Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log

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

This is a log of featured lists from Wikipedia:Featured list candidates, with the most recent at the top. Discussions about unsuccessful nominations are located in the failed log.

Candidacy discussion about lists promoted in this calendar month is being placed at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/April 2025. Summary logs of articles promoted by year are also maintained; the most recent log is at Wikipedia:Featured lists promoted in 2025.

Full current month log

view - edit - history

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, 13 April 2025 (UTC) [1].

---

U.S. Figure Skating Championships

Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because this is one of the flagship articles of the Figure Skating WikiProject and should be of the highest quality. The results are all sourced and documented, the tables are properly formatted, a well-sourced history is provided and I believe the sources are properly formatted, and relevant photographs are used to reflect both the present-day and historical contexts. Please let me know if you have any suggestions or comments, and thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

TheDoctorWho

Image review

• The image in the Infobox has been uploaded to Wikipedia under a fair-use license and has a proper non-free rationale listed.
• All other images were uploaded to Commons under CC-By licenses
• All images have proper captions and alt text included

General comments

• United States can be delinked in the Infobox per MOS:OVERLINK
• "There were no interruptions due to World War II as there had been during World War I; only the senior men's events were cancelled in 1944 and 1945 - would the lack of men's events not be an interruption? Not a full one as in WWI, of course, but still "interrupts" from the events that were typically held
• "was also on the flight." -> "was on the flight as well." - just a suggestion to avoid two "also"'s so close together
• I don't think it would hurt to link to the three section championship articles in the "Regions and sections" section
• "impact of the COVID-19 pandemic" --> impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on figure skating - more specific link (might have to edit source to get the exact destination)
• I don't know that the paragraph in the "Women's Single" medalist section is needed given that it's also a note in the table and a paragraph in the history section.

Nice work once again, TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:11, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

•  Done TheDoctorWho, All of these were good suggestions. As for the last one, that paragraph was already in place before the history section was expanded; it should have been removed once the Nancy/Tonya fracas was included earlier in the article. Thank you for your assistance! Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:43, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Of course, glad I could help again. Happy to support! TheDoctorWho (talk) 22:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Source review

• Some of the Newspapers.com citations use the wrong page number. Picked up a few during a spotcheck:
  • Citation 90: "p. 51" is actually p. 1D.
  • Citation 92: "p. 58" is actually "sec. 4, p. 1".
  • Citation 205: "p. 33" is actually "part III, p. 5".
  • Citation 206: "p. 66" is actually p. 2D.
  • Citation 247: p. 88 is actually "sec. 3, p. 6".

•  Done I have audited all of the Newspapers.com citations to correct any errors in page numbers. Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:14, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• Newspaper citations have repeated links, but Skating does not? This should be rectified.

• I do not understand what you mean here; please clarify. Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:14, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• Skating has no link to Skating (magazine) (which could be redirected to US Figure Skating, but also could be notable enough for an article). I also strongly recommend adding the ISSN number (0037-6132) and/or OCLC number to the citations as well. SounderBruce 03:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

•  Done Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

• U.S. Figure Skating citations use work parameter instead of publisher, which does not seem to be correct.

•  Done I have altered the parameter for items which were documents and not websites. Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:24, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• Citation 15 is missing access-date information.

• As the original link is dead, I don't have an access date. Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:14, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• An access-date should still be possible for an archived link. SounderBruce 03:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

•  Done Bgsu98 (Talk) 06:10, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

• Citation 16 is missing access-date information and a link to Slate.
• Citation 25 is missing author and date information; should also be marked as subscriber-only access.
• Citation 27 should use U.S. Figure Skating in its publisher field to prevent it from appearing like a fansite.

•  Done These should all be corrected. The Washington Post article (citation 25) does not appear to have an author.

Will take a deeper look later. SounderBruce 02:40, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• User:SounderBruce, please let me know other concerns you might have. Thank you for taking the time to audit this article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:24, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey man im josh & TheDoctorWho, I have not received a response to my followup on March 24. You're both good with sources; can you tell me what the second bullet point above is in reference to? Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:01, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

I am not entirely sure honestly. The way it was written, it sounds as if Skating (the magazine) used as a reference was linked in some places but not others and that Newspapers.com is linked on every usage. However, after looking it at myself it doesn't appear that Skating is linked anywhere and I couldn't locate an article for this magazine. Pinging @SounderBruce: again for a potential response, just in case this slipped past their notifications.

As a side note, I noticed that U.S. Figure Skating is italicized in some sources (4, 9) but not in others (1, 12). There may be more instances, but I just noticed those on a first glance, it should also be consistent. TheDoctorWho (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

TheDoctorWho, this was in response to the third bullet point above. I substituted "publisher" for "website" on sources that were PDFs, but not for genuine websites. The formatting seems to italicize websites, but not publishers. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:06, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, I was going through with a few spotchecks and got a little sidetracked with other stuff. Went ahead and fixed a few remaining formatting issues, but there's two points remaining, Bgsu98. SounderBruce 03:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

• SounderBruce, everything should be addressed as you suggested. There are a lot of citations, so it's always possible I missed one, but I think I caught them all. Please let me know if you have any further concerns or suggestions, and thank you for your assistance. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)
  • Source review passed. Thanks for your patience, things look great now. SounderBruce 00:43, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

    SounderBruce, Thank you so much! If you have the time and the inclination, I also have World Figure Skating Championships up for FL nomination. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

OlifanofmrTennant

• Consider listing the state name next to the city
  • I'm afraid this would make the tables excessively bulky, and it's also contrary to how tables on similar articles are set up. I wouldn't feel comfortable making this change unilaterally, but I can post on the Figure Skating WikiProject to solicit feedback from others. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:24, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
• "Theresa Weld of the United States won the women's event." I don't think "of the United States" is needed because this is about the American contest
  • I think the only reason that is there is because I had just finished identifying the two skaters from Canada who won two of the three events, and this was the clarify that the third champion at the U.S. Championships was actually an American skater. Canadians used to compete at the early U.S. Championships, and vice versa; Americans could compete at the early Canadian Championships. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
• Move ref 1 away from the section heading
  • That is the only place where that statement ("The event is organized by U.S. Figure Skating, the sport's national governing body") is made. Unless you would prefer the source be put in the infobox. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

  If the only other place where it would apply is the infobox then move it there. Per WP:CITEFOOT "Citations should not be placed within, or on the same line as, section headings." Olliefant (she/her) 21:39, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

  @Bgsu98: Olliefant (she/her) 21:40, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

  @OlifanofmrTennant:, I'm not sure that's technically a section heading, but I've moved it to the infobox either way. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:48, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

• For ties put both in the gold column and use {{N/A}} for the silver column
  •  Done. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
• Why no competition in 1919?
  • I think it was the Spanish Flu, but I have never seen an actual reason given for all of the 1919 sports competitions that were cancelled worldwide. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
• Move the ref in the gold column to the ref column. Rename "Ref" to "Ref(s)"
  •  Done That source was leftover from when many of the cells were empty, as it only confirms the gold medalists in each event. Since the sources down the righthand column now confirm everything in the row, including the gold medalist, so I've just removed them. It's still a good source, so I put it down at the bottom of the article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Thats what I found ping when done Olliefant (she/her) 17:42, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

OlifanofmrTennant, please let me know if you have any other concerns or suggestions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:25, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Support Olliefant (she/her) 00:30, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

TheUzbek

• The sentences "The U.S. Figure Skating Championships are held annually to crown the national champions of the United States." and "The event is organized by U.S. Figure Skating, the sport's national governing body." should be merged. For example, "The U.S. Figure Skating Championships, organised by the national governing body U.S. Figure Skating, are held annually to crown the national champions of the United States.
  • This is boilerplate text across all of these national championships articles. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

  That's not a great argument, really! You are nominating this for FA, that is, you are trying to make it better than all those other articles. TheUzbek (talk) 04:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

  • • That's a fair point. The merged sentence reads awkwardly to me, and I did hone this language for the lead to be used across the series of articles, many of which I'm hoping to elevate to FL (Ukrainian Figure Skating Championships has already been elevated to FL).
• "The competition's results are among the criteria used to determine the American teams to the World Championships, World Junior Championships, Four Continents Championships, and Winter Olympics." To me, this sounds awkward.
  •  Done Slightly modified. I'm not sure how else to word it. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
• Why did a Canadian win the first event? Isn't this a US-only event?
  • Canadians and Americans competed at each other's events early on. Go figure. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

  That needs to be stated. TheUzbek (talk) 04:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

  • •  Done It sure does!
• "There were no total interruptions to the championships due to World War II as there had been during World War I; only the senior men's events were cancelled in 1944 and 1945, because all but one of the skaters who would have competed had enlisted in the military" ---> "No total disruption" sounds awkward to me.
  •  Done I reworded this slightly. This had been in response to a suggestion made above. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
• "It took the rest of the decade for U.S. figure skating to recover from the sudden loss of so many top-tier athletes and other related personnel. " ---> rewrite
  •  Done I just deleted it. Someone else added that text, and it really has nothing to do with the U.S. Championships.
• "Photographs of the champions from the event show four medalists on the podium, and while the caption identifies the fourth-place medalist as simply "fourth", they are clearly seen wearing a medal." ---> is this sentence needed? Do people dispute this fact?
  •  Done I thought someone might. As no one has, I've removed the whole paragraph and relocated the citation to the lead paragraph where the pewter medals are mentioned. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
• "which had always been a required element of men's and women's single skating" ---> "which had been a required element of men's and women's single skating"
  •  Done Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
• I feel like the history section is more about athletes than the actual competition itself, how it was organised et. cetra.
  • Well, those are the major events in the history of the competition. The plane crash immediately after the 1961 championships, Tonya and Nancy, the plane crash after the 2025 championships. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
• I don't have any comments regarding the actual list! --TheUzbek (talk) 11:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
  • TheUzbek, thank you for your feedback. Please let me know if you have any other concerns or suggestions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
    • TheUzbek, I have addressed your follow-up comments. Please let me know if you have any other suggestions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

      I still don't like this sentence structure: "The U.S. Figure Skating Championships are held annually to crown the national champions of the United States. Skaters compete in men's singles, women's singles, pair skating, and ice dance at the senior and junior levels. The event is organized by U.S. Figure Skating, the sport's national governing body.[1] Pewter medals have been awarded to the fourth-place finishers in each event since 1988."

      First, you introduce the competition, then jump to the competitions in the championships, then who organizes the competition, and then the pewter medals. This all seems a bit random to me! TheUzbek (talk) 06:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

      TheUzbek, I moved the bit about the pewter medals down to the history section, although I'm not sure it really belongs there either. It needs to be somewhere, since pewter medals are unique to the U.S. Championships. I don't think the rest of the first paragraph is made up of random elements since they all highlight the main features of the championships. I did reorder the sentences, and added a sentence indicating the first year the event took place. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

      Look at these FLs: List of World Chess Championships, CMLL World Women's Championship, List of World Rally Championship Drivers' champions, World Women's Billiards Championship and List of World Snooker Championship winners. These are all good examples of leads. I literally feel that your first paragraph could be split into three to four separate ones. To compare, in the list, List of World Rally Championship Drivers' champions, each sentence in the first paragraph of the lead builds upon information in the last sentence. That is a very good lead. TheUzbek (talk) 12:41, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

      TheUzbek, I have re-worked the lead to follow European Figure Skating Championships, although I ended up splitting the paragraph into two. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:58, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

      Way, way better! :) Small thing, this sentence:

      Medals are awarded in men's singles, women's singles, pair skating, and ice dance at the senior and junior levels. Skaters may qualify for the national championships by competing at either the Pacific Coast Sectional Finals, Eastern Sectional Finals, Midwestern Sectional Finals, U.S. Ice Dance Finals, or U.S. Pairs Finals. The results of the competition are among the criteria used to determine the American teams to the World Championships, World Junior Championships, Four Continents Championships, and Winter Olympics.

      should be changed to this:

      Skaters may qualify for the national championships by competing at either the Pacific Coast Sectional Finals, Eastern Sectional Finals, Midwestern Sectional Finals, U.S. Ice Dance Finals, or U.S. Pairs Finals. Medals are awarded in men's singles, women's singles, pair skating, and ice dance at the senior and junior levels. The results of the competition are among the criteria used to determine the American teams to the World Championships, World Junior Championships, Four Continents Championships, and Winter Olympics.

      Why? Skater, qualification, medal results/prizes, and qualifying seem more logical than medal results/prizes, skaters, qualification, and qualifying, at least to me. TheUzbek (talk) 14:06, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

       Done That was an easy fix. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:18, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

      Support TheUzbek (talk) 04:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Promoted. --PresN 22:16, 12 April 2025 (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) 00:26, 13 April 2025 (UTC) [2].

---

List of World Heritage Sites in Belgium

Nominator(s): Tone 10:54, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

It's been a while since the last WHS list from Europe, so, here comes Belgium. 16 sites and 15 tentative sites. Standard style. For some reason, the archive link tool does not work for the last couple of refs but I suppose we will figure this out eventually. The list for Mongolia is already seeing support so I am adding a new nomination. Tone 10:54, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Image review by Arconning

• File:Belgium location map.svg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Leuven-Groot-Begijnhof.jpg - Public Domain
• File:Canal du Centre, l'Ascenseur No. 3.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Brussels floral carpet B.jpg - Various
• File:The Cloth Hall, Ypres, Belgium.jpg - CC BY 2.0
• File:Bruegge huidenvettersplein.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Tassel House stairway.JPG - Public Domain
• File:Minières néolithiques de silex - Spiennes (1).jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:ID57081-CLT-0002-01-Tournai cathédrale-PM 02391.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Library of Plantin-Moretus Museum in Antwerp.jpg - Public Domain
• File:20120815 Zonienwoud (6).JPG - CC BY 3.0
• File:Woluwe-St-Pierre - Hoffmann 050917 (1).jpg - CC BY 2.5
• File:Bois du Cazier 2.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Antwerp Corbusier Maison Guiette 01.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Spa JPG01.jpg - CC BY 2.0
• File:Bewakerswoningen, Kolonie 12-13, Wortel.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Lijssenthoek Milit. Cemetery. Rijen graven.JPG - Various
• File:Gravensteen, Gent.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Antwerpen, Gildehäuser.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:2011-09-24 17.42 Leuven, universiteitsbibliotheek ceg74154 foto4.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Galeries Royales Saint-Hubert.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Bloemenwerf - Henry Van de Velde - 1896.jpg - Public Domain, source link needs to be fixed for WP:V
• File:Palais de Justice from Hilton.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Fagne.Ardenne.JPG - CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Liège - Palais des Princes-Evêques.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Braine-L'Alleud - Butte du Lion dite de Waterloo.jpg - CC BY 3.0
• File:Panorama de la Bataille de Waterloo 03.JPG - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:91034-CLT-0001-01 (5).jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Eisden Schachtbokken.jpg - CC BY 4.0
• File:Spygrot.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Lessines hopiral cloitre.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
  • All images have proper licensing, have alt-text, and are relevant to the article. The one issue just needs fixing. Arconning (talk) 00:57, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

  I replaced the photo with a more current one. Tone 08:45, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

  Support per image review. Arconning (talk) 12:50, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Hey man im josh

Source review: Passed

• Reliable enough for the information being cited
• Consistent date formatting
• Consistent and proper reference formatting
• Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
• Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for

Feedback:

• Ref 38 – Missing publisher
• Ref 39 – Missing publisher
• Ref 3 – Lists publisher as just "UNESCO", whereas everything else linked from that site uses "UNESCO World Heritage Centre"
• Ref 4 – Seems the publisher should probably be World Heritage Committee
• All 39 references are from UNESCO. This could use at least a few references that show SIGCOV. I'm aware this would never get deleted, but it's certainly not ideal to have this article be entirely primary sources.

Please ping me when you reply. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks! Hm, adding the published for 38 and 39 still won't make the bot archive them. As for the references, UNESCO ones are the relevant ones, everything else is either derivative or not about why certain sites are listed or nominated. Tone 16:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Support. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

IntentionallyDense

• This is my first prose review on a features level article so please be patient with me.
• 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. for each example (aside from natural sites) you include examples in brackets but for natural sites you just put it with the rest of the text. I wonder if there is a way to fix up this sentence so that all further explanations are either included in brackets or not.
  • I'd keep it as such, we've been using this intro for a while. Of course, open to a better wording.
• I don\t believe countries need wikilinks
  • I think I only link Belgium, which seems appropriate here.
• Belgium has 16 sites inscribed on the list. The first sites to be added to the list were the Flemish Béguinages, the Grand-Place in Brussels and the lifts on the Canal du Centre, at the 22nd UNESCO session in 1998. I may be overthinking this but were these both added in 1998?
  • Yes, all three were added in 1998, sometimes several are added at the same session, if this is what you are asking?
• The most recent inscriptions were the Funerary and memory sites of the First World War (Western Front), a transnational site shared with France. the use of plural and singular language here makes it hard to tell if you are referring to one site or more than one site and if all the sites are shared with France.
• for abbreviations such as ft and mi consider using the abbreviation template
  • I rewrote it, maybe now is better.
• Wikilink mercantile
  • Done, link to trade.
• "People were using different extraction techniques" may sound better as "people used..."
  • Changed.
• I think "The architecture reflect" is supposed to be "reflects"
  • Fixed, thanks for spotting this :)
• "The Plantin Press was one of the three leading printing centres in Europe, along with Paris and Venice." I'm a little confused here, aren't Paris and Venice apart of Europe?
  • They are, I list all three cities with presses. Looks fine to me?
• That's all I have for now, ping me when you can get back to me on this! IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 02:52, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

  Pinging @Tone for follow-up. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:39, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

  • @IntentionallyDense: I'm through, thanks for the comments! --Tone 17:15, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

    Thanks, all of your responses make sense. Support. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 18:33, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Promoted. --PresN 22:15, 12 April 2025 (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, 13 April 2025 (UTC) [3].

---

List of Philadelphia Eagles seasons

Nominator(s): Hey man im josh (talk) 20:49, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Taking a break from the Olympic medal table lists to nominate the list of seasons for the reigning Super Bowl champions, the Philadelphia Eagles. This is my fifth NFL team seasons list and, as always, I will do my best to respond in a timely fashion and to address any and all questions, issues, and critiques that are brought up. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:49, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Source review

• Formatting is consistent.
• Ref 6: DAZN doesn't seem to have strong editorial standards. This one should be easy to replace, and move up to support the preceding sentence.
  • Ref 2 can similarly be replaced.
• Ref 78: ": The..." is not part of the headline.
• Notes H and J: "American conference" etc. are proper nouns, so conference should be capitalized.

That's all I have. SounderBruce 21:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look and providing a review @SounderBruce. For basic information about the NFL I felt as though DAZN is a suitable source. You'd also be surprised how difficult is actually is to source some of the very basic information we take for granted. I find the DAZN source states things in a more direct way than some other available sources that expect you to simply know some aspects of the information being verified. In regards to their standards, I don't think they're making any type of leap with the information provided, again just presenting it in a more digestible way for the layman. It's also relevant that they're an official streaming platform for the NFL on a ten year deal (source). With that in mind, I think the source is acceptable, but I understand if you do not and would like to hear that if you don't think the relevant context is acceptable.

As for the conference name stuff, I've fixed that. Regarding ref 78, it actually is part of the headline when I visit the page. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:15, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

The NFL broadcasting deal is what raises a flag for me, as it could affect how impartial their coverage is. In this case, it's not dire so it is acceptable. UPI uses auto-generated titles based on the first few words in content for their older releases, so it should be fixed or replaced with a newspaper's run of the same content (e.g. this clipping) that has a proper title. SounderBruce 22:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

@SounderBruce: I agree, if it were anything less than indisputable information regarding the structure of the league or something similar, I'd be looking elsewhere as well. I'm personally flabbergasted with how the league doesn't just straight up lay out their structure anywhere I can find, and sources are incomplete in their explanations of the conference vs division structure. That's why I resorted to using the DAZN references. As for the UPI ref, I've replaced it with the clipping you've provided, which I'm very much appreciative for. I'll keep this in mind for future UPI reference I find and use, and I'll search for Newspaper replacements for that reason instead. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:18, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Support based on sourcing. Replacing the DAZN source is a nice-to-have rather than a must in this case. SounderBruce 03:07, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• In the lead, Super Bowl LIX is linked but LII is not
• "became the first and only division where every team in it has won at least one Super Bowl" - if it became the first one then it also became the only one by definition. Suggest changing to "became the first division in which every team has won at least one Super Bowl; as of 2025 it remained the only such division"
• "No division has had all of its member" => "No division has had all of its members"
• That's it I think :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:11, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: Thank you for the review and the suggestions, I've made the changes. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:13, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:24, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Comments

I am not very confident in my reviewing capabilities but I have two minor suggestions:

• The lack of daggers and asterisks accompanying coloured cells of the postseason results column. I see that it’s done in other columns, so perhaps it doesn’t need to be done in the results column but I am under the impression that the symbols are supposed to accompany any cell that is coloured for accessibility reasons.
• The wording of "No division has had all of its members make multiple Super Bowl appearances, except for the NFC East, the members of which have all appeared in at least five Super Bowls." feels like it could be streamlined a bit. It just reads clunky to me as the sentence that comes before that is already referring to the NFC East. Like maybe "It is also the only division that has had all of its members make multiple Super Bowl appearances, with at least five each."

— Pyropylon98 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying @Pyropylon98, I've been away for work for most of the last week.

• The lack of daggers and asterisks accompanying coloured cells of the postseason results column. I see that it’s done in other columns, so perhaps it doesn’t need to be done in the results column but I am under the impression that the symbols are supposed to accompany any cell that is coloured for accessibility reasons. – This is actually an intentional thing to limit the spam of symbols and shading. Winning the conference is appropriately highlighted in the conference column, as is the winner of the league in the league column. The colouring is already highlighting / summarizing this aspect of things.
• The wording of "No division has had all of its members make multiple Super Bowl appearances, except for the NFC East, the members of which have all appeared in at least five Super Bowls." feels like it could be streamlined a bit. It just reads clunky to me as the sentence that comes before that is already referring to the NFC East. Like maybe "It is also the only division that has had all of its members make multiple Super Bowl appearances, with at least five each." – I get what you're saying, but your wording didn't feel exactly perfect to me, not that my new wording does either... I changed it to It is also the only division in which all of its members have made multiple Super Bowl appearances, with each team appearing in at least five Super Bowls.

Let me know your thoughts @Pyropylon98, and thanks for taking a look and offering feedback! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Following up on this review, as I haven't heard back from you @Pyropylon98. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:34, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Ah, yeah I read through it earlier, I have no comments, looks good and thanks for clarifying the info on shading/symbols. — Pyropylon98 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

guess i should say support — Pyropylon98 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• Abbreviations such as "WPMOY" should be included in the Legend atop the record-by-season list so that those whose devices don't display abbr/abbrlink will be able to more easily understand what the abbreviations mean.

--MikeVitale 22:30, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey @MikeVitale: Sorry for the delay in responding to this here. Respectfully, I don't think that's necessary in this case because screen readers would still be able to get the relevant information from the abbrvlink, while those on mobile would still be able to preview the link with ease (as I do sometimes on the app). I think it would end up making the legend far too large, and the legend is simply meant to highlight things that are not as easily identifiable and apply to larger parts of the article, as opposed to a specific acronym which is explained with the template. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:28, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Respectfully ... Support.

I have never run across this {{abbrlink}} thing before, so I checked out the page on my phone, looked at the code in my browser, and I learned something new. Thanks! --MikeVitale 01:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Promoted. --PresN 22:16, 12 April 2025 (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, 13 April 2025 (UTC) [4].

---

List of awards and nominations received by Kristen Bell

Nominator(s): Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:31, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

A follow up to my Kristen Bell filmography, I noticed that Bell's article was a GA and thought I'd complete the set Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:31, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• "In 2005, she received for her first award win" => "In 2005, she received her first award win" Done
• "She was nominated for a second time at Golden Globes." - when and for what? Also it should be the Golden Globes Done
• "Bell has never been nominated for at Primetime Emmy Awards," => "Bell has never been nominated for a Primetime Emmy Award," Done
• "which has considered a "snub"" - "has been considered". Also who considers it that - herself? someone else? Done
• As it's a sortable table, works, categories, etc need to be linked each time, not just the first time Done
• Why are the two rows for the Critics' Choice Television Awards not merged, like all the others?
  • Mistake
• Link Teen Choice Awards Done

-- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• • @ChrisTheDude: Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:52, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:18, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey man im josh

This review is based on this version of the article.

Source review: Passed

• Reliable enough for the information being cited
• Consistent date formatting
• Consistent and proper reference formatting
• Appropriate wikilinks where applicable
• Spot checks on 15 sources match what they are being cited for

Feedback:

• Teen Choice Awards should be linked in Awards column Done
• Merge the two "Critics' Choice Television Awards" cells, as you've done with other instances where she's been nominated for the same set of awards over various years Done
• There's inconsistent linking in the works column, Veronica Mars is linked twice and not linked the other two times, forgetting Sarah Marshall is linked on the second appearance instead of the first, personally I'd say just link every time there for when/if people sort, but I'll leave that up to you Done
  • Went with linking everytime but to be clear Veronica Mars wasn't linked twice one linked to the TV show and one to the movie
• Ref 9 and 10 – one uses publisher, the other uses website, be consistent Done
• Refs 11 and 12 – same website as refs 9 and 10, but you're listing a different website. Probably best to just link Gold Derby in all 4
• Ref 11 – has 3 more authors to add Done
• Ref 12 – has 4 more authors to add Done
• Ref 14 – not seeing the author listed at the target, can't find when searching for it either Removed
• Ref 19 – missing a pipe in front of the date parameter Done
• Ref 26 – Same as ref 1, name ref 1 and re-use it Done
• Ref 27 – lists that it was written by Matt Goldberg, but it's also listing "By Steven Weintraub" Done
• Ref 36 – website should simply be Ok! to match the target Done
• Ref 20 – redirects, mark link as dead to use the archive Done
• Ref 7 – author is listed as simply "Pete", not "Peter" Done
• Recommend adding archive links to the sources where you can Done
• The TCA entry for The Good Place sorts different than the rest of the entries for it Done

Please ping me when the above has been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:40, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

@Hey man im josh: done Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:52, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

I'll go ahead n support. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:04, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Comments from TheDoctorWho

• "in a brown leather coat" can probably be removed from the Alt text per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Alternative text for images#Importance of context
• This probably needs a short description per WP:SDLIST, perhaps something like "Accolades for American actress"
• Italicize House of Lies in the lead
• "for a Primetime Emmy Awards" ==> "for a Primetime Emmy Award" OR "for Primetime Emmy Awards" (a is singular, awards is plural, the two should match)
• I may have miscounted, but I believe I only counted a total of 42 total listings in the table, not 43?
  • This said, if the walk of fame is included as a nom, it should also be counted as a win. If you're not counting it as a win, the the total number of noms should be 41.
• The link for Teen Choice Award for Choice Movie Actress – Comedy should be on the first mention (the 2008 ceremony)
• "Year refers to the ceremony at which the award was given" reads a little weird to me, perhaps something like "Year refers to that in which the ceremony took place"? Or something else if you have a better suggestion.
• This would probably make a good external link

Think that's all I have! TheDoctorWho (talk) 19:18, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Pinging @OlifanofmrTennant for followup. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho: done Olliefant (she/her) 18:16, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Support, nice work! TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:46, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Promoted. --PresN 22:16, 12 April 2025 (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, 13 April 2025 (UTC) [5].

---

List of accolades received by Green Book

Nominator(s): Sgubaldo (talk) 18:30, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Green Book follows Frank Vallelonga, who is hired as a chauffeur by Don Shirley for a tour of concert venues in the Deep South. The Sakurai Prize nomination has picked up two supports and passed a source review, so I am adding a second one. Sgubaldo (talk) 18:30, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Source and image review from TheDoctorWho

Comments are based off of this revision:

• List only has two images; one originally uploaded to Flickr under a CC-By license; the other uploaded under CC-0
• Images have captions and alt text
• Ref 5: I'm concerned about the reliability of Box Office Mojo considering it's owned and published by WP:IMDb.
  • As far as I'm aware, BOM does not contain user-generated content like the main IMDb. It's also included in WP:FILMSOURCES.
• Ref 10: Missing a work/website
  • Added.
• Ref 11: Appears this should be url-access=subscription rather than registration
  • Changed.
• Ref 12: Missing a work/website
  • Added.
• Ref 14: Needs url-access=subscription
  • Added.
• Ref 15: Website needs piped to Salon
  • Sure, changed.
• Ref 17: WP:NEWSWEEK is unreliable post-2013
  • Replaced with a Vanity Fair one.
• Ref 31: Missing a work/website
  • Added.
• Ref 41: Needs an Italian language tag
  • Added.
• Ref 63: Needs a Japanese language tag
  • Added.
• Ref 66: Has a listed author that needs added
  • Added.
• Ref 82: Still has a form of live link just needs swapped out and updated
  • Changed.
• Ref 90: Dead link
  • Removed url-status=live.
• Spot checked references 2, 15, 19, 24, 27, 36, 41, 46, 50, 54, 60, 68, 70, 74, 81, 85, 92, 94
  • Ref 2: Doesn't confirm Victor Hugo Green as the author
    • Added another source to back this up.

No major issues here, just a few things to address. TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:02, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho, done. Sgubaldo (talk) 15:08, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Nice work, source and image reviews pass! TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:08, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Hey man im josh

This review is based on this version of the article.

• Ref 39 – Change website to Cinema for Peace awards to match the target
  • I feel like the target itself needs moving, but for the purposes of the FLC, I've changed website. Sgubaldo (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Ref 55 – Why is this marked as dead? The page is live and the archived version doesn't show anything that the current one doesn't. The current version just shows more recent nominees as well.
  • I must've just accidentally not put |url-status=live. Not marked as dead anymore.
• Ref 55 – Should link to Heartland International Film Festival instead
  • Done.
• Ref 93 – Website listed as "Next Best Picture" whereas refs 45 and 90 use "NextBestPicture". Be consistent.
  • Changed Ref. 93
• Heartland Film Festival in the table should be Heartland International Film Festival Awards
  • Changed.

With a focus on consistency in reference formatting, that's all I've got. Please ping me when these have been addressed. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

@Hey man im josh, done. Thanks for the review. Sgubaldo (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Support. I'm not opposed to Cinema for Peace awards being moved, I actually don't have an opinion on it, but I do think we need to match the target. I'll leave whether it should be moved up to you and anybody else involved. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:19, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• "limited release in 20 cities, in the United States, on" - no need for those commas
• "However, some also criticised" - American subject so that last word should be spelt with a Z
• "Ali was further recognised" - same here
• That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:18, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude, done. Thanks for the review. Sgubaldo (talk) 10:01, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:46, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

OlifanofmrTennant

• There was some contravery with Green Books win at the Oscars [6][7][8]
  • I've added a foonote with information the first two links. The third source just rehashes the Independent interview with Mortensen, which is already cited. Sgubaldo (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• Don Shirley should have the actor listed for consistency with Frank "Tony Lip" Vallelonga
  • Done. Sgubaldo (talk) 21:33, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
• "(where the film earned seven nominations)" and " (where the film garnered nominations in four categories)" seem unnecessary as the section is about Ali
  • The section is about the film, and so I think the bits in parentheses are necessary. I just thought starting with 'Ali was further recognised...' flowed well from before. I can change it if you deem it best. Sgubaldo (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• I don't think the two "(Ali)" are needed as the other recipients aren't listed
  • Done. Sgubaldo (talk) 21:33, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
• "The film was also nominated in five categories at the 76th Golden Globe Awards, where it won Best Motion Picture – Musical or Comedy, Best Supporting Actor – Motion Picture (Ali), and Golden Globe Award for Best Screenplay – at the 76th Golden Globe Awards, where it had been nominated in five categories." Repetitively worded
  • Done. Sgubaldo (talk) 21:33, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
• The "Ref" column should be "Ref(s)" as some have multiple citations
  • Done. Sgubaldo (talk) 21:33, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Ping me when done Questions? four Olliefant (she/her) 21:09, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay, will get this done sometime before Tuesday. Sgubaldo (talk) 00:21, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

@Sgubaldo: Following up to see if you took care of this, and hopefully to have you address the comment below as well. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:50, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant, done, one comment above. Sgubaldo (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

support Olliefant (she/her) 19:18, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Comments by Birdienest81

• Ref 56: E! Online could be just labeled as E! since they are of the same entity unlike BBC or BBC News.
  • Done. Sgubaldo (talk)
• Ref 91: CBS19 should be be labeled directly WCAV since that's the official identification (in this case the callsign) of the station here on Wikipedia.
  • Done. Sgubaldo (talk) 19:10, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• Also for Ref 91: If this list is using publisher in the ref, it should be listed as Lockwood Broadcast Group since that's the owner of the station and there is no indication within the article that CBS News was involved with the authorship of the article (if there was indication that it was published by Reuters or Associated Press, that would be a different case).
  • I've just removed the publisher in that case. Sgubaldo (talk) 19:10, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Otherwise everything looks fine. Would you mind taking a look at 50th Academy Awards for featured list promotion?

--Birdienest81talk 08:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Done. Do you still need comments on your FLC, @Birdienest81. Sgubaldo (talk) 19:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@Sgubaldo: No, but I do need comments on the FLC page for List of Los Angeles Rams starting quarterbacks. I don't know how well versed you are in terms of American football, but I guess maybe you could check for grammar or such. Otherwise, I give a support' for this list to be promoted to FL status. Birdienest81talk 07:50, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Promoted. --PresN 22:16, 12 April 2025 (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 Hey man im josh via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC) [9].

---

List of World Heritage Sites in Oman

Nominator(s): Tone 15:27, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Oman has 5 sites on the main list and 7 tentative sites. Standard style. The list for Belgium is already seeing some support so I am adding a new nomination. On a side note, I've had a discussion with @Moxy: about the sticky header parameter in the tables, which is nice for longer lists, but seems incompatible with the table style that I am currently using for these lists. It works for List of World Heritage Sites in Canada but messes up the first column in the table which is now bold, whereas it was not before. Suggestions welcome, I'd like to keep them consistent. Tone 15:27, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Image review from Arconning

• File:Bahla Fort.jpg - CC BY 2.0
• File:World Heritage Grave Al Ayn Oman.JPG - Public Domain
• File:Boswellia sacra in Wadi Dowkah (Dhofar).JPG - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:FalajDaris.JPG - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Qalhat, mausoleo di Bibi Maryam, xiv secolo, 08.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Al Rustaq Fort (2) (27255509348).jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0
• File:كوريا موريا - panoramio (1) retouched.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Dimaniyat Islands 2.jpg - CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Ras al Hadd.jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0, source link needs to be fixed
• All images have alt text and are relevant to the article, here are my comments. Arconning (talk) 10:40, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks! What do you suggest for Ras al Hadd image? I was not the one who uploaded it. Remove from the list? Tone 12:46, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Tone You should probably find an archive link to the source link provided within the image. :) Arconning (talk) 12:59, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

  Ah, I found another image which should have the appropriate license. Tone 14:04, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

  Pass, image review. Arconning (talk) 12:47, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

IntentionallyDense

Source review

• Sources are consistently formatted. Only thing I would change is adding a wikilink for Times of Oman
• Add publication date for https://timesofoman.com/article/2183867/Oman/Tourism/Travel-Oman-Visit-Al-Hazm-Castle-in-Rustaq
• I spot checked the sources and found no issues.
• The sources are appropriately reliable for the topic.

Please ping me when you have made the suggested changes or if you have any questions. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 05:57, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

@IntentionallyDense: Done, thanks! Tone 08:14, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Pass for the source review. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 17:59, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Support, passes criteria 2. and 6. If you are able to then please add images for listings in the tentative list which currently do not have images. Easternsahara (talk) 14:19, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I checked if there is any useful image for those two tentative sites but found nothing. Tone 09:37, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

History6042

• Lists should be sorted alphabetically I think.
• Please make dates in references consistent.
• Please make "The forts of Rostaq and al-Hazm" sort as "Forts of Rostaq and al-Hazm"
• Should the tentative list be added to the map?
• Why are some of the names transliterated differently than the articles that they link to?
• Maybe Aflaj shouldn't be in italics, I am not sure about this though.
• Ping when done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 18:47, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

  @History6042: Hm, I am not sure about your comments. The list is always set up chronologically, by the year of (first) inscription, but sortable. Which dates in references are not consistent? Looks fine to me. As for the forts and aflaj, I am using official names and style as per source so changing it would be at odds. However, wikilinks direct to the spelling used in the corresponding articles. Tentative lists are never on the map, just the main sites. Cheers! Tone 08:42, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

  For example, reference 3 uses mdy dates while reference 2 uses dmy. The others problems I brought up are no longer issues because you explained why they shouldn’t be done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 11:58, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

  @History6042: right, that one was off, fixed now, thanks :) Tone 13:02, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

  Support. History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:57, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey man im josh

All looks good to me, so I'm going to go ahead and support. Hey man im josh (talk)

• 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:35, 8 April 2025 (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 Hey man im josh via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC) [10].

---

List of Saturday Night Live guests (U–Z)

Nominator(s): Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:15, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

In honor of SNL's 50th anniversery I wanted to get promote some SNL content. This list wasn't nearly as tough as I thought it would be and it only took me a few days. I picked it as it was the shortest of the SNL guest lists. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:15, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• "Saturday Night Live (SNL) is a late-night sketch comedy and variety show created by Lorne Michaels" - I would add the word "American" after "is a". Can't assume that everyone knows its country of origin (even mentioning NBC might not help people in other countries if they aren't clued up on US networks) Done
• "A typical episode of SNL will feature a single host" => "A typical episode of SNL features a single host" Done
• "Candice Bergen was both the first female host in November 8, 1975, as well as the first " => "Candice Bergen was both the first female host in November 8, 1975, and the first " Done
• Any reason why Ukrainian Chorus Dumka of New York is at the bottom of the U list rather than in the correct place in alpha order? Done
• Reginald VelJohnson and Matt Vogel don't sort correctly in the V list Done
• Xzibit's name is spelt wrong Done
• Why are The Whiffenpoofs in the Y list?
  • They were listed as the Yale Whiffenpoofs but I changed it for consistency with the source.
• Todd Zeile is not in the correct place alphabetically in the Z list Done
• Add some images.....?
• That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: I have adressed the issues however what images should be added? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:26, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  • Did any of these people do something notable during their appearance? Or appear lots of times? Or anything like that.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

• One more comment: Frank Zappa's entry now says "Banned from future appearances". As Zappa has been dead for more than 30 years I doubt very much he would be making any future appearances anyway...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:04, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

  How would you propose to list it? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:37, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

  I would suggest "banned from further appearances after [whenever]" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:47, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

  changed Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: just following up, have all your problems been addressed? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:35, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

  I'll check. You have made a lot of changes since I last looked -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:05, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

More comments

• Lead image caption is not a sentence so doesn't need a full stop
• Morgan Wallen note is not a sentence so doesn't need a full stop
• Steve Whitmire note is not a sentence so doesn't need a full stop
• Walter Williams note is not a sentence so doesn't need a full stop
• In the lead you say ""Cameo", which is for a person who has appeared on the show but did not act as host or musical guest at any given time.", yet there are people with a tick in the cameo column who did serve as either host or musical guest.....?
• I still think it would be nice to add some images of actual people on the lists, maybe those with something in the notes column......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:08, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

  I added a few images and changed the punctuation. As for the cameo list. Some people have appeared on episodes they didn't host for example Christopher Walken hosted 7 times but also appeared in the cold open of a season 49 episode see [11] Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  OK, in that case I think you need to change the wording of "appeared on the show but did not act as host or musical guest at any given time." Maybe just remove the last four words..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: done Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 08:34, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:28, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Oppose I know there have been multi-part lists before that have been nominated separately, but I am uncomfortable with a few letters of the alphabet being promoted to FL while the rest of the list is unimproved. There are not six independent lists here, but one that just happens to be subdivided for length reasons.

• Moreover, List of Saturday Night Live guests has the actual introductory content, which in most cases would be the lead or introductory sections for the list that should also be FL quality. The lead for this subpage just copy-pasted the lead from that. Just because there was enough content to split the list members on separate pages doesn't mean 1/6 of the tabular material should get the star by itself.
• This is one of the least informative lists I've ever seen nominated here. It's just names and a checkmark. At the very least I'd expect the year(s) of appearance to be included. It's not much better than List of Saturday Night Live episodes (seasons 1–30) and List of Saturday Night Live episodes (season 31–present), which fit all the hosts and musical guests and more info on just two pages. I guess being together in alphabetical order is nice, but when in letter-based tables, sortable columns are kind of worthless. Reywas92^Talk 00:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

I'll see about adding notes and dates columns, though their might be a sourcing problem with it. As for your first point. It seems quite in-actionable. Just because one sublist is improved doenst mean the others magically get better. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:23, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Just because one sublist is improved doenst mean the others magically get better. Exactly. I do not want to give out a star when 5/6ths of the content is unimproved. It's entirely arbitrary that this is the U-Z list. Why not merge them all into one long page that's sortable in a useful manner? Or have three pages instead of six since this one is in fact somewhat short? Reywas92^Talk 00:58, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

This seems inactionable. Would you promote List of SNL episodes 1-30 since 31-present isn’t at the same standard? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 08:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

You've added "Banned from future appearances" to Neil Young, but the source does not support that assertion. Reywas92^Talk 01:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

@Reywas92: I hope to add a first appearence column but I cant find sources for all list entries could I list the episode under MOS:PLOTCITE? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:53, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Reywas92^Talk 17:01, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

@Reywas92: It took me a few days but I have added a dates coloumn Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:00, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Source review from TheDoctorWho

Figure I'd go ahead and knock this out for you:

• Ref 1: isn't asking for a paid subscription from me?
• Ref 7: a WP:VALNET source, is there anything better available?
  • Cut
• Ref 10: VIDEO --> Video Done
• Ref 20: Missing an author Done
• Ref 24: Any reason you're citing the Peacock website rather than just the specific {{Cite episode}}?
  • I'm not citing the episode I'm citing the listing
• Ref 31: isn't asking for a paid subscription?
• Ref 50: pipe the link to just Biography
  • Not done per WP:NOTBROKEN
• Ref 53: Another MovieWeb
  • Replaced
• Ref 66: Link Variety Done
• Ref 86: Another where we're not citing the actual episode? Per above
• Ref 119: Same as above
  • Same as reason I don't cite the episode with the various hosted clips.
• I'd suggest running some general scripts from date formatting cleanup, dumb quotes, and title/sentence case Done

TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:27, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho: Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 18:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant: from NOTBROKEN: However, it is perfectly acceptable to change it to Franklin D. Roosevelt if for some reason it is preferred that "Franklin D. Roosevelt" actually appear in the visible text - I'd say its preferred for uniformity in formatting of references (i.e. you use The Guardian not theguardian.com; Entertainment Weekly not ew.com) TheDoctorWho (talk) 05:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho: Done Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:36, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Great work, source review passes! TheDoctorWho (talk) 02:30, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Hey man im josh

Review is based on this version of the page.

• Frank Zappa was banned after for SNL after acting unprofessionally. – Banned after for SNL doesn't really make sense, seems you were trying to say something else?
• Ref 1 – "Love Love" is supposed to be "Matthew Love"
• Ref 3 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 4 – Missing date
• Ref 8 – Add James Andrew Miller as an author
• Ref 8 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 16 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 27 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 54 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 59 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 60 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 75 – Wikilink American Songwriter
• Ref 76 – Yale Bulletin & Calendar exists as a redirect instead of simply linking "Yale"
• Ref 91 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 98 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 99 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 100 – Note as subscription required
• Ref 115 – Missing date

Please ping me when you reply. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

@Hey man im josh: Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 18:02, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant: There's an error with ref 115. I believe that's probably related to an attempt to add the date? Hey man im josh (talk) 18:09, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

@Hey man im josh: fixed Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 18:52, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Support based on reference formatting. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Vestrian24Bio

@OlifanofmrTennant:

• Add a language varaint template. Done
• Instead ticks for appearances, consider replcing it with no. of appearances as each (Host, Musical guest and Cameo). For empty cells in these three add the {{N/A}} template as well.
• Also, consider adding a Latest appearance or Recent appearance column; only for guests with multiple appearances.
• For the "As the voice of [...]" notes, I think they should instead be in Cameo column as {{Efn}} notes. Also, consider adding similar notes to other cameo appearances as well explaining what the cameo was; only where it applies which should exclude guests welcoming a new five-timer.
  • Problem is with this and the above two is it would possible lead to some WP:OR issues some of the sources just say "X appears on day" not "X appeared on day and did Y. They returned Z times on other day". As for the voice of EFN I worry that it would reduce the value of the notes column and make the cameo column more cluttered
• Also, what's the initial sort order? assuming it's alphabetical order, which it should be...
  • Ukrainian Chorus Dumka of New York should be placed between Bob Uecker and Carrie Underwood. Done
  • The White Stripes should be placed between Forest Whitaker and Betty White. Done
  • The xx should come before Xzibit. Done
  • Last four of Y table should be: Young Jeezy, Young Thug, Neil Young, Paul Young. Done
  • Todd Zeile should come between Frank Zappa and Renée Zellweger. Done
• Ref 81 - SB Nation is an unreliable source.
  • SB Nation is owned by Vox Media and I know it has been used in FLs before though off the top of my head I cant recall any.

Vestrian24Bio 12:32, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@Vestrian24Bio: Questions? four Olliefant (she/her) 20:32, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

All good, Support. Vestrian24Bio 04:31, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98

I examined your article last night and only have a few suggestions.

• Paragraph 2, sentence 2: "On occasion" should be followed by a comma.
• With regards to the tables, these are only my personal preferences. I prefer it when sequential tables are the same width; I think it looks much more uniform. If this were my article, I would set each table to a uniform width (say, 70%). Additionally, I would specify that the columns (especially the Host, Musical guest, and Cameo columns) be of uniform width as well, because the contents of those columns are only checkmarks. You could specify that those three columns be of a specific width, or set each table to have the same parameters (for example, Performer=30%, etc.).
• I would also suggest removing the "Notes" columns from tables where there are no notes, as empty columns look unusual. The column can always be re-added in the future if a note needs to be added.

Unlike the editor above, I see no reason to not promote one article in a series even if the other articles do not merit it. What that tells me is that the rest of the series should be brought up to the same quality as this one. Even if all six were ready for FL nomination, it's not like they could all be submitted at the same time. There is nothing wrong with promoting one, taking the improvements suggested here and applying them to the other articles, and then promoting them one at a time as well.

Please let me know if you have any feedback! Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:09, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bgsu98: done Olliefant (she/her) 17:45, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

OlifanofmrTennant, the tables are uniform now, so I will Support. If you don't want them to stretch out the full width of the screen, you can set the width (ie. 70% will stretch the table out to only 70% of the screen's width). Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:34, 3 April 2025 (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. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:28, 8 April 2025 (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 Hey man im josh via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 9 April 2025 (UTC) [12].

---

List of Michelin-starred restaurants in Vancouver

Nominator(s): History6042😊 (Contact me) 20:54, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it is the same as my other nominations. History6042😊 (Contact me) 20:54, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Comments from Arconning

• Image caption says "1 star", body says "one star", I'm guessing both are accepted styles though I would suggest for the sole usage of one of these to maintain consistency.
• Specify which cuisine Kissa Tanto is. It is mentioned as Japanese by Michelin in one source, then Fusion in the other, though all of them mention it as a fusion of being Japanese-Italian. Could add a note here, Ex: Fusion would be the text under "Cuisine", then add a note clarifying it as Japanese in reference 7 then Fusion in reference 11 but both sources also mention it being Japanese-Italian fusion.
• Use dmy dates as it's topic is focused on Canada.
• References 7, 8, 10, and 13 need archive links.
• Reference 3 and 6 should have CNN wikilinked.
• References 7, 11, and 13 should have Michelin Guide wikilinked.
• References 8, 10, and 14 should have Vancouver Sun wikilinked.
• "(which will be added in 2025)", as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia this would be outdated information soon once it is added. Please specify the dates somehow, similar to the usage of "As of" in a statement.
  • My comments so far. Ping me once done.Arconning (talk) 12:26, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  Done, except the exact date of the Quebec guide is unknown. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:03, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Arconning, forgot to ping. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:12, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  @History6042 The Quebec section still needs to be fixed, see Wikipedia:As of#Precise language. Arconning (talk) 00:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Arconning, as it isn't currently reviewed I have just removed it. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:33, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  Support. Arconning (talk) 00:35, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

OlifanofmrTennant

• "Vancouver is one of three regions Michelin reviews in Canada, alongside Toronto... and Quebec" like all of Quebec? or a specific part
• Section labeled "Lists" but I count one
• Michelin shouldn't be in all caps in refs 7 and 12
• Lead image needs alt text
• The lead seems too boilerplatey not about the Vancover restaurants specifically please change this

Ping when done Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 18:01, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Done, @OlifanofmrTennant. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:29, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

It’s still very surface level. Can this be expanded to be more about the Vancouver restaurants? Also the Quebec thing should be readded Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:39, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant, even more has been added. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:42, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

"The Vancouver guide exclusively rates restaurants only within the city's limits." well duh... seems redundent

"For example, restaurants in places like Richmond, Whistler, Vancouver Island and the Okanagan Highland are not reviewed at this time" unnecassary this is about Vancouver not all of Canada Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 23:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant, for your first point, Vancouver has a metro area, so it is correct to specify. I removed the other part. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:15, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Clarify that it excludes the metro Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 00:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant, Done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:28, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Lead needs more links, maybe link a few of the restaurants in the lead? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:19, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Done, @OlifanofmrTennant. History6042😊 (Contact me) 16:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

You should not use graphics on FLCs as they are transcluded they slow down the load time on the main page, please convert yours to a bolded "done" once this is done Support Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:43, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

SounderBruce

• The prose is missing an analysis of the selected restaurants and their context within the Greater Vancouver food scene. From a quick search, there seems to be plenty of coverage, so I'm not sure why this wasn't added before the nomination. Oppose on criteria 3(a) until this is addressed. SounderBruce 00:47, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  @SounderBruce, I am not sure what you mean by analysis of the restaurants. List of Michelin-starred restaurants in Turkey passed so I would assume it has it, please point out where it is. History6042😊 (Contact me) 01:25, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  • Simply put, the amount of prose dedicated solely to Vancouver (and not copied across all of these lists) is far too short. The Toronto list at least has a Criticism section that dives deeper into the local details; I wouldn't expect the same Criticism section to be added here, but rather more context, e.g. how representative the cuisines are relative to the rest of the scenes, the ages of the restaurants, how geographically spread out they are, etc. SounderBruce 01:44, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

    @SounderBruce, I will add more specifically about Vancouver's restaurants. History6042😊 (Contact me) 01:49, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

    Done, @SounderBruce, there is now much more info about the restaurants. History6042😊 (Contact me) 11:48, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

    @SounderBruce, repinging that more has been added. History6042😊 (Contact me) 14:23, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

    I'm still not seeing a real analysis. Just some choppy sentences that repeat basic facts and a whole paragraph that is just copied from an awards list, which isn't exactly needed here. I don't think this is of FL quality. SounderBruce 04:14, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

IntentionallyDense

Source Review

• Sources are appropriately reliable for the topic
• Add wikilinks to Vancouver Magazine, otherwise formatting is consistent
• Add author for [13] and [14]
• I did a source spot check and found no issues.

Please ping me when you have fixed the above issues. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 06:07, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

@IntentionallyDense, done, thank you. History6042😊 (Contact me) 11:38, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

pass for the source review. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 17:58, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Comments from TheDoctorWho

• Add {{Use Canadian English|date=April 2025}}
• Italicize Vancouver Magazine in the lead
• If the guide "exclusively rates restaurants within the city's limits" is it necessary to include "Vancouver" in front of all the neighborhoods in the table?
• Italian fusion is a MOS:BLUESEA issue
• References 2, 3, and 6, are WP:DUPREF's that can be combined
• References 10 and 11 are missing archives
• Reference 11 has a SHOUTING issue

Not much else to say here, nice work! TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:52, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho, all  Done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 20:16, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Happy to support! TheDoctorWho (talk) 20:57, 4 April 2025 (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. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:28, 8 April 2025 (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 Hey man im josh via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 9 April 2025 (UTC) [15].

---

List of Michelin-starred restaurants in Moscow

Nominator(s): History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:36, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it is similar to other Michelin FLs. History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:36, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Drive-by comment You say "It was stated by a Michelin spokesperson" but do not give a year or timeline. Mattximus (talk) 16:26, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Fixed. History6042😊 (Contact me) 18:00, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

IntentionallyDense

Source review

I will do the source review for this article starting with formatting then checking reliability and then doing a source spot check. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 19:48, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

• Wikilink Reuters to match formatting of other sources
• Remove www from finedininglovers
• Dates are inconsistent
• Since you have retrieved dates for most of the sources it would make sense to add that for the others
• Add date for [16]
• Sources seem appropriately reliable for the topic
• Spot checks all verify information

Ping when done. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 22:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@IntentionallyDense,  Done History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:18, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Pass for the source review. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 04:45, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

OlifanofmrTennant

• The location row is redudent as the article title names Moscow
• Why is "Fine Dining Lovers" reliable?
• In Ref 2 "MICHELIN" should in lowercase
• What does "Modern" mean?
• There is little in the lead about the Moscow specific list
• Michelin Guide is linked in both the first and second sentences, it's linked a third time in the last paragraph.
• The last sentence is a bit confusing did you mean "could resume Russian activities, but it was too early"
• Moscow is linked for the first time in the final paragraph, move this link to the first mention in the opening sentence

Ping me when done Olliefant (she/her) 01:09, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant, Done, except modern is how the restaurants are described on their websites and there is already a full paragraph about how it got shut down. History6042😊 (Contact me) 12:21, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Clarify the month the spokesperson made the comment Olliefant (she/her) 14:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant, done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 20:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Support Olliefant (she/her) 22:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Comments from TheDoctorWho

• Wikilink Moscow in the first sentence rather than the third paragraph
• Add a comma after "However" in the second sentence
• "the last year that the Guide was released" - either decapitalize guide, since the usage here could meet the textbook definition OR italicize as a shortened reference to Michelin Guide.
• "In March 2022, it was stated by a Michelin spokesperson that the company could resume Russian activities, as it was too early to make a decision." doesn't make much sense, looking at the source is it supposed to read something closer to "In March 2022, it was stated by a Michelin spokesperson that it was too early to make a decision if Russian activities would ever resume"? Doesn't have to be that wording exactly, just a suggestion.
• Michelin Guide is italicized in Ref 2 but not 6, this should be consistent one way or the other.
• Link Michelin Guide in Ref 2
• Refs 1, 2, and 6 are missing archives.

TheDoctorWho (talk) 21:31, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho, done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 21:39, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Nick work, Happy to support! TheDoctorWho (talk) 21:59, 4 April 2025 (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. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:28, 8 April 2025 (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 Hey man im josh via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 9 April 2025 (UTC) [17].

---

2025 Asian Winter Games medal table

Nominator(s): Arconning (talk) 12:29, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

A non-Olympic list for now, though it's still a medal table! Ping me if you have comments, will probably reply a few days later. Loved these games so much, had to start a new article about it. Arconning (talk) 12:29, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• "A total of 1,275 athletes representing 34 National Olympic Committees (NOCs) participated" - these are not the Olympics, so is this accurate?
• "Among the NOCs that participated, Bhutan,[2] Cambodia,[3] and Saudi Arabia made their Asian Winter Games debut" - first five words are redundant
• "most gold medals won for an individual at the games" => "most gold medals won by an individual at the games"
• "The medal table is based on information provided by the International Olympic Committee" - is it.....?
• "they are listed alphabetically by their IOC country code" - there are no country codes in the table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:44, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude Addressed all the comments, as the Olympic Council of Asia is under the auspices of the IOC, they still utilize NOCs. Arconning (talk) 12:16, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:58, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

IntentionallyDense

Source review

I will do the source review for this article starting with formatting then checking reliability and then doing a source spot check. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 19:48, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

• Would add retrieved dates for those that don't have them as the majority do.
• Add website and author for [18]
• I can't access [19] but just wanted to double check there was no author
• Spot checks all verified information

Ping when done. Great work! IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 22:14, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

@IntentionallyDense I believe I'm done, removed the second citation though. Kuensel source does not have an author listed. Arconning (talk) 16:01, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Pass for the source review. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 19:48, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey man im josh

I found nothing to crticize or recommend, good job! Suppport. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:27, 8 April 2025 (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. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:28, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

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