Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of bus routes in Derbyshire/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 not promoted by The Rambling Man 17:55, 17 February 2011 [1].

List of bus routes in Derbyshire

Featured list candidates/List of bus routes in Derbyshire/archive1

Nominator(s): RCSprinter123 (talk) 16:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a good lis. RCSprinter123 (talk) 16:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw - There are only two references in the list and none of them are in any of the tables. GamerPro64 (talk) 16:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw per GamerPro64. Nev1 (talk) 17:00, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose withdrawal Sorry, but that doesn't mean it should be "withdrawn", please. It could be easily done in a few days. Also the external links has all of these bus routes. Now you need to create a new column like "Ref(s)" and put the refs for each. For bus routes 1-16 for example, you should put this ref and so on.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 18:23, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible the list could be overhauled, but I'd be more inclined to believe it would be done if I felt Rcsprinter123 was aware of FL standards. There's a similar situation with his recent GA nominations and this step up doesn't seem to demonstrate an understanding of what is required. Nev1 (talk) 18:59, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Sometimes list articles don't lend themselves to being referenced in the tables. We have plenty of Featured lists with tables without refs and instead use a "General reference". Some additional references to the page wouldn't go amiss though
Please don't start a page with "This is a list of...".That practice ended a while ago; the article dog doesn't begin "This is an article about dogs". Please see WP:LEDE
While lede's don't usually need referencing, it will here because the information it presents isn't repeated in more depth in the main part of the article
Second paragraph is a jimble-jamble of singular and plural. "There are also several operator...", "This includes..., "which aren't officially part of Derbyshire but is included in the Derbyshire bus map"
References should be placed after punctuation
I don't think it's a good idea to use graphics for the key. Will blind people and screenreaders be able to use this information? What about low-bandwith users with graphics turned off? It's preferable to use text based identifiers such as {{dagger}}
Not sure what the colours mean at 49, 180, 182, 183, 184, 199, etc as they're not mentioned in the Key. Also, per WP:COLOR, please don't use only colour for identifiers
Some of the notes don't help the reader. What is Rainbow? UniBus? Circular? Sixes? Sevens?
Consider making the table sortable

Oppose for now. Matthewedwards : Chat 23:05, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - First as mentioned per WP:COLOR color shouldn't be the only thing to define information, also on this note I'm unsure what the colors are defining. Lack of references, nothing sources the tables for starters, in a more intricate look shows me nothing sourcing the Operators of the routes nor Notes. I have no clue what you mean by Via which means the average reader doesn't either, I'd suggest running through the Operators and doing some research on them a quick Google search for me came up D&G Bus instead of just D&G. The lead as mentioned needs a lot of work. Also I'm not quite sure on the relevance of the images also I'm sure saying "Service serves" in the key isn't proper English at all. Also the tables don't appear to be updated "Replaced by Swift service from 30 January 2011" "From 7 February 2011". To finish it off saying "From 27 March 2011" I don't think helps the reader at all I'd suggest if applicable to elaborate on the note. Afro (Talk) 00:05, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also I'd like to point out I don't think saying "Withdraw" is very helpful nor is "per GamerPro64", Opposing the Candidate is one thing but suggesting a Withdrawl off the bat is another thing, and Objecting without giving any specific reason will get this Candidate nowhere. Afro (Talk) 00:09, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'd suggest it's worthwhile the nominator taking a look at this list against the advice given in my checklist. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:51, 13 February 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.