Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of San Francisco Giants managers/archive1
- 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 Scorpion0422 23:26, 28 April 2009 [1].
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets all the criteria Adam Penale (talk) 00:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Extremely Strong Oppose Please never nominate something you didn't significantly contribute to without consulting the principal contributor(s). On WP:FLC, it reads "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the list should consult regular editors of the list before nomination."-- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]]call me Keith 00:28, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
|
- Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards. Great work.--Truco 02:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose- Agree with above, though I have quite a few comments if the primary contributor is OK with the nom. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 00:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]Oppose - per above—Chris! ct 01:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I have asked Rlendog whether the list was ready and he wanted it to be nominated. Let's keep this FLC open until he replies. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I am okay with this going forward. I think it is in good shape and I am not sure what additional improvements are needed and would be interested in the feedback and getting this up to FL. Thanks. Rlendog (talk) 14:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Since we have Rlendog's consent to move forward with the nom, I'll post my comments when I get home from work this afternoon (they are waiting on a WordPad document on my computer's desktop). KV5 (Talk • Phils) 14:56, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I am okay with this going forward. I think it is in good shape and I am not sure what additional improvements are needed and would be interested in the feedback and getting this up to FL. Thanks. Rlendog (talk) 14:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from KV5 |
---|
Hope this helps. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 21:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
Cheers. I support. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:45, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Criterion 1, per everything KV pointed out above. Four typos in a lead is simply unacceptable in any article, never mind an FL. Add in the many MoS glitches already mentioned and there is serious work to be done. To offer an original comment, does the lead really need to be six paragraphs long? In particular, most of the second paragraph has little to do with the Giants or their managers. Giants2008 (17-14) 02:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe I have fixed the typos and any MoS issues. I think the second paragraph is necessary. The first two sentences address the early Giants' managers. The other two paragraphs don't sepcifically address a Giants' manager, but I think they are necessary to explain the fact that I am sure many will find surprising that Jim Mutrie managed the Giants to two World Series titles before 1900. Rlendog (talk) 18:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I did eliminate one paragraph by combining the last short paragraph with the previous one. Rlendog (talk) 18:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- (ec) If you find it necessary, perhaps have the information as a footnote, like how it's handled in the table. Giants2008 (17-14) 18:24, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for the suggestion. I did that. Rlendog (talk) 21:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- (ec) If you find it necessary, perhaps have the information as a footnote, like how it's handled in the table. Giants2008 (17-14) 18:24, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I did eliminate one paragraph by combining the last short paragraph with the previous one. Rlendog (talk) 18:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk) |
---|
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
|
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008
|
---|
|
Support - Nice work addressing the points brought up during this review. Looks much better, and ready for FL status. Giants2008 (17-14) 20:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Is there any kind of official San Francisco Giants source that you would be able to include (not that one is necessary, but it would be nice to have one in there). -- Scorpion0422 15:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The reference for the general managers was already from the Giants' official page, but I now added a link to the manager list on the Giants' official page as a general reference.Rlendog (talk) 17:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.