Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Board of Regents of the University of Michigan

Board of Regents of the University of Michigan

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. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 12 days, 1 support, 2 oppose. No attempts to meet the opposition. Fail. Crzycheetah 04:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Self-nomination. List is (I believe) complete, sourced, stable, uncontroversial, and presents the data in a more useful fashion than other presentations of the same data I have seen. -Sarcasmboy 02:23, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Too many redlinks. Tables hard to follow in some places. I am not sure that many of the redlinked names will ever have articles. Rmhermen 17:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you expand on where you find the tables hard to follow? I can't deny that there are a lot of redlinks, and that many of them are not notable enough to have their own article. But one of the Featured List criteria is (emphasis added):

3. contains a finite, complete and well-defined set of items that naturally fit together to form a significant topic of study, and where the members of the set are not sufficiently notable to have individual articles

so I wasn't under the impression that it would be an impediment. Would simply removing the wikilinks and turning the redlinks into regular text help at all, in your opinion? -Sarcasmboy 21:48, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Some of those redlinks will never be created, so it's best to delink them. Nishkid64 (talk) 23:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will go through and delink the ones that obviously will never have their own article. I think there are still a number of redlinked people who are notable enough in the history of Michigan that they might end up with their own article at some point, so I will probably leave them linked. -Sarcasmboy 22:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A few things that bear additional explanation:

How could two men hold all thirteen professorships of the Catholepistemiad?
Something should be said about the Superintendent of Public Instruction in the lead for the 1852-present table.
How do the regent elections work, e.g. what are the term lengths, are they all elected simultaneously?

Toohool 21:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added clarification that I hope addresses your first two points. Your third point was touched on in the Current Board section, I think, but is now also mentioned again in the expanded text I just added. -Sarcasmboy 22:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose
- Agree the table format chosen is less than ideal (it's already troublesome in political articles, let's not spread it unnecessarily).
- Far too many redlinks
- "List of Members of the Board of Regents of the University of Michigan (and its predecessors)" is a laughable headers. I can't believe "Members of the Board (and its predecessors)" couldn't do the trick. You could even get rid of the "(and its predecessors)". THe other headers can also support shortening.
Circeus 06:16, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]