Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Inner Hebrides/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 Dabomb87 22:50, 12 January 2010 [1].
- Nominator(s): Ben MacDui 16:40, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it is now complete and ready to match the existing Scottish island FLs such as List of Outer Hebrides. Ben MacDui 16:40, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 19:05, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 15:21, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply] Many thanks for your comments. I will attend to them asap, although you have caught me at a busy moment and it may be Saturday before I get the time to look at them all. Ben MacDui 21:42, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Typically we avoid bold links.
- Especially as you link Inner Hebrides in the next para as well.
- The lead is fixed I think.
- There are emboldened links in the "Smaller islets and skerries" section too. This isn't generally necessary in the other lists as they are all archipelagos distant from the shore so the "main island" the skerries surround is always linked higher up. Here the links are useful pointers to the general area. It would be a pity to unlink them and I'm tempted to suggest that this is a case of IAR, but I am open to suggestions.
- Well, I suggest we see what the rest of the community think about it... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:05, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree the emboldened group names are appropriately linked. An alternative would be to repeat the group name and link that - would probably look worse. Finavon (talk) 20:49, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the bold is fine as well. We could very loosely consider it used for a "definition list" function, as per MOS:BOLD. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree the emboldened group names are appropriately linked. An alternative would be to repeat the group name and link that - would probably look worse. Finavon (talk) 20:49, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I suggest we see what the rest of the community think about it... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:05, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from bamse (talk) 23:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments by Bamse
Looks very good. Just a couple of comments/questions:
bamse (talk) 11:52, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some further replies: Ben MacDui 12:46, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
Support All comments have been addressed.bamse (talk) 23:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Reywas92 Support
- The years in the Last inhabited column should not be linked.
- Done
- Notes 2 and 6 could be merged.
- Done
Very nice overall. Reywas92Talk 03:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done and thanks for your comments. Ben MacDui 13:05, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Before I can support I have a couple of comments below. Other than that the alt text looks good and the article seems well written with a good lead and clean and organized tables. I checked it through AWB and there was nothing significant there.
- There is 1 disambiguous page for Lismore
- Took me a while to find it hiding on a template. Now fixed.
- many of the references seem to lack proper formatting--
- Could you be more specific?
Kumioko (talk) 21:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I also think that the last section of the lead that appears to be notes in determining what is defined as an island be removed from the lead and linked as a note. I think this info detracts from the content of the article itself..but thats just my opinion.
- Done
Other than that it looks good.--Kumioko (talk) 21:21, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I changed my comment to support, looks good to me know. --Kumioko (talk) 23:34, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Quick comments –
In the two tables, items that have Gaelic names with Gaelic as the first letter sort following all names beginning with a regular letter in the Gaelic names column. Is this the intention?
- It was not and thanks for spotting this. Now Fixed.
In the second table, Eilean Tigh's area is not sorting properly.Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:18, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Ben MacDui 09:52, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from KV5
Looks very nice, just a few minor things:
"The islands of Scotland's west coast are known collectively as the Hebrides and the Inner Hebrides are separated from the Outer Hebrides by The Minch to the north and the Sea of the Hebrides to the south." - this is a bit of a run-on sentence; might I suggest instead The islands of Scotland's west coast are known collectively as the Hebrides; the Inner Hebrides are separated from the Outer Hebrides by The Minch to the north and the Sea of the Hebrides to the south. This would break things up a bit by inserting a verbal/mental pause."In the past the Hebrides as a whole" - a comma after "past" would not be amiss."Scottish Gaelic speaking" is a single adjective, so I believe the correct punctuation would be Scottish Gaelic-speakingJura and Gigha overlinked in the lead.
Otherwise very well done. Cheers. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 20:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Many thanks for your comments. All done. Ben MacDui 19:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I support the promotion of this list, as it meets the featured list criteria. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Many thanks for your comments. All done. Ben MacDui 19:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.