Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Boat Race results/archive2

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 (talk) 21:10, 12 July 2015 [1].

List of The Boat Race results edit

Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk) 17:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, last time round this became subject to an edit war so it needed to be withdrawn. I have reduced the controversial part to a minimum so, with luck, we won't end up in the same boat (tee hee). As always, thanks to anyone who has the time and energy to comment, your efforts are always appreciated, and I will attempt to address any and all comments as soon as practicable. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support: a few very minor tweaks, but all good for a suppotr, the heavy work having been done in the last review. Excellent. - SchroCat (talk) 08:39, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, much appreciated. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

40% of the lead is dedicated to the reserves. Overrepresentration?
A large proportion of the results section is dedicated to the reserves. How would you like me to improve the lead to satisfy your concern? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe have a graph showing the progression of victories after each year?
I don't see how this helps, the information is in the table. It's personal taste. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a graph! The Rambling Man (talk) 07:23, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What is the horizontal scale? From 1947 on it seems to be in fours, but prior to that it's unclear. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's the year of the event. Prior to 1947 the race was intermittent, which is why you may find it unclear. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:25, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I suspected as much... it's fine when races were held every year, but when they weren't, it's not at all apparent which year really applies. For example, the year shown before 1947 is 1937, so assuming that was four races earlier, we cannot tell from the graph what years the three in between were. This was of course when WWII was on, so they were 1938/9/46; but for other gaps, like 1829-41? We need to refer to the table. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:41, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, which means to say that the graph and the table are complementary, the actual bare facts are in the table, the sense of dominance and equality and now how close it is after 161 events is given in the graph. Alternatively we could replace the year with the "edition", 1 to 161. Then dates, gaps etc become irrelevant. By all means upload your own preferred version. Or I can remove the graph altogether. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think the table could use a column with the length ran that year. Use multirow if necessary
No, but what I could do is to add a footnote regarding the courses which weren't the Championship Course, after all it's just a handful. Adding the same length for 150+ items is pointless. The Rambling Man (talk)

Footnotes added. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:31, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure what easily is supposed to mean. Exact margins are completely unavailable? Is it >10lengths for sure? Perhaps have a footnote for it?
It's what the official source says (i.e. the Boat Race website) and what the contemporary sources say. There's no definition. In answer to your first question, yes, exact margins are completely unavailable in the early races. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The body of the list doesn't really explain what are reserves supposed to mean, and why was it started in '65. Have there been cases of somebody being injured in the main crew and they hopped from reserves to main?
This is a list about the results, not the history of the Boat Race. If you're worried about the meaning of the word "reserve" then would you prefer me to link to Reserve#Sports?
how much is a canvass and a boat length?
I can link this to the Glossary of rowing terms if you prefer, every boat is of different construction so its length and the length of its canvas is variable, there is no one answer and no regulation regarding it. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nergaal (talk) 14:38, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Canvas is already linked. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:54, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've responded to your questions above, please let me know how you would like me to proceed. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure you will find plenty of reviewers out there happily dealing with your replies. Nergaal (talk) 02:54, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand this comment. The Rambling Man (talk) 04:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Harrias

Comments from Harrias

Not sure the first reference needs repeating in the first sentence, but I'm pretty ambivalent about it.
Funny, some people get sniffy about quotes, so I directly referenced it each time. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"to which Oxford responded with then record-equalling streak of nine consecutive victories" I think there is a missing "a" between "with" and "then".
Yep, added. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Cambridge won the last race before the First World War resulted in a five-year hiatus in the event, and while Oxford triumphed in the 1923 race, Cambridge won thirteen consecutive races between 1924 and 1936, and led 47–40 overall." This sentence doesn't fit together right for me. The Oxford win in 1923 is relevant for breaking up a string of Cambridge victories between 1914 and 1936, but the article doesn't make that clear. At the moment, that middle bit seems a bit unnecessary to me.
Tried an awkward reword, feel free to batter me for it and make alternative arrangements. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the lead you refer to "the 4.2-mile (6.8 km) Championship Course", with a lower case "the", but thereafter you always use "The Championship Course". I prefer a lower case "the" myself, but either way, remain consistent.
Well in the first case it's split by the measurement. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It would be nice to have some sort of indication in the table, be it a symbol or a note, ideally next to the time, for those races that did not take place on the current course.
Agreed, that's on my to-do list. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have an accessdate for ref #13. Technically, as a newspaper source, that isn't the end of the world, but given you have provided one for the similar refs #17 to #21, for consistency it would be nice.
Added. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Harrias ^talk 19:53, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Muchos gracias, I'll sort the footnotes about the length of the race, as noted also by Nergaal, tomorrow, I'm too tired to do it now. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes now added. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:31, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support my concerns have been resolved, nice work! Harrias ^talk 17:53, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support but there still isn't an accessdate for ref 21. - A Texas Historian (Impromptu collaboration?) 05:56, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and I've added that accessdate! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:06, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from FrB.TG

You might add alt texts for the images.
If I am not wrong, in harv references (book ones), we also add year preceded by the last name of the book's author e.g. "MacMichael, p. 34" should be changed to "MachMichael 1979, p. 34".
I don't see the need to do this if there's no ambiguity, there's only one MacMichael reference after all. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since you have linked publishers of sources in the Notes section, the same can be done with CBC News.
Sure, done. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Boat Race Company Limited – ditto.
No, while they're the official Boat Race company, they are not notable enough. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why have you provided a google link only for the third entry in the below section and not with the other two?
If you are referring to the bibliography section, it's because the third entry is the only one PD and available to read on Google for nothing, the other two are not. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had some other minor concerns which were already mentioned by the above reviewers and are already addressed. Aside from that, the list looks good. -- Frankie _talk 15:38, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SNUGGUMS

Very well-compiled list overall. However, the names of works only need to be linked within the first reference using it per WP:OVERLINK. Other than that, good to go once FrB.TG's comments are addressed. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:37, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I link them every time since it's not certain which reference will be accessed first, a bit like linking every item every time in a sortable list. I don't see it being a violation of overlink. Thanks anyway! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I now support. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:17, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:27, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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