Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Mage: The Ascension books/archive1
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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC) [1].[reply]
List of Mage: The Ascension books (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): AlexandraIDV 03:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
With the Vampire list promoted yesterday, and my Changeling FLC now having two supports, it is time for FLC #4 in my World of Darkness project: Mage: The Ascension, one of the most popular games in the series (and therefore one with the largest number of books...). This one follows the same format as the Vampire and Changeling lists, with books organized by which game edition they were released for, and with a descriptive annotation for each item. As always, I welcome constructive criticism! AlexandraIDV 03:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - I aim to provide constructive criticism, but on this occasion I have none :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:47, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you!!--AlexandraIDV 16:01, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Couldn't find anything of concern. ~ HAL333 18:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you!!--AlexandraIDV 18:16, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, not much to comment here. Nice work! --Tone 10:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for looking over it!-AlexandraIDV 13:15, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Cool work! I'll note that I view the table headers as vague/repetitive,
and that some links are not archived (I've tried using Toolforge but it doesn't archive any). But that's all, and I've done some edits myself per WP:BOLD;I'll try help manually archiving some of the sources.GeraldWL 10:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]- @Gerald Waldo Luis: Thank you! Table captions are a mandatory accessibility feature (see MOS:DTAB), for the sake of readers accessing the article with screen readers.--AlexandraIDV 11:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- That's somethin' new. Prompted me quickly to add a caption at List of Latvian submissions for the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film. Btw it's a current FLC; adding that there in case you're interested in commenting. Cheers! GeraldWL 14:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Btw you don't have to ping me again, I've watchlisted this. GeraldWL 14:27, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Gerald Waldo Luis: Thank you! Table captions are a mandatory accessibility feature (see MOS:DTAB), for the sake of readers accessing the article with screen readers.--AlexandraIDV 11:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Source review — Pass
[edit]Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 20:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Formatting
- Okay I've fixed some of the tedious things
- Is ref 81 & 86 really page 0?
- no other issues
- Reliability
- No issues here
- Verifiability
- No issues here... ugh I was hoping to find some feed back to give you but the sources and sourcing are very thorough. Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 21:16, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Aza24: I'll make sure to leave in some intentional errors for you to pick up next time, don't you worry. Joking aside, yeah, pagination of ref 81&86 does start at 0, which for sure is an unusual choice on the publisher's part. Regarding the changing of ISBN format, I do have to oppose that though, based on WP:ISBN, which asks us to not convert to ISBN-13 if only ISBN-10 is given in the book, "because ISBNs are often used as search strings and checksum differences between the two forms make it difficult to find items listed only under the other type". This being a list of books, I could absolutely imagine readers wanting to find more about a list item and trying to use the ISBN to find it.--AlexandraIDV 23:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Fine by me. IDK I've heard that reasoning before, but have never been convinced; I would assume the by far most common use of ISBN nowadays is searching in some online catalogue—whether that be WorldCat, archive.org, a local library etc—where the system would most likely have both ISBNS (all books with ISBN 10s now have 13s by now I would think). Not an issue however Aza24 (talk) 04:43, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Aza24: I'll make sure to leave in some intentional errors for you to pick up next time, don't you worry. Joking aside, yeah, pagination of ref 81&86 does start at 0, which for sure is an unusual choice on the publisher's part. Regarding the changing of ISBN format, I do have to oppose that though, based on WP:ISBN, which asks us to not convert to ISBN-13 if only ISBN-10 is given in the book, "because ISBNs are often used as search strings and checksum differences between the two forms make it difficult to find items listed only under the other type". This being a list of books, I could absolutely imagine readers wanting to find more about a list item and trying to use the ISBN to find it.--AlexandraIDV 23:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Promoting. --PresN 03:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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.