Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Lincoln City F.C. seasons/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 The Rambling Man 17:43, 7 June 2010 [1].
List of Lincoln City F.C. seasons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): Struway2 (talk) 10:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a long time since I've done one of these... This one follows the structure established for football season FLs, and I think it complies with the current criteria. There are a few redlinks among the top scorers, but the articles are on their way, and I waited until the number was down to "minimal" before submitting. All constructive comments gratefully received... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 21:32, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments nice work.
The Rambling Man (talk) 18:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support nice. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:32, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Great work. --Carioca (talk) 21:10, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
Symbols should be provided for the champion and runner-up colors, as they are for the other two.- Do you not think the existing use of "1st" for the champions and "2nd" or "RU" for the runners-up is already an adequate alternative to the use of colour?
- Didn't notice that in the key before. I won't push the point too hard. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- To be fair, I changed the key this morning to put "1st" and "2nd" in the coloured boxes. I started off thinking it wasn't particularly respectful to the readers to tell them that 2nd position meant runner-up, but hadn't considered that many sports have post-season games to determine champions.
- Didn't notice that in the key before. I won't push the point too hard. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you not think the existing use of "1st" for the champions and "2nd" or "RU" for the runners-up is already an adequate alternative to the use of colour?
Bolding for the seasons should be removed, as an overuse of bold text is discouraged by MOS:BOLD. As for the other columns, the normal alternative of italics is already in use, so I can't get too worked up about it. If the champion teams are to be bolded, though, it should say so somewhere in the key.- The seasons are row headers, so automatically bolded (and presumably the automatic bolding is why table headers are an explicit exception at MOS:BOLD :-), though if you think it's excessive, I have no problem with making them normal cells instead. I've unbolded the champion teams, garish gold should be plenty...
- Also didn't realize this was automatic (the season lists I've worked on don't have this). Won't push this too hard either, though I thought MOS was referring to the headings at the top. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The seasons are row headers, so automatically bolded (and presumably the automatic bolding is why table headers are an explicit exception at MOS:BOLD :-), though if you think it's excessive, I have no problem with making them normal cells instead. I've unbolded the champion teams, garish gold should be plenty...
Giants2008 (27 and counting) 18:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- By the way, thanks for your reply at WT:FLC#Query on sourcing, you confirmed what I'd already decided to do. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – Meets FL criteria. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- P.S.: if you get a chance, would you mind double-checking reference 12 from Statto? It's showing up as a dead link on the link-checker. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It's live if you click it, perhaps it's something to do with how the Statto pages are generated. Thanks for the support, cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:45, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- P.S.: if you get a chance, would you mind double-checking reference 12 from Statto? It's showing up as a dead link on the link-checker. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – Meets FL criteria. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support A fine list, with a good intro. Some comments remain. Sandman888 (talk) 16:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Sandman888 (talk) 15:44, 3 June 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.