Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/May 2023

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 archived by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [1].

---

Critical Role (campaign two)

Nominator(s): Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Critical Role has become a big cultural phenomenon, the channel is among the highest earners on Twitch, and the show has propelled the actual play genre forward. I'm nominating this article specifically because it is a nearly complete work (ex: it has plot summaries for its 141 episodes unlike other Critical Role episode lists) with work done by multiple editors. I've just finished addressing points of improvement raised during a Guild of Copy Editors review. This is my first time nominating an article & I look forward to your reviews! Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Nomader

Oppose until the plot section and other minor comments are dealt with.

Prose (1):

• In the lead, there's a citation after the phrase "four months after the conclusion of the first campaign." Per WP:CITEFOOT, "If a word or phrase is particularly contentious, an inline citation may be added next to that word or phrase within the sentence, but it is usually sufficient to add the citation to the end of the clause, sentence, or paragraph, so long as it's clear which source supports which part of the text." I think this isn't a contentious citation here and would be fine at the end of the sentence instead.
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
• I think that the upcoming Amazon adaptation could be merged into the end of the previous paragraph but could also see the argument for keeping them separate. Defer to you here.
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
• Not sure why there's a use of a direct quote with the Collider article in the beginning of the "Production and format" section. I think it could say something along the lines of (please put this into the right words but I think you'll see where I'm going with this): "Collider reported that the second campaign had aired for over 530 hours, including 100 hours dedicated to battles, and previewed that the finale would be seven hours long."
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
• The reception section isn't really grouped by theme, and is instead kind of grouped by reviewer. Take a look at The Simpsons (season_10)#Critical reception to see a good example of how a reception section can be better at giving information based on themes for the reader.
  • I regrouped it and brought in a few more sources; P1 is on the recommendation of this campaign as the Critical Role starting point, P2 is the viewership (which is fairly limited compared to something like Nielsen ratings), P3 is the criticism of the show's length (both individual episodes & as a series), and P4 is on the plot points critics covered (mostly Molly's death & his body returning as an antagonist). Let me know if that wasn't conveyed or if there are any other places of improvement. Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Comprehensiveness (3):

• (a) I think that the plot section is far too broad here. For comparison, MOS:TVPLOT recommends that whole seasons of television shows use *either* episode tables that limit descriptions to 200 words, or to a prose summary of the entire season of no more than 500 words -- not both. I know this isn't a television show, but it's the closest guide that I could think of here (a serial series with hours of content). Examples of Featured Lists that I think do a good job of showcasing how this split works are listed here: The Simpsons (season 10), Desperate Housewives (season 1), Degrassi: The Next Generation (season 4), Bleach (season 9). In this case, it's obviously not exactly a 1:1 comparison -- I would keep the setting section (which is important context for the detail found in the episode summaries) but then would cut the entire rest of the plot section and allow the episode listings to do the heavy lifting here.
  • Removed the plot section. Do you think that's something that should be moved to List of Critical Role episodes#Campaign two (2018–2021)? Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

  Honestly, good question -- my gut based on other FL examples of long-running television shows (again the closest thing I can think of in comparison to this situation) like Avatar episodes and other series would be that you would actually just not have it at all. I'd keep the description to extremely broad strokes with details of settings, and maybe small highlights of particularly poignant moments -- but the episode descriptions will tell the story in more detail in a "summary style" (per MOS:SUMMARY) in the Season article, and then the full list should just include the setting. You already have a plot section that gets told through each of the episode descriptions.

  In my own personal editing example, I think back to when I gave a super-detailed plot summary of the play Hamlet for the game Elsinore that I collaborated on with a user from the Shakespeare WikiProject, and when I was going through the GA process, the reviewer (rightfully) cut it down to like, a quarter of the size (see this diff: [2]). And it felt a bit weird to me to cut it out because we'd spent so much time with them tweaking it and sourcing it and figuring it out... just to realize that it was way too much detail. In this case, I think it's an incredible effort of highlighting and focusing 550 hours (!!!) of content but it's redundant to the descriptions. Nomader (talk) 08:39, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

  That makes sense! It was an original holdover as the really long plot summary was what led to the individual campaigns being split off from the Critical Role article. Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

• (b) There should be a citation for Ashley Johnson in the main cast section (you can probably just use #11 which is above it).
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Style (5):

• Per 5b in the criteria, there should be media appropriate to the topic with succinct captions. I think you could include one of the photos of the actors -- maybe in the reception area, a photo of Taliesin Jaffe could be included with context about Molly's death?
  • Done. Another potential image to go along with Jaffe's is the cover of Critical Role: The Mighty Nein – The Nine Eyes of Lucien, however, I'm unsure if that would meet WP:NFCI. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

A spot check of citations was all good to go. This is unbelievably thorough work, and although it needs some large changes (mostly the removal of the "Plot" section of the synposis along with a full re-working of the reception section), the level of work to summarize all of those episodes is extraordinary. Please ping me once you're finished with edits and I'll be happy to strike my oppose -- this review is also being submitted for the Wikicup. Nomader (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your review Nomader! I'll start addressing some of the points you listed above and ping you when I'm done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:01, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Perfect, sounds good! Just a heads up that I'll be on vacation from tomorrow, Thursday February 16, to Tuesday February 21st -- in case I don't get back to you right away, I'll only be checking sporadically during that time. Nomader (talk) 08:24, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Nomader: Just wrapped the last point (notes on the reception sections above). I hope you have a good holiday! Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:15, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Sariel Xilo: Luckily you caught me 24 hours early! The reception section is an incredible improvement and reads much, much better. I'm happy to support now that all of my concerns have been addressed. Really impressive work to everyone involved (especially on the summary plot notes for each episode which I haven't talked that much about here). Thanks for being so prompt! Nomader (talk) 02:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks again for all your feedback! I've also dropped a request for a fair-use map at the Graphics Lab; they have a queue but the list might end up with a map for the setting section down the line. Sariel Xilo (talk) 03:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Comments by RunningTiger123

Saw this has been sitting here for a while, so I figured I'd take a look.

• Don't bold "second campaign" in the lead (similar FAs/FLs about TV seasons don't do it)
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:27, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• The article shifts between using "The Mighty Nein" and "the Mighty Nein" – pick one form of capitalization and stick with it (I personally prefer the latter).
  • Fairly sure I got all of these using ctrl-F (went with lower case) except for when it was in quotes or titles (such as the comic book Critical Role: The Mighty Nein Origins). I would appreciate a second look though as my dyslexia makes this kind of task easy to mess up. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:38, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• The lead says the campaign ran for over 550 hours, but the "Production and format" section says 530. Use the same number in both places.
  • Done. I think the second source is a typo; CritRoleStats (a fan run site that Critical Role itself cites for stats on their show) reports the total run time as 556:34:24 so "over 550 hours" is the accurate count. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:03, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• "Since February 28, 2019, ..." – "Since" feels like the wrong word because the campaign is finished
  • This paragraph in general should stick with past tense for this reason
    • Rephrased. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:48, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• "These changes were present until the end of the campaign on June 3, 2021." – unsourced
  • Added a primary source (the episode itself); alternatively, the sentence can be removed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:54, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• As someone who is generally unfamiliar with D&D, some links in the episode list to various terms would be helpful. Basically, any time a new type of creature or D&D–specific item appears, I would suggest a link.
  • Example: In episode 5, link Gnoll (fictional creature)
• #5: "The party aids" – use plural verb instead for consistency
• #15: Title should be "Where the River Goes" (capitalization)
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #16: "The Mighty Nein destroys it" – see above
• #18: "With was looming" – should that be "war"?
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #24: "the party is" – use plural verb
• #25: "The party agrees" – see above
• #31: "the party heads southward" – see above
• #33: Need a citation to justify why Orly's introduction is significant
  • Added source but also open to removing the sentence. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #38: Use "Ashley Johnson is absent for a block of episodes and..." for consistency
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #40 and #68: Use "Laura Bailey is absent this episode." for consistency
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #42: Title should be "A Hole in the Plan"
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #45: "toBall Eater" – missing space
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #55: "The party engages" – use plural verb
• #62: Close the quote or remove the standalone quotation mark
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #74: "nick-knacks" – should that be "knick-knacks"?
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #74–76: Use a period after "Guest stars Mica Burton" for consistency
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #75: "Reani has a summoned a spider" – assuming that first "a" is a typo
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #92: Title should be "Home Is Where the Heart Is"
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #93: "called that Dust of Deliciousness" – remove "that"
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #94: "Leomund's Tiny Hut" is in quotations here but italicized elsewhere. Pick one format, or better yet, just write it everywhere without quotations or italics (other spells and items don't seem to use them).
  • Went with italics. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #102: "party'e" is a typo
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #105: "and use a reflection spell" – assuming Vokodo did this, "use" should be "uses"
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #105: "the party sees" – use plural verb
• #108: Trim the summary (MOS:TV suggests using no more than 200 words; I would stick to that)
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 01:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #108: If the episode's title is "Traveler Con", why is it spelled "Travelercon" everywhere else?
  • The cast & sources are inconsistent on this so I'm assuming different editors went with different versions. I'll go back through & change it to "Traveler Con" as that's what the episode title uses. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Done via ctrl-f. Sariel Xilo (talk) 01:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #114: Trim the summary
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 01:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #114: "and states;" – use a colon instead of a semicolon
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #115: Is the Nein Sided Mansion the same as the "Nein-Sided Tower" from #111? If so, use the same term for both.
  • Fixed. It is called both a tower and a mansion in the show; the character modified the Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion spell to create the Widogast's Nascent Nein-Sided Tower spell so tower is more accurate. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #119: "Because" should be lowercase
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #128: Here, Trent Ikithon is referred to as "Ikithon", but elsewhere, he is called "Trent". Pick one name and use it consistently.
  • Updated to just "Ikithon" via ctrl-F. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:47, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• #130: Replace the semicolon with a comma
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• "...by having few references to the events of the first campaign makes the second campaign..." → "...by having few references to the events of the first campaign, the second campaign is..." (emphasis only added to show where changes are needed)
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:47, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
• "goblins, kobolds, bugbears and Drow" – not sure why drow is capitalized here
  • Fixed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:25, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• "the total runtime of episodes 1-99 is '623 hours (25 days, 23 hours)'" – this contradicts the earlier citations. Are you sure they're not counting other episodes, maybe from Campaign One?
  • Removed the quote; you're probably right that they were adding C1 & C2 together for total hours. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:03, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• In the Reception section, the image and quote should be spaced farther apart within the section to avoid issues with MOS:SANDWICH
  • Done. Moved the quote box above the image. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:17, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
• Include a link to the campaign's YouTube playlist under an "External links" section
  • Done. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:23, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:47, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

@RunningTiger123: Thanks for taking a look! I'll try to tackle a few of these suggestions now but probably will do the bulk of it later this week when I have more time (maybe Tuesday or Wednesday). I'll strikethrough or comment above as I go. Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:54, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Two follow up questions:

1. In terms of article links, are more general mythological articles fine? The issue with linking to D&D specific articles is that most of them are redirects to larger list articles (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons/Where) which may not actually include an entry on a specific creature or item (a lot of these redirects are being deleted due to this). I'll go through the episode list when I have more time to see what can be linked.
2. Could you explain the plural verb issue? I did a quick google and I can't tell what the issue is so I'm not sure how the sentence should be changed.

Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 00:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

1. General terms are fine; I think it's just useful to know what they're facing.
2. You generally treat "the group"/"the party" as plural, so the verbs should be plural; i.e., "The party aid" instead of "The party aids". (This link might help to explain it better – since the members play as individuals, the collective noun should be treated as plural.)

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:00, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been archived, 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) 22:24, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

@Giants2008: I was still working through the advice above but got a bit swamped in IRL. What is the process for resubmitting? Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:07, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

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

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 archived by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [3].

---

List of LGBT Olympians and Paralympians

Nominator(s): Kingsif (talk) 01:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

This is now one of the largest lists by size on Wikipedia. I suppose it's really a few lists that add up to one subject. I have put a lot of work into it this year, basing the appearance on a comparable list I found at the Hebrew Wikipedia, taking some poor bullet lists from related articles, and altogether adding the hundreds of missing entries for completion. I nominate it as a candidate for FL because I think it is quite a neat complete work - though, more on that - and for advice on further improvements, of course. Given its size, I sure am expecting some! I am currently in the process of migrating its many references to a more user-readable harvref format, since there are also hundreds of those. The only concern I have to it becoming FL is that it is a dynamic list; former Olympians can come out at any time, and there are more predictable periods in the run-up to Games when already-out athletes are announced to be competing. However, we have other dynamic lists at FL, and while they may be less prone to change, I think the somewhat predictability here makes it manageable. Happy to answer any questions, and thanks for looking it over! Kingsif (talk) 01:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Technical considerations

Before getting too far into this nomination, I want to note that this page is really long. Right now, the post-expand include size is 1790806/2097152 bytes, or about 85.4% of the maximum page size (2 MiB per WP:LENGTH). I think it would be prudent to consider either splitting the page or reducing the page size – otherwise, there will likely be serious technical issues within a few years. (Removing images from the table might help, though I don't know how much the HTML code to display the images actually contributes.) I'm open to suggestions here. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:16, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I second this. This is a great list, and the pictures and notes are instrumental to it, despite making up so much of the length - a list of names alone wouldn't be as interesting. But the fact is that the athletes added for the 2020 and 2022 games alone are 20% of the incredibly long list, which means we can safely assume another massive addition for the 2024 games. As RunningTiger123 notes, it's already 85% of the way to the point where the page will literally stop rendering partway through- as in it will just cut off in the middle of the table and not display anything further down. This means that, very likely, in 1.5 years the page will be unreadable by anyone, and it's frankly already unreadable for anyone who is on a slower internet connection, which is a good chunk of the reading populace. It's nice to have it all in one page, but this is, unfortunately, a problem that a lot of longer lists like this face, which then reach the same unfortunate conclusion: you have to break it up into sublists. I'd recommend breaking it up into at least 3 or 4 lists by year of Olympic debut, though alphabetically is also sometimes done. It's up to you, but something has to be done, I'm afraid. --PresN 03:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@RunningTiger123 and PresN: Thank you both, these are exactly the kind of comments I was hoping for on that side - as well as table accessibility notes (which would presumably make the code longer if not up to scratch). As for resolving it, the longer notes take up quite a bit, even the shorter notes get long with references; the images are around 100 characters per entry, which is a lot with this many, but not as much as the notes. I think I agree that splitting is the better solution; the LGBT issues at the Olympic and Paralympic Games article (which needs work, but) has some rough historical periods - would these be beneficial to breaking it up?. Kingsif (talk) 03:51, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Another thought for splits: Summer athletes, Summer artists, intersex athletes, Winter athletes, and Paralympians getting lists at separate articles. The Summer athletes at least could do with splits, too, I fear. Kingsif (talk) 03:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not a technical guy, like, at all, but my lists all have a lot of images ... and I don't know if they've done something in the last two years to fix the problem, but a few reviewers were telling me that some of the images stopped loading for them when I got up to roughly 100 images. You have a lot of SVG pictograms on top of a lot of photos, too ... I don't know if that's a problem, but it might be. Personally, I haven't had the problem of images not loading for my own lists, so I can't test the problem I'm talking about. - Dank (push to talk) 17:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I think splitting by type of athlete is fine, but I agree that the same issue will still arise with summer athletes. If I had to pick a non-arbitrary cutoff, maybe start a new list from 2004 onwards, as transgender athletes were first allowed to compete at those games? I could also see the list being split from 2020 onwards since those were described as the "Rainbow Olympics", though I think it's probably too soon to determine if that's a meaningful nickname that will stand the test of time. I would also be fine with a somewhat arbitrary cutoff from 2000 onwards (i.e., pre-21st century in the first list), or really at any point in the last 20 years. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the ideas - I think 2004 is a good suggestion. I'll probably start with 2004-present to see how long the resulting lists are, in case the pre-2004 needs to be split further. Kingsif (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kingsif: Okay, since you're splitting this, would you prefer to close this nomination, or do you think you'll have a nominate-able chunk that can take the whole list's place in short order? Up to you. Since you asked, I'll give you an accessibility review for this list in a second in any case. --PresN 04:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the accessibility review, and the input so far. I think that splitting this means splitting everything out and, maybe (and which I've prepared for), leaving a boring old plain text list at the List of LGBT Olympians and Paralympians article/title (essentially to serve as a hub and to preserve history) - I think I will leave this open because a variety of cut-pastes and scraping the names shouldn't take too long. The process can then decide if the plain list is suitable, right? And I'm sure the process will come up with suggestions to, I suppose, "highlight" some of the more prominent athletes of each type. Of course, I trust your judgment on if this nomination should be closed and, perhaps, one of the split articles to be nominated once all cleaned up. Kingsif (talk) 04:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

The current list at the title of this nomination should be suitable now, to begin review. There are only the summary tables now present at this list, and I think I have made these accessible with this edit. Thanks again for this. Kingsif (talk) 01:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

@RunningTiger123: For future reference, how are you able to see the post-expand size? ~ HAL333 20:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

@HAL333: You have to open the page source and scroll to the bottom of the HTML code; close to the bottom, there's a comment with various page stats. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah, got it. Thanks, ~ HAL333 23:31, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Unless otherwise specified, these apply to both the main table as well as the summary ones in {{LGBT Olympians overview}}
• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead. You have captions for the tables at LGBT Olympians overview, but not the main one.
• Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. ! Country becomes !scope=col | Country. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.
• Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | [[Robert de Montesquiou]] becomes !scope=row | [[Robert de Montesquiou]]. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead. Note that the "primary" column of cells doesn't have to be the first column, but it usually makes more sense for it to be so. Right now, you have the name and picture as two separate columns, with a grouped header cell and some sorting magic so that readers can sort by the picture column and actually sort by the name, but it may be cleaner overall to just have the first column be a combined "name <br/> picture", or else swap the name and picture columns. It is fine to leave the name column as the primary and the second column if you don't want to change it, though.
• This would also fix a second issue: none of your images have alt text, which is needed for non- or poorly-sighted readers. It's fine to skip the alt text if you have a caption that explains what the picture is (e.g. the name of the person) in the same cell (or rather to have a generic "|alt=athlete" or something, since otherwise the alt is the image url which is a mess), but right now you don't have it in the same cell, so the images don't have explanatory text right alongside them as far as screen reader software is concerned, and would need an alt text of the person's name at minimum.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. --PresN 04:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

  Hi PresN, this review hasn't had any input since January and I think I'm going to withdraw it and put up List of intersex Olympians for the moment. I remembered your comments and came to review them to implement them there, but I'm finding them a little complicated at the moment. Maybe it's the hour or maybe it's because of the different cells. Would you be willing to expand on some of the points at that list's talk page - no problem if not, I'll try to wade through the accessibility help page and I'm sure you'll have comments when I put it up for consideration :) Kingsif (talk) 22:01, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

  Now seeing this; a lot of this had to do with the old, pre-summary list. I've gone ahead and edited the tables directly; all they were missing were rowscopes (and some oddness in header formatting). Will go ahead and close this nomination. --PresN 15:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• What's actually sourcing the "by sport" table at the top? The other tables I can see summarise data already displayed in the big table so I guess fall under WP:CALC, but the level of detail in the "by sport" table isn't displayed in the big table. If I want to know who, say, the one intersex judoka is, how can I confirm that? Do I have to check the references against all the judo entries (none of the judo entries mention intersex in the notes column)......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: For that particular one, the list of intersex Olympians just got split out. More generally, yes, it is looking through all the entries. When the list was much less formal, some of the entries had the person's sexuality/gender identity, and I think the list of LGBT sportspeople is still like that. The issue with having such a column has increasingly been people not labelling themselves, or having identities that don't neatly fit one word — and it's obviously not something we want to mislabel. Of course, as comes to gender identity and intersex people, this is a bit more cut and dry than with sexuality, so if you have ideas on how to incorporate the information in the tables, I would love to hear them. Kingsif (talk) 18:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Kingsif, in the by country tables may I suggest that link point the relevant country at the Olympics article, or where is exist, the country at the Summer/Winter Olympics article rather than just the country article, eg. Argentina at the Olympics and Australia at the Winter Olympics. – Ianblair23 (talk) 23:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

@Ianblair23: great suggestion, thanks! Kingsif (talk) 00:23, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been archived, 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.

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