Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Los Angeles Clippers seasons/archive1
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 17:55, 24 April 2011 [1].
List of Los Angeles Clippers seasons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): Cheetah (talk) 08:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because...I worked on it these past two days and now I believe it's ready to be nominated. I welcome any comments/criticism/questions! Thank you! Cheetah (talk) 08:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Courcelles 08:12, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
*First thing that catches my eye (cause I know how much of a pain it could be) is... what's sourcing the awards column? Courcelles 08:18, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
|
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Oppose for a few technical issues...
The Rambling Man (talk) 19:34, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
|
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments –
|
- Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Looks like a very strong piece, which is surprising for a low importance article. Great job! Soxrock24 (talk) 02:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I made my usual minor fixes, but this list meets the criteria. A couple comments that aren't dealbreakers:
- Consider removing the font size parameter from key; it would enhance accessibility slightly and there is no aesthetic disadvantage (IMO)
- The lead seems a little short. Of course, the Clippers are one of the NBA's less-successful teams, which means they are light on achievements, but then again, perhaps that might be worth discussing in a couple sentences (if you can find stuff in reliable sources)? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:35, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! I removed the font-size limitation. I added a couple of sentences implying that the Clippers are the least successful team in sports history. You're more than welcome to continue to do your copyedits.--Cheetah (talk) 01:51, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, that's better. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:56, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! I removed the font-size limitation. I added a couple of sentences implying that the Clippers are the least successful team in sports history. You're more than welcome to continue to do your copyedits.--Cheetah (talk) 01:51, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Support A good model for how to structure these lists for limited existence/limited success teams that are harder to expound on. I would add a couple things namely (1) Their overall postseason record to the 2nd lead paragraph, (2) Their overall record at the bottom of the last paragraph, and (3) One more image if you can find one. Maybe Elton Brand with a caption about winning the Sportsmanship award in their last playoff season? Staxringold talkcontribs 19:50, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! I added the Braves' record to the 2nd paragraph because that paragraph talks about the Braves. Overall record is added, as well. I didn't want to add Brand because I don't have a free pic of him in a Clipper uniform. I added Cassell instead. Let me know what you think.--Cheetah (talk) 03:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.