least a new adaptation of the story he had worked on at the beginning of his career. It might be a good way for the LS or the page to come full circle, one of the first films mentioned (with English article) being linked to one of his last projects. It does not matter much, anyway. I would help you directly on the page but am too lazy. Yours, -MY, OH MY! (mushy yank) 10:23, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

This source might help identifying the film project. A 1973 unproduced film project by Hajime Tsuburaya is mentioned on a wiki about Godzilla but I know nothing about it. -MY, OH MY! (mushy yank) 13:22, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm quite sure I've already written about it on Tsuburaya's actual page (and I was the one who added the info on Hajime's unmade project to Wikizilla). Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Support

All points above have been addressed when they could (and one implied a particularly demanding work). I am very glad to fully Support this nomination. This list meets, in my view, all criteria for feature content. (Prose; LS; comprehensiveness; navigability; structure; style; media (only 1 image but it's high-quality; I'm not in favour of a collection of Godzilla posters here.) Stability is more than clear as this is the work of one person. So I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Eiga-Kevin2 for this superb achievement based on his deep knowledge of the Master's works .-MY, OH MY! (mushy yank) 06:30, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Source review – Pass

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 12:58, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

• Non (unrelated) source comment: The notes column looks extrememly odd since it is mostly empty. I wonder if you could possibly move the remarks to actual notes, or perhaps include them underneath the movie titles (i.e.

  <br/><small>(Uncredited)</small>

  after "The Adventure in Taklamakan" Aza24 (talk) 14:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Formatting

Bibliography

• Galbraith is not used in the list. Either delete or move to further reading
• Asano is missing publisher
• Not sure about "ASCII MEDIA WORKS" is all caps. The target article has "ASCII Media Works"
• "May 6, 2014" is the only exact date you have for books. Recommend just 2014
• You might consider adding url-access=registration for Ryfle 1998 & 2017
• The biggest inconsistency is the linking of publishers. Sometimes they are linked (i.e. Chikuma Shobō), sometimes they are not (i.e. McFarland). There is three solutions: link them all, link none of them or link only the first mentions.

Citations

• Trans-title for ref 13?

Reliability

• Is there no better source than the 1959 Motion Picture Herald? 60 years is rather old

Verifiability

• ref 3 should be "pp." and have an en dash instead of hyphen (like your other multi-page refs)
• Page number for Asano 2019?
• Spot-checked a few refs and found no issues. Aza24 (talk) 14:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I think I've fixed mostly everything you suggested. I don't know the page number for Asano's book sorry so I may just need to remove it and can remove the old Motion Picture Herald trade paper if you want me to. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:32, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Looking better Eiga-Kevin2. There are really two outstanding issues: two sources are unused but listed in the sources section. I've just now removed them, feel free to include them in citations or move them into further reading if you'd prefer. Looks good though. Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 17:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Image review and general comments from BennyOnTheLoose

Image review

• I agree with Mushy Yank above. I'm not sure if that was a formal image review, so I'm doing one here. Image has a PD licence; it's relevant and suitably positioned and captioned. Optionally, ALT text could be added per MOS:ALT.
• Pass for image review. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

General comments

• Great work on the article, thank you. Feel free to challenge any of my suggestions. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

I have made some edits based on your recommendations, and I hope you find them acceptable. Please tell me if you want anything else fixed. Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 02:30, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

@BennyOnTheLoose: I've added all your suggestions now I think! Eiga-Kevin2 (talk) 21:03, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

• Popularly known as the "Father of Tokusatsu" for his techniques in special effects.. Consider briefly explaining Tokusatsu in the text here so that readers not familiar with the term don't have to preview or visit the link to know what it's about.
• Similarly, for jidaigeki
• I think and had his breakthrough in effects could be clearer - I wasn't sure what this meant.
• Tsuburaya transitioned from Kyoto to Tokyo in - transitioned seems like an off word here to me; was it more than him just moving?
• Thereafter, feels redundant.
• directed the effects for the Kajirō Yamamoto-directed - if possible, replace one instance of "directed" to avoid repetition. (I'm not sure whether something like ""supervised the effects" is appropriate)
• the highest-grossing Japanese film in history upon its release = I think "upon its release" could be removed.
• His efforts, cited as behind its major critical and commercial success - slightly awkward phrasing IMO. Maybe something like "His efforts were regarded as a significant factor in its major critical and commercial success, and"?
• He, therefore, created his own independent effects - I'd suggest losing the "therefore" as it didn't automatically follow that he would do this.

General comments continued

• In 1963, he earned Japan Technical Award - amend to something like "he earned the Japan Technical Award" or "he earned another Japan Technical Award"
• Also that year, he began preproduction on his recently-founded company's first series that aired on Japanese television in 1966 as Ultra Q and created the special effects for Frank Sinatra's war epic None but the Brave. quite a lot in one sentence that only has one comma.
• Ultraman was released from 1966 to 1967. - to me, something like "screened" or "was broadcast" would be more appropriate than "was released" but I think the current wording is probably technically correct.
• he passed away - he died (see MOS:EUPHEMISM)
• Despite plans to work on Space Amoeba, Japan Airplane Guy, and Princess Kaguya, he passed away in Itō, Shizuoka on January 25, 1970, a day before his scheduled return to Tokyo to begin work for the busy year ahead. - I don't think the "Despite" really works here; the plans wouldn't make his death less likely. I'm also note keen on "the busy year head". I'd suggest rewording, to something like "Tsuburaya planned to work on Space Amoeba, Japan Airplane Guy, and Princess Kaguya, but died in Itō, Shizuoka on January 25, 1970, a day before his scheduled return to Tokyo to begin work on the projects."
• There are a few sentences that start with "In (year)..." - I didn't find this really detracted from my reading the text, but you could look to reword some of them.

• Support, as the comments I had have been addressed. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 15:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [18].

---

Daya discography

Nominator(s): NØ 04:22, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

This is the discography of American singer Daya. As you will see, the girl is a bit of a flop, especially nowadays... It's been a while since I've done this so please bear with me on anything obvious and I'll be proactive in fixing it. Thanks a lot to everyone who will take the time to give their feedback here.--NØ 04:22, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude

• In the interest of not simply supporting without picking anything up, I'll note that "went top 10 in several other countries" is ever so slightly slangy/journalese and I would suggest changing it to "reach the top 10 in several other countries". That's it, though! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Addressed! Much thanks for giving this list a read, ChrisTheDude :) --NØ 14:03, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:05, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

Nice to see you back in the FLC space. I still think "Sit Still, Look Pretty" since the first time I've heard it. It's unfortunate that her career hasn't taken off since.

• and it earned a Gold certification in the former country. -- earning a Gold certification in the former; I think it can do without country or you could state RIAA being the certifying body (that works too, but would be a longer read.).

• Done.

• The album was additionally supported by the single "Words" (2016). -- perhaps you could say a second single, "Word", was released in 2016 or somewhere along those lines.

• There's some purposeful ambiguity here because both "Hide Away" and "Sit Still, Look Pretty" were included on the EP as well. I haven't been able to find secondary sources clarifying whether they consider "Words" the third, second or lead single from the album.

• That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. In that case the current woring wording fine.

• I think that's it from me. The tables seem to be in good order. Wonderful work. Pseud 14 (talk) 14:52, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Much thanks for the review, Pseud 14!--NØ 16:25, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support. If you have some spare time, hoping I could get your input in my FLC  :) Pseud 14 (talk) 16:35, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• Two of the Sverigetopplistan links need to be identified as Swedish-language links, and the FIMI link is in Italian. The German and Dutch links also need this. (I can't evaluate the foreign-language links.) One Sverigetopplistan link and the Instagram link need retrieval dates. Also, source reviewers may want to look at the Instagram, Twitter and Dropbox links; I'm not sure how to evaluate these. I'm not sure what the requirements are for "partial subscription needed" and "subscription needed" tags.
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. You've got two prose reviews so far; I'll skip that part. There are no sortable columns. I sampled the links in the tables.
• 2. Otherwise, the lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. I didn't find any sourcing or retrieval-date problems except as noted above. The list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any other problems (but this isn't a source review).
• 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 one image seems fine.
• 6. It is stable. - Dank (push to talk) 22:20, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot for accepting my request, Dank!! This really is a big help. All issues fixed. The Instagram and Twitter sources are Daya's own personal accounts that I have used in a generally acceptable and uncontroversial way. As for ARIA releasing their certifications on Dropbox, it has always been bizarre but that is just the way it is unfortunately.--NØ 22:44, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

• Glad I could help. I anticipate supporting after I have a look at what the source reviewer(s) say(s). - Dank (push to talk) 23:18, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

• The social media sources are WP:ABOUTSELF, most appropriate thing we could use for single designation in absence of secondary sources, and the Dropbox link is literally the only place Australian certifications are uploaded, linked on their official website and in use on proactively maintained high-profile FLCs like Taylor Swift singles discography but whatever floats your boat.--NØ 00:56, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

• That sounds reasonable to me. I'm mainly trying to communicate with whoever does the source review ... I'm saying that I've covered a lot of it, but there are things I haven't covered because they go past what I know. - Dank (push to talk) 19:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support. - Dank (push to talk) 22:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Source review by MyCatIsAChonk

Seems like you've justified the social media sources above, so I won't worry about those. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

• MOS:CONFORMTITLE, the citation titles should be all title case (seeing as most are already that way). Only one I can spot is refs 61 and 68, but there may be others.

MaranoFan, can't spot any others formatting or reliability issues. Nice job. Spotcheck below, choosing refs at random. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

• Ref 3 (Weatherby 2017): good
• Ref 6 (Leight 2016): good
• Ref 10 (Sverigetopplistan): The link just goes to the singles list, which shows this week's top singles- the link should go to a page in their archives. Ref does not content.
• Ref 12 (Lipshutz 2021): good
• Ref 14 (Daya Chart History, Billboard): good
• Ref 18 (Irish Charts): good
• Ref 23 (swedishcharts.com): good
• Ref 27 (Recorded Music NZ): good
• Ref 34 (ARIA): good
• Ref 38 (Apple Music AU): good
• Ref 61 (RIAA): the text says it's certified 9x platinum, source says 10x
• Ref 71 (Bein 2018): good
• Ref 75 (Russian 2016): good

Issues with refs 10 and 61. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 15:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the source review, MyCatIsAChonk! A huge relief after how long this nomination has waited. Fixes done on 10 and 61.--NØ 20:07, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Support sources- ping for @Dank, since he was waiting on a source review. By the way, if you ever get the time, I got an FLC open here. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

• Comment: Giants2008/PresN I would really like a status update on this nomination. I'm seeing several FLCs promoted within the past year either entirely without a media review or with a coord doing it (including one with a single support and no source review??). Dank is converted to a support now, btw. Kindly help me understand what's needed here. If I am ignored again, I will feel forced to raise a discussion about this.--NØ 23:37, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
  • @MaranoFan: I see we have four supports, a source review, and that Dank checked the images. Barring further review, I'd think this is in line for promotion in the next round of closures. Cheers. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:54, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 15:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [19].

---

95th Academy Awards

Nominator(s): Birdienest81talk and RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

We are nominating the 2023 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, 2021, 2022 ceremonies were written. Birdienest81talk 21:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

• Halle Berry who won for performance in 2001's Monster's Ball. -- who won for her performance in...
• Link to Halle Berry's wiki article, since it is the first instance in the prose.
• after Haing S. Ngor who won the same category for his role -- who won in the same category for his role
• last year's decision to presented eight below-the-line -- to present
• in the vent a similar altercation -- in the event of a similar alteraction
• or unexpected fiasco arose -- should an unexpected fiasco arose or if an unexpected fiasco arose
• winners names -- should be possessive as in winners' names
• or images form the nominated films -- from the nominated films
• According the red carpet consultant Lisa Love -- According to
• That's it from me. Enjoyed watching this ceremony and one of the best (IMO) in last couple of years. Pseud 14 (talk) 13:44, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

• @Pseud 14: Done - I have made all the corrections based on your comments. Thank you for your feedback.

--Birdienest81talk 19:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

• Changes look good to me Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 19:39, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Pamzeis

I've never seen an Oscars ceremony because... they're really long, and I can just look up the results and watch random bits and bobs on YouTube. I will try not to screw this up

• Check for MOS:LQ issues
• I could be mistaken, but lead doesn't mention anything from #Critical reviews?
  • Not every section has to be covered, at least by my reading of MOS:LEADREL; here, it focuses on the key items (namely, the major dates, crew, and winners) in line with previous years. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• "the third pair of directors to" — is "of directors" necessary? What other pairs could the have been winning in the "Best Director" category?
• "directors to win the aforementioned category for the" — "aforementioned" feels a bit clunky... can we just say "win in that category"?
  • I thought "pair" instead of "pair of directors" felt a bit awkward, so I tried a slightly different wording to address the two points above. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• "since the 7th ceremony were held in" — "were held" is unnecessary unless there's something I'm missing?
• "who won the same category for his role" — "the same category" is already implied
• "The 42-year span between Judd Hirsch's first nomination for his supporting role in 1980's Ordinary People and his latest one in the same category for The Fabelmans set the record for the longest gap between career Oscar nominations." — I'm confused. This sentence doesn't mention what category he's nominated in (even though it's sorta implied) so "the same category" is meaningless. Also, is it even relevant what category he was nominated in? And I'm also not sure what "career Oscar nominations" means...? (OK, now I'm confused by what I wrote in this comment, so.......)
• "oldest person nominated competitively" could be linked to List of oldest and youngest Academy Award winners and nominees#Superlatives (though that page is outdated)
• ""We are thrilled to have Glenn and Ricky at the helm. We look forward to working closely with them, our Board of Governors and the Board's Awards Committee to deliver an exciting and energized show," remarked AMPAS president Janet Yang and CEO Bill Kramer." — this is a pretty long quote that doesn't have much meaning. I assume at every Oscars ceremony the Academy want to deliver an "exciting and energized show" regardless of its producers. Is it possible for this to be trimmed?
• "Either way, I am grateful to the Academy for asking me so quickly after everyone good said no." — seems like a random quip Kimmel made? I don't really understand why it warrants inclusion...
  • I'd say it reflects/comments on the general difficulty in finding hosts that the Oscars has faced for a few years. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• Is there any information on what the "crisis team" does? (Like, are they security guards or something?)
  • Nope, the cited article just calls it that. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
• "would perform the song during the ceremony" — remove "during the ceremony" as redundant
• "the film's Instagram account was criticized" — by whom?
• "Critical reviewes" — typo?
• Any curly apostrophes (’) → straight apostrophes (') per MOS:CONFORM
• You've probably seen this brought up a million times but the Critical reviews section is mostly made up of the "X said Y" structure, which, to be honest, can get pretty boring. WP:RECEPTION can be a pretty helpful guide for this (you've probably seen that essay brought up a million times too)

Overall, this is a pretty good article, and I can definitely see it getting to FL status. However, at the current moment, I'm leaning oppose as I feel it doesn't meet the "professional standards of writing" required. I'm 100% expecting (and hoping for) that to change... but right now... that's my position. Best of luck with this article. Pamzeis (talk) 08:52, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

@Pamzeis: I've either addressed your feedback above or edited the article accordingly; let me know if anything should be tweaked. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for your changes. I'm happy to support on prose now. Pamzeis (talk) 04:21, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• Kimmel image caption needs a full stop
• "negative feedback regarding last year's decision" => "negative feedback regarding the previous year's decision"
• "Many consider Merle Oberon who was nominated for her role in 1935's The Dark Angel to be" => "Many consider Merle Oberon, who was nominated for her role in 1935's The Dark Angel, to be"
• That's it I think. Great work once again! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:58, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: All done. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Comment there's a giant gap in the Films with multiple nominations and awards subsection. I figured a while back that you need to remove the float command from the tables to get rid of the gap.—indopug (talk) 02:04, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it's the tables, it's something with {{col-float}}. When that template is added, the first text (or table) in that section appears no higher than the top of the last image included before that template. The same issue exists at other articles (for instance, 74th Primetime Emmy Awards, which doesn't include a float parameter in the tables). I can ask about it at the template talk page. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:19, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 15:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 7 August 2023 (UTC) [20].

---

List of Mckenna Grace performances

Nominator(s): Pamzeis (talk) 13:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Mckenna Grace is an actress who has appeared in Captain Marvel, Young Sheldon, Once Upon a Time, The Young and the Restless, Annabelle Comes Home, Ghostbusters: Afterlife, A Friend of the Family, I, Tonya, Malignant, Chilling Adventures of Sabrina, CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, The Angry Birds Movie, The Vampire Diaries, K.C. Undercover, Scoob!, Spirit Untamed, The Lion Guard and The Haunting of Hill House. That's literally just a quarter of her roles. And also, she's 17.

With over 70 credits, Grace is the most prolific child actor ever, with more credits than the biggest child actors like Shirley Temple, and Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen. She's also well-known for her portrayal of younger versions of many Hollywood stars, including Margot Robbie, Brie Larson, Amanda Seyfried, Jennifer Morrison and Candice King. Just watch her performance in Gifted or The Handmaid's Tale and you'll understand how exceptional she is. Pamzeis (talk) 13:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• Why's the lead image on the left? It doesn't look right IMO
  • Well, I put the image on the left so that Grace doesn't look away from the article. I've changed the image and moved it back to the right now.
• "Grace booked her first part in a commercial at five years old"- "booked" makes it sound like she arranged it all herself. She may be exceptional but I doubt she was doing that at the age of five. maybe "Grace secured her first....".....?
  • Done
• In the film table, if you sort in date order, "TBA" sorts at the start, before 2013. I would suggest it should sort last, after 2023.
  • Done
• In the music video table, you have "herself" as the artist for every entry. Is that not redundant given that it's a list of her performances?
  • Removed
• That's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:15, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
  • BTW I am on holiday after tonight, I'll check back when I get back -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:35, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

    @ChrisTheDude: I believe I've resolved them all your comments. Have a great holiday! Pamzeis (talk) 03:50, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

• I think it would be better to have ref 1 placed outside of the enclosure, and not inside.
  • Not done per MOS:CITEPUNCT, which recommends that refs be placed inside brackets if it only applies to the material inside (i.e. here it is only citing that she was born in 2006)
• For this part Grace starred in the Ghostbusters (1984) and Ghostbusters II (1989) sequel Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)., since she only appeared in the 2021 film, I would suggest maybe saying she starred in the Ghostbusters franchise installment OR sequel film Ghostbusters: Afterlife
  • Revised
• For accessibility, per MOS:DTAB Tables need captions- e.g. at the top of each table code put `|+ table_caption_text`. You can hide it from visual browsers like |+ {{sronly|table_caption_text}} as in this example or have it shown as in this example. This allows non-visual screen reader software to jump straight to a named table without having to read out all the text above it to find it. It's already in use under the Extended Plays table, the rest should have the same.
  • Done
• That's it from me. Solid work and I enjoyed her stint in Young Sheldon. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:38, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you for your comments, Pseud 14! I have hopefully addressed them all. Let me know if I should make any further changes! Pamzeis (talk) 05:49, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 12:45, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Media review — pass

• File:Mckenna Grace 2023 (cropped).jpg occurs in a video still available under the CC license on YouTube, as claimed by the licensing.

Source review — pass

• It might be better to have ref 1 outside of the closing bracket here: "(born 2006[1])", as it currently looks a bit odd.
  • Well, MOS:CITEPUNCT recommends putting the ref inside the bracket if it's only citing material inside
• WP:RSPSS seems to regard BuzzFeed's quality as "highly inconsistent", a better source would be needed for the claim made here.
  • Removed claim
• Insider is questionable according to RSPSS as well. Any possible alternatives?
  • Replaced
• BroadwayWorld is an unreliable source
  • Apologies for asking, but why? Because the site seems to accept corrections and have an editorial team. It's also been cited by NPR, Observer, TV Guide, CNN and Time. LATimes called it "an indispensable resource" per its second AfD.
    • WP:RSPSS has it in light red, indicating that it is deemed "generally unreliable". This discussion also gave me some pause. Since it regurgitates press release material, it might be fine on a regular article but probably not featured content.--NØ 15:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
      • Understood. Removed all instances of the source.​ Pamzeis (talk) 03:15, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
• Is The Cinemaholic reliable?
  • The site claims to perform extensive fact-checking and "do not accept unsolicited guest articles, blogs, or posts". It's also been cited by Women's Health, SCMP and Elle, among others.
• Bloody Disgusting is not italicized on its article.
  • Adjusted
• I'm not sure about J-14 as this seems to be a gossip magazine. Couldn't the music video just be sourced to its YouTube upload?
  • I'm mean, yes, but I've tried to use secondary sources where possible. I found instances of J-14 being cited by Teen Vogue and NYDN, but I can remove it if needed.
• Spotchecks passed.
• Other than that, the list is reliably sourced with a consistent format. Great work!--NØ 08:25, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for your comments! I've responded to them above.​ Pamzeis (talk) 14:54, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

• The replacements and explanations all look good to me. Passing the source review. Good luck with the nomination!--NØ 05:57, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

MyCatIsAChonk

Support- it seems the other reviewers have gotten everything, very nice article! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:12, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:08, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

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