Wikipedia talk:Featured lists/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Title

Since all of the lists are prefixed with "List of X" would anyone object if I removed the list of in front of every article listed here? It is going to get very redundant and very repetetive very soon. This link is Broken 01:17, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC) (I'm just going to be Bold and do it, actually)

  • So far, timelines, a line of succession, and a few other non-"list of X" articles have been nominated. How would we deal with them? --Dmcdevit 03:55, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Good idea. I suggest we suppress "list of" but use the full name of articles that do not start "list of". -- ALoan (Talk) 10:44, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Featured lists on the Main Page

What would it take to get featured lists to actually be featured on the Main Page???? [[User:JonMoore|— —JonMoore 20:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)]] 03:04, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Judging by the featured lists you need lots of pictures, or good annotation, or put it in a well-maintained table format. I'm not sure how you can get pictures relevant to a list of lists. As for tables I'm not sure that'd help anything. Annotation would likely be unnecessary, but maybe possible.
I hope someday a list I created or worked industriously on gets to be here.--T. Anthony 10:58, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

(This was brought up at Talk:Main page#Featured Lists.) Now that there are 130 Featured Lists, with ~10 added per month, putting them on the main page seems like a potentially great idea. You can't do it every day because they don't come that often, unless you do it like Featured Pictures, with the list starting over when it's run through. Or it could be done only on weekends like Featured Pictures used to be done. Any thoughts? Whatever gets on the Main Page might mean trimming something else, though. --Dhartung | Talk 22:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I wonder what happened at this proposal. The FA-diehards seem to don't want to add FLs in the Main Page. Then if this is the case, then we should really rename this into Wikipedia:Showcased lists or Wikipedia:Best lists, or any title we can think of, because the lists here, aren't really featured. --Howard the Duck 05:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Mathematics

Why is List of lists of mathematical topics in a section labled Science? Math is, well, math. Although it is heavily used by science, it is not science. I'm going ahead and changing it. --Tox 12:04, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Very Few Here

I noticed that we have way more articles featured than lists. Is this because lists are harder to produce in general, or is the citeria harder to become a FL, or is it just by chance? Tobyk777 02:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

It is because the Featured article process started with Brilliant Prose back in 2002, but Wikipedia:Featured lists was only set up in May 2005. If anything, the standards for lists are slightly lower than those for articles. -- ALoan (Talk) 03:18, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Fishing for comments

I don't want to nominate them as these were up for deletion not that long ago, but I guess I would like to draw attention to them. First there's List of Catholic authors. This wasn't created by me and it's been largely a group effort so I feel better about mentioning it. I personally feel kind of proud of the List of Christian thinkers in science. I have received help of late and I don't mean to belittle those who did. That said I think it's fair to say this one has largely been my project.

I'm also mentioning these as I'm hoping to relay ideas on further ways to improve either or both.--T. Anthony 11:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Fishing for compliments? That's dangerous:) You may get some constructive comments though: The first one is in desperate need of references. On first view, the second one looks better, though it's not 100% clear to me what determines whether someone is or isn't included, jguk 11:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Changed the title. I'll relay that information to the page on the first one. On the second one it's people who made contributions to religious and scientific work. Admittedly there are a few borderline names on it though.--T. Anthony 12:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, if we want Catholic lists, List of pastoral visits of Pope John Paul II outside Italy and List of Encyclicals of Pope John Paul II have been on my featured wishlist for ages. Having added a reference, I was about to nominate the second yeserday when I noticed the rather embarassing redlinks (10 out of 14)... -- ALoan (Talk) 12:03, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps we could start a Request for comments type page for prospective Featured Lists - as our criteria are quite different than those for featured articles. Also perhaps a list of quite good lists? Rmhermen 22:05, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Template:Featured list

similarly to {{Featured article}}, I created {{Featured list}} which puts a star on the upper right corner of a featured list. I've marked all the FL with this template. CG 21:08, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Municipalities of Lithuania

Why isn't List of municipalities of Lithuania in the geography section? Afonso Silva 21:01, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

List of notable brain tumor patients

I'd really rather see this categorized as a list of people than as a medical list. Durova 21:03, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Lists of Users

I created a List of Wikipedians by Featured Lists successfully nominated. I believe that there are no inaccuracies. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 21:32, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. There is also Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured article nominations and Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured list nominations (both slightly out of date, I believe). -- ALoan (Talk) 23:55, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

100th FL

I've only just realised, but given that two lists were previously demoted, the 100th list to be promoted to be a featured list was List of municipalities of Portugal, which I promoted earlier today. We lost a third list today, so we are back to 98 again.

If all goes well, the list should get to 100 entries with the 103rd list to be featured, which will either be List of Formula One drivers next Monday 10 April (if objections to List of Presidents of Liberia are resolved so it is promoted first) or, more likely, List of Alberta premiers next Friday 14 April. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


Sections of certain lists

Shouldn't French Monarchs and Portuguese Monarchs go in a "Royalty, nobility, and heraldry" section, while Battles of the Mexican-American War goes into the "War" section? Currently, they are all in the "History" section. If no one opposes, I'll put the three lists in question into my proposed new sections (which are will just be uncommented and use the terms of the featured articles page). Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 16:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Sure - go ahead. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Shouldn't the football-related lists be lumped back into the "Other lists" section because it groups association and american football together, and those are quite different sports. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 18:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

List namespace

I think we need to have seperate namespace (e.g. List) for lists. I have left a short note at the end of featured content's talk page. If you have any ideas, please comment there. Shyam (T/C) 19:43, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. "Lists" are just articles with lists in them. -- ALoan (Talk) 02:30, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Football

If the football category is not just soccer, as it has NFL content, should rugby football (Tri Nations Series champions) be in there as well? Cvene64 17:00, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll be putting tri nations champs at football, in case somebody disagrees, just revert it. --Howard the Duck 13:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok i split football American and Football every where else in the world into two categories. hope this fixes the problemTrey 05:47, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm opposed at this, but I guess it would be fine. Also changed Football-related lists: into Football (soccer)-related lists: following the article title "Football (soccer)". --Howard the Duck 04:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't see why you would be opposed they are two completly different sports. No one would combine a list that includes cricket and baseball and call it one sport. And i left it as Football not football soccer since the huge majority of the world thinks of as football as soccer.

Well, these sports all derived from Football. I dunno about cricket and baseball (I think they're differently derived). Also, we have to match the article name. Currently, its "Football (soccer)" so it should stay that way. Also, Tri Nations Series champions and Super 12 champions were previously at "Football-related lists", so it would cause further confusion, so I moved them to "Other lists". Or we can move both "Football (soccer)-related lists" and "American football-related lists" into "Other lists" since they're few. The reason why Cricket was segregated was that it has many FLs. And BTW, next time, sign your posts using ~~~~. --Howard the Duck 05:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Since the subdivisions within FL categories are completely arbitrary, we do not have to follow article naming conventions. Also the MoS is not mandatory for the Wikipedia namespace, in case you were wondering. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 10:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, although the readers won't have to be confused with one "Football-related" list, then on the next section we have "American football-related" list. And even though it is not mandatory, it doesn't mean that we shouldn't follow it. Besides, this is the FL page, and we have to present this page like it is a "featured page".
I'd rather go with the previous convention (all football codes merged in one "Football-related" list category, or we place tem in the "Other list" category. --Howard the Duck 05:23, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I really don't know where you got the idea that we have to present the FL page as a "featured" page itself, but I think you are reading too much into the concept. If we judge we have too many lists of one kind we clump them together to make navigation easier, but we don't have to do that at all (see the FA page). It's that simple. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 11:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Being a list of featured lists, it is corollary that we'd have to present this page in the highest of standards, at par with the lists they present. --Howard the Duck 07:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I really don't see the problem here at all. Really I wouldn't mind breaking out the other list into each sport even if their is only one list under it. I think that would make navigating the list easier than having swimming and rugby under one big catch-all topic. And I deeply and profusely apologize for forgetting the tines at the end of my last post, 500 some edits and I finally forgot the tines... I’m surprised the world didn’t end right then and thereTrey 17:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll support the classification of each list by sport/game.
Apology accepted. --Howard the Duck 07:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Release Version 0.5

Featured lists are eligible for nomination for Release Version 0.5. Maurreen 12:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

New collaboration

Would you consider creating a "List Collaboration of the Week" which aims at improving lists to the FL status? CG 17:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

That's a good idea. Maurreen 17:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Proposed change to all featured lists

If you look at the featured lists section of the feature content page you will see that it is currently just a big list of the lists... basically a condensed version of this page. It would be preferable to instead have that page display just one randomly selected list on each page view, as it currently does for featured articles and pictures. However, there is no way to do so currently. To this end I'd like to propose that we put <includeonly> tags, or 'FeaturedStart' / 'FeaturedEnd' templates which do nothing but place those tags and have an explanation of why on the template page, around the header paragraph(s) of each featured list. This would not change the display of the featured list page at all, but if a featured list page were then transcluded only the header paragraph(s) would show up... like we currently show just the header for featured articles. This would allow the featured content page to display the lead-in for one randomly selected list with a link to the full list - just as we do for featured articles (though that is accomplished a different way). Thoughts? --CBD 19:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

While this is a nice idea, the problem is that in many cases the lead paragraph(s) is/are only one or two lines long, especially in the older lists. In many other cases the lead only goes over the inclusion criteria, which makes for quite boring reading, because the rest of the interesting text is spread over the list.
My guess is that in many cases you won't have enough text to entertain the reader. A better idea would be to manually select the FLs that have enough text/background info and just use that subset for the Portal. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 18:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
The list of pages to be accessed has to be put together manually anyway for the randomization logic to work. Thus, excluding some pages would be no additional effort. Though I'd think we might want to try displaying a different section of the page for such lists or updating them. Maybe instead of the header we should always display a few entries from each list. --CBD 11:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Whatever you choose I'm all for it as long as it helps to improve the Featured Content portal. My guess is that you'll end up using a combination of the methods described above. There are some lists that cannot be "updated" (e.g. the lists of chemical elements) and for some others it would be interesting to display a few entries (I'm thinking lists of incumbents for instance). At the end it would be nice if you kept somewhere a record of the lists you've selected. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 09:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
I think you are really asking for a Featured List Of The Day/Week/Month, with an excerpt from the header, an image, and a sample from the actual list. It would be a bit of effort to set up, but would be useful here, could be added to user/talk pages, and would give us something to show as a possible contender for a slot on the Main Page... -- ALoan (Talk) 11:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
That's in essence how I understood it as well. I was pointing out above some of the implementation issues he will come across, since I think CBD wanted to semi-automate the process. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 11:29, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
POTD and TFA are semi-automatic, in that the templates, etc, are all set up, but the content has to be created by hand, in advance. Would could do a similar thing. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Well, a 'List of the day' following the traditional setup would work by creating a new page for each list which is formatted to look nice specifically for that list. Exactly as we currently have pages like Wikipedia:Picture of the day/August 15, 2006 for each picture/article of the day. That could be done, but as you note it would take some time to set up and then a while longer to build up an 'archive' of list pages which could be selected from randomly. What I was suggesting was actually to go directly to the existing list articles and put in markers on each to specify a specific section (or sections) to display on the Featured content page. For example, this diff shows me placing such 'markers' on a copy of one of the current featured lists. At User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox you can see that these markers have no impact on the article itself, but when transcluded, as at User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox2, you get a nice little 'blurb' with just the specifically marked elements. Advantages are that it is easier to set up (no separate pages) and automatically updates when the list page does... for instance if the number of reactors for a country is updated this would display the new value while a separate page would continue to display the old. Disadvantage is that if someone removes or changes the tags it would mess up the display of the 'blurb'. I could put the 'markers' into templates to make them less likely to be messed with, but ultimately it comes down to whether people think this is a workable approach. This method could also be used for a 'List of the day' by just changing the page to link to each day. Probably wouldn't be workable for the Main page though because vandalism to the list page would then be transferred to the Main page. --CBD 12:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm all for the proposal if someone has the time to implement it. Durova 02:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and implemented this on three of the featured lists as a test case. See Wikipedia:Featured content for the actual display (refresh / purge cache to see the displayed list change - though with only three you may need to try a few times), this for an example of updating the number of pages which can be displayed from 1 to 3, and this for an example of changes needed to the featured list page itself to display properly. If people are ok with this and there aren't alot of problems with the inclusion tags getting moved around we can look into fully implementing this. --CBD 22:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
I like it. I think you should also provide a link to the list below the table itself (ala the "read more" link at the end of the FA blurb). -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 08:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I was pondering whether it should be there or in the section title (where it is currently)... but both probably wouldn't hurt. --CBD 10:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey - I was just looking at Wikipedia talk:Featured content and saw that User:Howard the Duck has a mock-up of a "Featured list of the month" on his user page! See below. I guess this was done by hand. -- ALoan (Talk) 19:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

This month's featured list
The seal of the President of the Philippines.
This a complete list of Presidents of the Philippines that consists of the 14 heads of state in the history of the Philippines. The list includes Presidents who were inaugurated as President of the Philippines following the ratification of a constitution that explicitly declares the existence of the Philippines.

For leaders of the Philippines prior to the ratification of the 1899 constitution, see Royal Governor of the Philippines. For leaders prior to the ratification of the 1935 constitution, see Governor-General of the Philippines.

Note that the Presidents under the Commonwealth of the Philippines were under American administration, and that of the Second Republic is considered to be a puppet government of the Japanese during World War II.

# President Took office Left office Party Vice President Term Era
1 Emilio Aguinaldo January 23, 1899 April 1, 1901 none
(Magdalo faction of the Katipunan)		 none
(The 1899 Constitution did not provide a Vice President)		 - First Dictatorship
First Republic
2 Manuel L. Quezon November 15, 1935 August 1, 1944 Nacionalista Sergio Osmeña 1 Commonwealth
2
3 José P. Laurel October 14, 1943 August 14, 1945 Kalibapi
(Caretaker government under Japanese occupation)		 none
(The 1943 Constitution did not provide a Vice President.)		 - Second Republic
(continued...)

Implementation

The 'random featured list' on Wikipedia:Featured content has been active for about a week now without any problems so I'm going to go ahead and start slowly increasing the number of featured lists which are set up to work with this. You could leverage that to do a 'featured list of the month' or create individual pages like the example above... in which case I'd probably switch to using those separate pages once enough of them had built up to provide a large selection for the random generator. --CBD 18:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Excellent. Please don't forget to direct editors who may be confused by your actions to this talk page. Good luck! -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 19:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Yay. Just saw my list a while ago at WP:FC. --Howard the Duck 13:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Comment: Can you omit the references? Or is it OK that they're displayed? --Howard the Duck 13:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I've run into a few display issues like that. We could omit references, but in many cases it would require bracketing them with 'noinclude' tags (or closing and then re-opening 'onlyinclude' tags around them)... which might increase the likelihood of confusion or problems if the references get changed. A couple of the lists have been edited since I expanded the list (up to 20 now) without problems so maybe it'll be ok. As time goes on and people get more familiar with this concept I hope those who actually work on the lists will make these decisions on where/how to place the inclusion tags. I've been trying to decide whether or not it is important to include the table 'key', how much of the header text to include, whether to bring in pictures - and which ones, et cetera... all tasks which would be better handled by the people who know the subject. It is actually very flexible in what you can choose to display / not display, but the more complicated you make it the more tags are involved and the more you'd really want the page regulars to be running the show. I can set up a test page so that it would be easy to see what adjustments to the inclusion tags would look like in the final presentation if people are intereested. Otherwise, let me know which list and what you'd like changed and I'll try to do so. I'll take a look at the references now to see if there are any which can be easily taken out. --CBD 10:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I went ahead and created the test template. See {{list preview}} for instructions on how to use it. Basically, that template will display how any list it is added to will appear on Wikipedia:Featured content. Only problem is that it displays the currently saved version - so you have to put in the inclusion tags, save it, and then use this template. Still, quick way to see what it will look like rather than waiting for the right random list to come up. --CBD 11:38, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

List Namespace

A discussion is going on here to introduce seperate namespace. A request to bugzilla (7561) also have been made for this. Your response is invited on the proposal page. Regards, Shyam (T/C) 21:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I think this was defeated. --Howard the Duck 14:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Yup. Withdrawn by nom. See archived discussion. --Quiddity 17:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

List of Avatar: The Last Airbender Book Two episodes

I was on New Page patrol, and I came across this page, which is apparently a featured list. That set off alarm bells, but, looking at the article, it seemed to be pretty legitimate. Is it a featured list, has it been mistakenly said to be so, or is someone trying to bypass the need to nominate deliberately? J Milburn 15:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, its sister article List of Avatar: The Last Airbender Book One episodes. J Milburn 15:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

There is also another. I have made contact with an editor who was involved in writing the original list- turns out someone decided that there should be three lists, when originally there was one. As the original was featured, the new editor decided the three news ones were as well. I think that the articles have now been nominated for deletion. J Milburn 16:06, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, as I have started talking about these articles here, I may as well say that the deletion debate can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Avatar: The Last Airbender Book One episodes. J Milburn 19:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Front Page?

Why aren't featured lists on the front page? Just H 02:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm guessing because it would look... odd... Maybe we could at least get a link? -- Ned Scott 04:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
There's no technical reason why not – they appear on Wikipedia:Featured content in abbreviated form. See Wikipedia talk:Featured content#Featured lists and portals on the Main Page, Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates#Featured? lists and Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day#Wikipedia:Featured lists for the most recent attempts achieve this. Colin°Talk 11:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I am wondering about that too. Featured lists have the same quality information with FA. Furthermore, FL is really harder work than FA/FP. Why can't FL in the front page? I don't think it will make the main page looks odd. — Indon (reply) — 12:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

number of FLs

We need a way to keep track of the total number of FLs when users don't update the number at the top of the page. I'm thinking that in each section on the WP:FL page we can write the number of lists in that section so the whole thing would be easy to count. --Arctic Gnome 17:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

This has been done at Wikipedia:Featured articles using the Jmax bot. We should probably request that its tasks be expanded to include Featured Lists and Featured pictures. It should also be noted that if we can't have this done automatically, we can consider doing what Wikipedia:Former featured articles tried having the counts in comments: see here. But, I think that having a bot do it would be our best option. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 01:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Featured color - orange to blue?

I propose we change the default featured color from the current orange({{{2}}}), to the blue now used in most top level pages. E.g. this demo diff.

Please reply at Wikipedia talk:Featured content#Color. Thanks :) —Quiddity 21:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Status of FLs on FC page

Currently 85 of the featured lists have been set up atWikipedia:Featured content/Lists for display on the featured content page. This includes all entries from each of the list categories except "Geography and places", "Politics and government", and "Sports and games". Of course, those are the three largest groups so there is still alot to do. Thus far the only objection to this system has been at List of Stargate SG-1 episodes, where it was stated that the inclusion tags reduced accessibility because any transclusion of the page elsewhere than WP:FC would not include the full list. That page has therefor been removed from the options for random display on the featured content page. Thank you to the people who have set up featured lists for display themselves. When doing so please remember that you need to insert the inclusion tags, add the new entries to display, and update the total count. I will continue working through the remaining lists. --CBD 21:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all your efforts, CBD. -- Colin°Talk 21:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Now up to 109, just over half, including all from Geography/places and recently promoted in other categories. Also, if you want to see whether a particular list has been formatted for the WP:FC page, or how it will look there, you can use {{list preview|<page name>}}... either to 'Show preview' of what it will look like or save a copy on a page. --CBD 22:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
List of Pennsylvania state parks is now set up for display - I wanted to include the clickable map, so left more of the intro in, plus the first five parks in the list. I tried preview and it worked, but wasn't sure if I needed to let someone know or have someone double check it. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 12:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope, no need to get 'approval'. You did everything correctly. --CBD 11:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Current count

I just counted 227 Featured Lists, but the top of the page says 235. Did I miscount or are we off by 8? Jay32183 21:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

FLs in the Main Page

Currently there is a discussion at Talk:Main Page on featuring featured lists, and what is needed someone who's like Raul (the FA scheduler) to get things going, etc. --Howard the Duck 13:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm currently working on a proposal for a WikiProject here. I personally think that we need a collaboration first, to ensure that we have a steady rate of 31 FLs a month coming in to keep the "Today's Featured list" up and running. Therefore, I think that we need a WikiProject first, then we can decide whether we should implement the TFL.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 03:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I think the "this week's FLs" can be enough, with the content from that list rotating for 7 days. Wikipedia has a lot of lists, and with the implementation of FLs in the Main Page, the folks at WP:FLC will be much more stringent and tougher to please. --Howard the Duck 09:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

What's a list?

Is Scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming a list, an article or something in between? Not that I think the list/article has any chance of being featured anytime soon, but just got to wondering because it's an article I got interested in recently and then the 'featured list' proposal got me thinking of lists vs articles... Nil Einne 11:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I wonder when would an article win "the double," being an FL and an FA. :) --Howard the Duck 12:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Simpsons

Someone keeps putting a FAR tag on List of The Simpsons episodes; I believe they intend to submit it for featured list review, but I don't know how to do that for them. Can someone review the talk page and figure it out? Wikipedia:Featured article review/List of The Simpsons episodes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Appears to have already been taken care of Nil Einne 23:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Idea for list and suggestion for featured list

  • I recently jotted down a list of the known burial places of English monarchs. It doesn't feel like a real list, but is it the sort of thing that has potential or not? See the Reference Desk question (and answers) here for more details. Carcharoth 00:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I also came across List of islands by area. What would have to be done to improve this towards featured status? It look interesting, but needs a fair amount of work done on it. Carcharoth 00:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Is Lists of mathematics topics featured?

Lists of mathematics topics says it's featured. The different List of mathematics topics (note "List" instead of "Lists") which redirects to List of mathematics articles was removed from Wikipedia:Featured lists in this edit. PrimeHunter 23:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Request for an early look at a list improvement in progress

Inspired by the FL List of Dartmouth College alumni, I've started work on improving List of University of Oxford people in the hope that, one day month year it might reach FL standard. It was previously a long list of names (with some other details) in text form, divided by field of notability (e.g. Prime Ministers, novelists). I'm now gradually putting the sections of the list into sortable tables and trying to find references for all the alumni mentioned. As it's a large project, I would be very grateful if someone could cast a brief eye over what I'm doing to tell me if I'm doing anything obviously wrong, or missing anything blindingly obvious. For example, when using sortable tables, should I be wikilinking each occurrence of the different Oxford colleges (as, if I only link the first occurrence, that may not be the "first occurrence" once the table has been resorted)? I know this isn't WP:PR but I've never tackled the task of improving a list before: five minutes from someone more used to looking at excellent lists could save me a lot of time in the long run and would be very welcome. Thanks, BencherliteTalk 21:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

New sections in the Manual of Style: dates, numbers, etc

Dear colleagues

WP's Manual of Style has been expanded to include a summary of the recently overhauled MOSNUM submanual. Featured List candidates are explicitly required to follow these guidelines, as are all WP articles.

At issue are the new Sections 9–14:

  • Non-breaking spaces
  • Chronological items (Precise language, Times, Dates, Longer periods)
  • Numbers
  • Decimal points
  • Percentages
  • Units of measurement
  • Currencies, and
  • Common mathematical symbols

More detailed information on these and other topics is at WP:MOSNUM. Tony 06:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Count of FLs

The count of Fls at the top was off by 8. I counted all of the listed lists twice and came up with 327 instead of 335 that was written at the top. I then found out that the count was correct at the end of 2006 (see here) and did some research and found that the problem occurred in this edit.--Crzycheetah 21:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

List size

Some lists, especially given the requirement to have a ref for each entry, can grow to a large size. What are the guidelines on this and splitting a list from say A-Z into A-L and M-Z?Rlevse 12:45, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean to ask whether an existing featured list can be split, or how the criteria apply to "fragments" of lists? Circeus 18:02, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
An existing list.Rlevse 19:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
My take is: the list is demoted (because the original article is probably not worthy anymore), but the parts can be re-nominated separately. Which list where you thinking about? Circeus 17:51, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

New record

It looks like August 2007 could set a new record for number of lists promoted. With the month half over, there are 23 lists, which ties it for second overall. Currently, July 2007 is first with 29 and if August continues with its promotion rate (3 lists promoted every 2 days), it could slaughter the present record. There's really nothing else to it, I just thought it was cool that another new record would be set. Although it will be a while until the FL promotion number is anywhere near the FA promotion number (70 promoted in July 2007) -- Scorpion0422 14:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Music subsection

I think it has become necessary (or at least will become necessary in the near future) to break the music list in a subsection for discographies. There's 8 discogs currently featured (half of the music-related featured lists), 3 current candidates (all of which look pretty good to me), and personally I intend on nominating another very soon. I think it's safe to say that this will eventually have to be done. Drewcifer 02:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

So yea, now there's a total of 12 FL discographies, and 4 more up for nomination as we speak. Does anyone else have an opinion on this? Drewcifer 05:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Why is there a "Physics and Astronomy" category and a "Space" category?

I'm kind of curious about that. They aren't split up in the FA category, so why should that be any different here? It's not like there are a lot of space related lists. -- Scorpion0422 01:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

That's because "Space" means "Spatial exploration", specifically on terrestrial orbit, which is entirely different from "astronomy". I'll fold that under "engineering and tech" instead, and move the AAAASP to Astronomy. It's not easy as new topics for list emerge to keep the listing logical and useful. Compare the listing of building, for example. Circeus 03:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Main page

O.K. for the nth time, let's look at a dedicated mainpage section for WP:FLs. I think the WP:POTD takes up a lot of unnecessary space. A feature such as WP:LOTD (List of the Day) or WP:TFL (Today's Featured List) could take up the right half of the space allocated to WP:POTD. If we have to repeat list for a while that is O.K. I am not so sure it will be much of a problem. There are now about 400 WP:FLs and the pace of promotion is picking up.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 13:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the picture takes up a disproportionately large area compared to the FA section. I assume you know that lists appear on Wikipedia:Featured content, which randomly displays snippets of featured articles, pictures, lists and topics. You can randomly cycle through the content to see what a MainPage list snippet might be like. Most lists contain tables that require a decent width to display properly. I don't think this would work if squeezed into the RHS of a page. IMO, the example list portions you get at Wikipedia:Featured content are generally not fascinating enough to deserve a place on one of the most viewed pages on the internet. Many of them are also considerably larger (vertically) than would probably be allowed for the mainpage. Colin°Talk 14:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  1. Being on the main page is totally different than being at Wikipedia:Featured content.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  2. The lists at WP:FL are no less fascinating than the new articles at WP:DYK. However, we have to work on making the hook for the list on the main page intriguing.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  3. I am not sure the main page hook need always contain a snippet of the list. I think the WP:LEAD need be intriguing or informative. If so, it would suffice for a main page snippet.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  4. I, in fact, have a proposal to revamp WP:TFA that failed to get approval that might work well as an experiment at for WP:LOTD. It did not fail because it is undoable, but more because of the cadre of follows of the WP:TFA director who do not want to see the system change. I could revamp my proposal for list and see what people think. I think WP:FL is getting big enough to do this successfully.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

New FL on the Main Page proposal

We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1, 2007, voting starting December 1, 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1, 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

List_of_WWE_Champions needs fixing

I just visited Wikipedia:Featured content and discovered that something was wrong with the tranclusion of this list onto the page. I'm sure it's something to do with the include tags being messed up or something like that, but aren't really sure about how the specific implementation works. Could someone fix it? Harryboyles 17:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Toohool 00:59, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

List of Naruto chapters (Part I)

Does this fall under "Language and literature" or "Media". While I'm at it, do lists of awards won by ____ fall under "Awards and decorations" or whichever medium its recipient fist under? (music, media, etc.)? -- Scorpion0422 01:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

"awards won by" would fit with whatever the winner fits in (cf. the Amateur Achievement Award of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific). Naruto can go in either, but I'm inclined toward literature, since it only cover paper media (and it was originally a manga, unlike Kingdom Hearts media, which would be unreasonable to move). I'm going to add subdivision to the media section while I'm at it... Circeus 02:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Colors for featured list

Can we use color coded tables for featured lists? Miranda 21:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but not excessively. Generally, colour coding should not be used for any "vital information". See this page, which is an FL, and contains what I think is acceptable colour coding. -- Scorpion0422 22:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I used it for this, since there are four groups of founders. Miranda 23:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I would say that is entirely, even obnoxiously unnecessary. It's actually an excellent exampleof how not to use color. There's no need whatsoever for it and it replaces information that should be offered in prose anyway. Circeus 23:19, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 :-( ok let me take it out. Here's the original version here. Miranda 23:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
As it is, if they were mixed into the list, (with the fact they are founder mentioned), it would be appropriate to add the color to make them stand out (That's how color is usually used), but as it, it was really unneeded. An idea is that instead of having a repetitive note column, you could split the table like List of mammals of Canada to show the different groups. Given the small size of that table, losing the sort function is not a big deal. Circeus 01:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

LOTD proposal

You may have seen either the original list of the day proposal or the revised version. A more modest experimental proposal is now at issue at WP:LOTDP. Feel free to voice your opinion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

FL class

I have gotten list class added to the quality log. I am trying to get FL class added here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Why what's the big deal with that? I thought all featured class articles were considered on the same level, so why should it matter? If anything, Featured portals and images and sounds should have their own column, not lists. -- Scorpion0422 20:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Finally!!!!!!!!!!!!--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 03:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Is there any way to know what project templates support FL as a class? Gimmetrow 03:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

huge blunder

Lists (PLURAL, dammit!!) of mathematics topics is a featured list.

List (singular!!) of mathematics topics is not.

After the featured list got moved to lists of mathematics topics, someone changed Wikipedia:Featured lists so that it said list of mathematics topics, which was a redirect to the non-featured list of mathematics articles. Then someone saw that the page listed at Wikipedia:featured lists was not a featured list, and deleted it. The error stood for almost seven months. I've changed the singular title to a disambiguation page. Michael Hardy 02:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I asked about this five months ago in #Is Lists of mathematics topics featured?. PrimeHunter 02:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

List of The Day

Since it looks like Today's featured list proposal is going to pass, I am here to recrute people to help get this going and help decide who should be in charge of it. Any suggestions? The Placebo Effect (talk) 00:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Royalty, nobility, and heraldry... and vexillology?

How about expanding the section "Royalty, nobility, and heraldry" to "Royalty, nobility, heraldry and vexillology"? Currently, the section includes only two lists: List of French monarchs and List of Portuguese monarchs. With the expansion, we could move Flag flying days in Mexico and List of Polish flags here from the "Culture and society" section. Heraldry and vexillology have quite much in common and we have a single wikiproject for both topics. We might also expand the "Awards and decorations" section to "Awards, decorations and vexillology" like it is at Wikipedia:Featured articles and move all the flag-related lists there. This seems like a worse option to me, though; currently, the section contains mostly lists of motion picture awards, which have little to do with vexillology. — Kpalion(talk) 00:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I decided to be bold and go ahead with that. — Kpalion(talk) 12:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposal #6!

This time I posted the design itself as the proposal. A picture is worth a thousand words...

Wikipedia:Today's featured list proposal

Are we there yet?

See you there!

The Transhumanist    21:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

move to portal namespace

See Portal talk:Featured content#move to portal namespace. —Ruud 12:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

References

I have no idea where to bring this up so if there's a better place to do so, please let me know. Right now, work is being done to raise List of centenarians to FL status and a question was raised about referencing. On one hand, it would be optimal to have a reference for each name that mentions them being 100+ years old (obit, biography, 100th birthday news article etc. etc.). On the other hand, these facts should be inherent on the article page themselves and thus cited properly there and it would add a lot to an article that is already almost 90 KB. We still have some things to do (add a picture, write a proper lead etc. etc.) so I'm not asking for a "review" of the list as it stands, but rather wondering, before I put an awful lot of work into individual references, if that would be the preferred method. Cheers, CP 00:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Automation

Would you like FLC closes automated like FAC closes? Gimmetrow 19:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

500 Featured lists!

We now currently have 500 lists! For those who are curious, the 500th one would be the second that I promoted today, which is List of Green Bay Packers first-round draft picks. Congratulations, and here's to 500 more in 2008. -- Scorpion0422 22:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Question of sources for featured lists

(Stupid question, bear with me) If someone were trying to turn, lets say, a sports roster into a featured list, and the majority of the list is covered by one or two websites, would they have to put inline citations next to everyone on the list referencing them to those two websites, or could they just but the two sites at the bottom in the references section and use inline citations for everything else not covered? Nenog (talk) 04:09, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Which page are you talking about? -- Scorpion0422 04:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
World Wrestling Entertainment roster, and the discussions here, here, here, here, and specifically here. Nenog (talk) 04:25, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
We have plenty of FLs working that way. Circeus (talk) 04:26, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, in that case, a few general citations should be okay. For a similar list see: List of Manchester United F.C. players, which is an FL. -- Scorpion0422 04:28, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

Now that WP:LOTD is up and running we were trying to expose it to readers at WP:FC by adding {{ListoftheDaylayout}}. This has been controversial. Please comment at Portal_talk:Featured_content#List_of_the_Day.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 23:00, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

There is another proposal out there, and displaying either one would be choosing sides and it would look like advertising. -- Scorpion0422 23:16, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


Weekly archiving

Although Wikipedia:Goings on needs to be archived every Sunday at 0:01 UTC, and reports Featured articles, lists, pictures, portals and topics, I seem to be the only person making the effort to archive it each Saturday night. It would be nice if some of the other processes could help with this task occasionally. The instructions are right in the top of the Wikipedia:Goings on page. I've attempted to get a bot written to to it, but there have been no takers for a long time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Lists that direct to other lists

Is there a precedint for getting a list that redirects to other lists up to featured status. Specifically, I am referring to the List of Medal of Honor recipients list. Due to the sheer size of the list (over 3500) it wouldn't be feasible to put them all on one big list so its broken up by conflict. My qustion specifically is is this acceptible for a featured list?--Kumioko (talk) 20:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess knowone knows...or cares.--Kumioko (talk) 23:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

edit this page, pretty please

Neat change, but I can't see how it was done, and it only happens from the WP:FL shortcut. So how was this done? Gimmetrow 22:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

What happened? -- Scorpion0422 22:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Gone now [1]. I guess the shortcut was still cached for me, so I was looking through {{R from shortcut}} and subtemplates for something. Gimmetrow 22:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Images in lists of people

In a list of historical people (for example, Lists of Presidents of Examplecountry) can it not become an FL if it doesn't have free images for one or two people in the list? Do we have to wait fifty years until the existing photos of the person are in the public domain? Would a list have more chance of passing if it had no photos of any people except in the intro, so it would be at least uniform, if plain? --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 03:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The image part of th FL criteria is usually ignored because it was written before the more stringent image rules. I don't see why a list with only a few missing images would have a lot of trouble. We have several FLs that only have images for less than half of the people in a table, ie. List of premiers of Alberta. -- Scorpion0422 13:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Can you clarify what "is usually ignored"? All criteria should be respected, and if there is something wrong with them then they should be changed. Colin°Talk 16:49, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
What I meant was criterion 3 is usually the most excuseable, because with the image rules, most lists aren't allowed to have any fair use images. I've never seen a list fail because of an issue over free images (fair use images, yes, but not free images)

Alpha order?

My assumption would be that the groupings are listed alphabetically. So why is "Literature and theatre" before "Law"? I didn't want to change it myself in case there was something I didn't know. --Midnightdreary (talk) 17:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Discographies

At the risk of blatant WikiProject advertisement, I thought I'd let everyone know about the new Discography WikiProject. As far as I know this is the first list-based WikiProject (with the exception of the Lists WikiProject), so I thought it was worth mentioning. There's been alot of scattered discussion about discography style as of late, so I hope this project can act as a central hub for those discussions, and once consensus is reached, to provide a style guide of some sort. Anyways, take a look and stuff. Drewcifer (talk) 22:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Should this existing FL be split into shorter lists?

Thoughts, please, on List of people associated with Jesus College, Oxford. When it passed its FLC, it looked like this (113 alumni, 25 fellows/principals, 91,000 bytes). In its current state, it now has 211 alumni, 86 fellows/principals and 160,000 bytes - I've been busy, as you can tell! The page is now one of the top 100 longest pages on WP, and is getting increasingly difficult to load and edit. I think it would be appropriate to split it into at least two lists, e.g. List of alumni of Jesus College, Oxford and List of Fellows and Principals of Jesus College, Oxford. What do people think, and how should this be done so as to keep both at FL status? BencherliteTalk 00:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

MOS:DISCOG

Just to let everyone know, as part of the ongoing effort to get WP:DISCOG up and running, I've written up my proposal for a discography style guideline, which can be found at MOS:DISCOG. I mention it here since a lot of the FL discogs past and present will potentially be affected by the guideline, since my goal was to make more stringent requirements for FL discogs. Nearly all FL discogs (including the 4 or 5 that I've seen through to FL) aren't 100% compliant with my proposal, to varying degrees of necessary work. I'd like to eventually cleanup all of the current FL discogs, ideally with this or any other WP:DISCOG style guidelines in mind, so any decisions made with my proposal will most likely affect alot of featured lists. So, please take a look and make any comments you might have on the guideline's talk page. Thanks! Drewcifer (talk) 23:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

List of WCW Hardcore Champions

Can List of WCW Hardcore Champions be merged with List of WCW Hardcore Championship reigns by length in a sortable table?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)