Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Liberal Democrats leadership election, 2006

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Liberal Democrats leadership election, 2006

(Self-nomination.) This article is now pretty stable, as the election finished a few months ago. It is well-referenced and comprehensive and has undergone a peer review (albeit a fairly quiet one). —Whouk (talk) 20:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment—The title needs "(UK)" inserted; there are lots of Liberal Democrat parties all over the world. Tony 02:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

  Liberal Democrats is the current home of the party's article as no other party is named the "Liberal Democrats" (As opposed to the "Liberal Democratic Party"). —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 @ 03:01 UTC

• Weak Object. The article is good overall, but the end is a bit list-heavy. RyanGerbil10 03:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - I think the supporters lists are important, but I wonder if there is a better way to format them? —Whouk (talk) 07:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Support. The new formatting of the lists is much better, I now see no problems with the article. RyanGerbil10 03:39, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support - I have done a light copyedit, but it covers its subject matter concisely and well. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support - The article has improved significantly since I was last involved (entering the results). I think it is a worthy candidate. The lists at the end of the article don't disturb me that much. Tamino 14:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
  • I have gone through the article with a fine-toothed comb (and I see Whouk has been too) and made four corrections, all very minor. Any help in ironing out such small faults would be appreciated. Tamino 14:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Your comb has finer teeth than mine. I think the "listy" parts are necessary to tell the story. -- ALoan (Talk) 15:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
      • If you mean the list of candidates and their supporters at the bottom, I agree. Tamino 15:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. It would be nice if the colors were removed next to the names in each table. After all, all of the candidates were obviously Lib Dems. —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 @ 20:41 UTC
  • It's consistent with similar tables on other Liberal/SDP/LibDem and Conservative leadership articles, although not Labour ones which don't use colour in the tables. I like the colours as they brighten up the tables and the article a bit, but I'll happily go along with a change if there's a consensus that they should go. —Whouk (talk) 20:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - the lead image needs a fair use rationale for appearing in this article.--Peta 00:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Done. —Whouk (talk) 08:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support - I like FAs about very specific topics, and this seems to be one of them, because it shows the depth of Wikipedia. Its level of detail is good, and it provides a good record of what would otherwise be quite an insignificant topic, at least from a non-UK perspective. Ronline ✉ 10:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I agree with Tony, the article should open with "In the UK" or something similar. You may know that there's only one Liberal Democrat party in the world, but putting that phrase in front makes it explicitly clear to readers who aren't as well-informed as you. (NB I actually made this edit last week(?) and it was reverted.) Kaisershatner 13:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
  • "...in the United Kingdom" is at the end of the very first sentence, which makes it pretty clear, IMHO, but as always I'll bow to consensus. —Whouk (talk) 13:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
    • I agree with Whouk. Remember that when (if) the article appears on the Main Page then the first few sentences are in the box so it will be easy to see "...in the United Kingdom". Tamino 08:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)