Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of current Indian chief ministers/archive1

Add links
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 10:02, 12 April 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of current Indian chief ministers

[edit]

List of current Indian chief ministers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): —indopug (talk) 20:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly five years after my last FLC nom, I bring you a list that, just 30 hours ago, I found looking like this. Since it's a "current" list, sources were easy enough to find; it is in the vein of List of current Canadian first ministers.—indopug (talk) 20:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this article had a previous FLC. However, since I moved the article to a new name, the FLC doesn't should up on the talk-page's ArticleHistory template. Anybody know what's wrong and how to fix this?—indopug (talk) 20:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I tried doing something; what I have done may not be right thing to do (Was thinking that I was creating a subpage of the talk page). Would request an admin to review it and delete if needed.--GDibyendu (talk) 09:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This list by its very nature may become outdated at any time if one of those chief ministers resigns. It will require continues maintenance in the future, and I do not understand how its compliance with the FL criteria will continue to be maintained. Ruslik_Zero 16:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
if a CM resigns and a new one takes his place, the list will simply be updated. Since it will be a major news event, high-quality sources won't be difficult to find. At most it'll take a couple of days before it is done perfectly (ref formatting etc), but for the most part it should be a stable, non-controversial, easy-to-maintain list. Besides the Canadian featured list above is a precedent.—indopug (talk) 21:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Frankly I can not see any real issues. I fixed a dab link. What you may do is linking all the states in the image. "is the de jure head" – the article is probably redundant in such cases. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 15:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 08:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • A little like the States and territories of India article you link, I'd prefer to see "twenty-eight ... and ... two".
  • Is it "chief minister" or "Chief Minister" (like the article you link)?
  • Per my understanding of WP:JOBTITLES, I've used "a chief minister is the head of government" when speaking generally, but "the office of Chief Minister of Jharkhand is vacant" when referring to a specific title.
  • Table headings, no need for Past to be capitalised, similar with Tenure.
  • Done. Should the "(List)" under each state also be "(list)"?
  • Done.
  • Blank cells should be avoided, put an en-dash in there.
  • The blank cells are for unavailable photographs. So, would adding a dash be appropriate as that might imply that a photo is "not applicable"? (for eg: I've used a dash to indicate that a party is N/A in the case of President's rule in Jharkhand)
  • Done.
  • " these aren't listed " avoid contractions.
  • Ref 1 should be "pp." not "p." as you list multiple pages.

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:57, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • "All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam" has a green line next to it. Why? It's not shown on the map or in the key as green? There are more of these...
  • The map colours all non-Congress, non-BJP states together as "other parties" (all of which are in power in exactly one state). Otherwise you'd need ten different legends for ten different parties, several of which have highly similar official-colours, making their identification on the map difficult anyway.
  • The table, on the other hand, lists each party alongside a band of its official colour. In short: the colours in the table and the map are mostly unrelated; the legend applies to the map alone. I can't think of a better way of doing this, though I'm open to suggestions.
  • The colours in the legend don't apply to the table (which is why it is inside the map's caption), but I don't think colours are superfluous or irrelevant in the table. They provide a quick visual indicator of the party, esp for those familiar with the colours, and increase the article's visual appeal (5a).
  • I propose to move the map to the bottom and heavily enlarge it. In the lead I would add an image of a significant person. I guess then there will be no confusion. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 10:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Tomcat7: The reason the map is not enlarged or clickable is that it isn't the focus of this article (I want to avoid feature creep), nor does it really it contribute to readers' understanding of this article. If somebody wanted to know which state was which, we have other articles for that.
  • Due to the nature of this article, there's no one significant person whose image I can add to the lead. It will surely lead to partisan bickering of the "why this guy but not that guy?" nature.
  • @The Rambling Man: but isn't a key for the table redundant because the party's colour always accompanies the party's name? (so even colour-blind readers aren't really disadvantaged). If the existence of colour bands itself is confusing, I've added an explanatory note.
  • That said, if you still feel a key is necessary, I will definitely add one.—indopug (talk) 06:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Turns out Indian parties don't have official colours (there are quite a few strong affiliations though—BJP with saffron, red with communists etc). I will thus add a key to prevent any confusion.—indopug (talk) 15:25, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note this nomination appears to have stalled. Suggest the nominator contacts relevant projects or editors who may be interested in reviewing this for FLC, or else we should archive the nomination. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:04, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Support
  • "Given he has the confidence of the assembly, the chief minister's term is for five years; the office is subject to no term limits." I did not understand that "office is subject to no term limits" part. What does it mean? CM can change, but CM's office staffs cannot?
  • Clarified.
  • "At present, the office of Chief Minister of Jharkhand is vacant..." Instead of "at present, it should be "As of ..."
Diffs. Thanks for your comments and kind words.—indopug (talk) 15:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I... don't really have anything. Not sure why this nomination stalled out for so long. Consider archiving your online references using web.archive.org or webcitation.org, so that any changes or removal of content at those sites don't affect the citations in this article. --PresN 23:54, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!—indopug (talk) 05:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch! Fixed.—indopug (talk) 08:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see the merit in doing that, especially when we have so many of the CMs' images already (20 out of 30). Further, there's no reason that free images of the remaining ones won't turn up; they are highly visible public figures after all. For eg: I've been searching Flickr a lot lately, and have been moderately successful at getting photographers to release their works for free.
FWIW, I think the article you linked didn't suffer for missing a few images and that they shouldn't have been removed during FLC.—indopug (talk) 13:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please take my comments very casually. I was just pointing out the difference as i was under the wrong impression that completeness is something we require for FA/FLs. I understand that such points can be (intentionally/unintentionally) missed. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 15:20, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
thank you!—indopug (talk) 05:57, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_current_Indian_chief_ministers/archive1&oldid=1138486325"