Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes/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The list was withdrawn by The Rambling Man via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 7 December 2021 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Timeline of the 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes

Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes/archive1

Nominator(s): DTM (talk) 07:56, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for a featured list because I think it is close to meeting the required quality criteria, if not having already met them. Further, it is part of a topic whose parent article 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes is also currently in the line for being reviewed under GA criteria. I hope to take both of the articles past the FL and GA quality standards respectively. This featured list has a good intro summary, and the list itself covers both relevant military and diplomatic events. This is my first featured list (FL) nomination. (I was part of a previous FL however another editor took it through the review process.) DTM (talk) 07:56, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by RunningTiger123

I have several major concerns with this list regarding the featured list criteria.

How is this list unique from the main article 2020–2021 China–India skirmishes? In other words, why do we need both the main article and this stand-alone timeline? Per FLCR #3C, a featured list "does not largely duplicate material from another article", but I scanned the items in the timeline and would estimate that at least 60–70% of them are covered in some way in the main article already.

While there is clearly an overlap, the difference is visible in the amount of summarization present. The timeline summarizes the main article even more, compressing into it more events with less detail. Take for example the main skirmish during this period, the Galwan Valley skirmish on 15/16 June 2020. While the main article has an entire 900 plus words on it, the timeline has two short sentences. And this is exactly what the article title denotes— timeline. The timeline gives significance to when an event happened and not why. DTM (talk) 09:51, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What are the criteria for including items in this list? Per FLCR #3A, a featured list should provide "at least all of the major items", yet there are many dates in the main article that are not mentioned here. For instance, the following is a quote from the main article: "On 21 May, the Indian Express reported that Chinese troops had entered the Indian territory in the Galwan River valley and objected to the road construction by India within the (undisputed) Indian territory." This seems like a major event, so why does the timeline make no mention of it?

In response to the example you raised, what I had in mind here was that only Indian sources recorded this. In the timeline I have tried reducing this. So take for example the Galwan clash. Both India and Chinese sources talk about it, irrespective of the what or why of it. When I have only used a Chinese source or only an Indian source, it is for less important events.

Notable and un-notable entry into anothers territory has to be differentiated between. I have placed a chart in Sino-Indian border dispute which displays hundreds of transgressions "Major sites of Chinese transgressions on the LAC (2015–2019)".

Thank you for raising this point. I will go through the article and see the level of consistency once more. DTM (talk) 09:51, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is this list stable? The situation is apparently ongoing (the infobox in the main article states that the dates are "5 May 2020 – present"), so it is quite possible that this list could continue to change. Per FLCR #6, a featured list "does not change significantly from day to day".

Yes, the skirmish is still going on. However, what has already been recorded in the list cannot change significantly. This is to say while the content is about a skirmish, the content itself is not too controversial. And here we must remember that the "when" matters more than the what or why. If new literature appears which causes significant changes... well isn't that the case with any topic? DTM (talk) 09:51, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not opposing the article right now, but I want to hear your thoughts on these issues first. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:30, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to withdraw this nomination. Too many issues remaining to ask others to review it at this stage. Regards. DTM (talk) 06:39, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't feel compelled to remove the nomination based solely on my comments – I'm willing to work with you on that – but if you still want to withdraw the nomination, I suggest using Template:@FLC to ping the FLC directors. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:49, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RunningTiger123, thank you for the concerns. After a breather, I can now focus on and address your comments. I will take up comments from any other editors as well. While I still think I nominated this prematurely (in a bout of enthusiasm) I also think the concerns can be addressed, improving the quality of the article in the direction of a FL, now or in the future. DTM (talk) 09:16, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RunningTiger123, I have provided explanations for your three concerns above. DTM (talk) 09:48, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Fowler&fowler

I don't usually review featured lists, but did run into this submission accidentally, and figured it'd be worth my two cents. Clearly, a lot of hard work went into it; for this the author deserves praise. The list has much potential; however, in its current form, it roundly fails criterion 2 (i.e "has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.") The lead is a bit on the opaque side. An average WP reader, unfamiliar with the context, will learn very little as the burden of explanation is passed off to the reader or to Wikilinks. There is no map (neither local nor regional). The reader has no idea where the skirmishes took place, nor what a line of actual control is, which moreover is being described as "notional." Also "melee," has all sorts of meanings, not just hand-to-hand combat ... Anyway, long story short, I won't oppose or support, nor return to this article, but recommend that the author rewrite the lead with the average WP reader in mind. All the best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:58, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

Please add alt text to images with the '|alt=' parameter; note that alt text should briefly describe what the image is of (in coordination with the caption), not try to describe what it looks like. --Pres N 01:34, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw

The Rambling Man, I would like to withdraw this nomination. Thank you. DTM (talk) 11:07, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, 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 Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 11:28, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.