Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Alberta premiers

List of Alberta premiers

Self nomination, though this is mainly the work of others. This list meets all of the criteria IMO. For copyright and fair use reasons, I decided to add the flag of Alberta instead of pictures of the premiers. I did not use templates for colours on the main list to avoid the objection that was brought up for the Prime Ministers or Canada list. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 23:23, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - It meets the criteria and I particularly like the layout, the timeline is very good. Of course pictures would look great, but if no appropriate pictures exist, there's nothing to do. Just one thing, is it really important to include Frederick Haultain? I would remove him, but perhaps there is a very good reason to keep it. Anyway, it is a very nice work. Afonso Silva 23:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Haultain is listed at the source. That's why he is included. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 20:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the timeline is nice, except for the fact that it runs chronologically from bottom to top, whereas the table it is alongside runs chronologically from top to bottom. One or the other should be changed. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 12:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure how to do timelines, so I asked the creator of the timeline for help. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 21:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - It was impossible to reverse the order of the vertical timeline, so it's now the best I can horizontally. If people don't like the timeline now I'll take it out instead. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 20:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What OTP said. If that's fixed, I'll support. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 12:42, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure how to do timelines, so I asked the creator of the timeline for help. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 21:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - It was impossible to reverse the order of the vertical timeline, so it's now the best I can horizontally. If people don't like the timeline now I'll take it out instead. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 20:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, reversing the timeline is only possible with a date format of "yyyy", i.e. without the day and the month in the date. Such thing will disrupt the timeline, as several transitions ocurr in fractions of a year. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's what I understood by analyzing the use and the code of wikipedia timelines. I suggest changing the order in the table, changing the timeline to a horizontal layout or else leave the article as it is, as I don't find any conflict, for me, the timeline and the table are two different entities. Afonso Silva 23:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose not enough substance. Ardenn 03:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- In order for me to take action to resolve this objection, you need to provide information about where this list is lacking in substance. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 15:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Yes, it's fairly short, which is a consequence of their having been few Alberta premiers! This is hardly the fault of the article. The table is well detailed, clearly offering considerable advantages over a category, and the timeline is a nice touch. Soo 17:18, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- With all this new content, I don't know if this is really a list any more. The list aspect is certainly small compared to the prose. On the other hand this would never make it as an FA. The article seems stuck between the two. I don't know what to vote. Will look again when the dust has settled. Soo 01:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Would be nice if the colors in the table matched the colors in the timeline better. Should there be a note explaining the color to party correlation? Rmhermen 17:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I changed the colours in the table. The colours are basically those that the parties themselves use. How is it now? Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 20:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object #1. Party colors do not match or use the templates from Template:Canadian_politics/party_colours they must be standard with all other Canadian political articles. #2. <no primer on the history of the changes in the administration of the Alberta Government (ie:) the conditions that led to change, the broad direction the government moved in. --Cloveious 03:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to adjust the colors in the timeline to match the colors in the template? I gave up after my first attempt to make a timeline so I couldn't say. Rmhermen 18:35, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only colours available are listed at the Ploticus Color page. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 18:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is impossible to currently use templates for colours in the timeline, so I made them close. ie, the Liberals in the timeline are coral, while they are lightcoral in the table. Could you please explain your second objection more fully. I don't understand how the table does not provide enough information about the changing of administration, because the reasons for a change in premier are given in the table. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 20:59, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I came to that realization about the time line after I objected, but good job with changing the colors, as for the other object. I will help you out on. --Cloveious 21:30, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a larger introduction, more substance and am now ready to support. --Cloveious 01:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose with new additions. This is a list, not an article - this is far too much material. Rmhermen 02:08, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inactionable objection, see List of Northwest Territories general elections for example. --Cloveious 05:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly my point it was not made a featured list and is now attempting to be made a featured article. Action is easy remove new additions. Rmhermen 17:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Northwest Territories general elections was made a featured list Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Northwest Territories general elections/archive2 and has nothing to do with being a featured article. The fact is there are hundreads of complete lists of politicians or anything for that matter, to me that does not define a featured list. Making a list pretty doesn't quite define a featured list. If I follow your comments I could go put my list of grocerys down here link to to some food manufactures websites and submit it for featured list status without adding anything else to it. There was an objection up top complaining about substance, I added substance. You can read in summation how this list got from point A. to point B, and hopefully it primes the reader to read in detail. Premiers of Alberta is a fasicnating subject and 10x the volume can be written then the four brief sections added to this list. If you want to take substance out of the article the blood will be on your hands. --Cloveious 11:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If there's really that much material about the subject it would probably be best at this point to separate the list from the subject (as in President of Mexico vs. List of Presidents of Mexico or similar articles, for instance). Right now this list has a lot more text for my taste, and List of Northwest Territories general elections doesn't have as nearly as much as this one, IMO -- Run e Welsh | ταλκ 08:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - nice list, shame there is no images. -- I@n ≡ talk 10:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]