Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/U.S. state dog breeds/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 promoted by Dabomb87 23:51, 27 January 2011 [1].

U.S. state dog breeds

Featured list candidates/U.S. state dog breeds/archive1

Nominator(s): Miyagawa (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it's a complete list which I believe meets the requirements. Miyagawa (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Can't you just list states that have state dog? I don't think it is visually appealing to have a large number of "none" on the list.—Chris!_c/t 21:58, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, happy to - I'll make the edit now. Miyagawa (talk) 22:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support I am comfortable to support. I read the list several times and can't found any issues.—Chris!_c/t 03:47, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion and comments the table is a little bit odd. My suggestion, moving the columns in that order:Dog breed, image, state, since, refs. I wonder why there are no names for the dogs. Why is "beagle" not capitalized?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 16:23, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about Beagle - I've fixed it. Miyagawa (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments disagree with GreatOrangePumpkin, the ordering is logical and, in my opinion, completely correct. Some things I've seen...:

Should the title of the list be "List of U.S. official state dogs" since you've emboldened "official state dogs" in the lead?

That was another editor - now bolded state dog breed. Miyagawa (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Five paras in the lead seems a bit lengthy considering the size of the list.

And there was me worried that it might be short! Seriously, it's just me being inexperienced with FL's, I wasn't sure how much prose so I went for as much as I could find. I've merged the one line first paragraph into the second. Miyagawa (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, should this just be called "U.S. official state dogs" since there's no other article about the state dogs?

Changed article title to U.S. state dog breeds. Miyagawa (talk) 20:37, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image caption has "state(s)" three times in one sentence, can we improve?

Changed to "Map of the USA showing the showing which states have a specified dog breed as an official symbol in red." Miyagawa (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"quickly followed" - no need for quickly, perhaps just "followed the year after..."?

Done. Miyagawa (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"including the Chesapeake Bay Retriever (Maryland)" I don't think you need to repeat the breed since you've already talked about it in a previous sentence of the lead.

Removed. Miyagawa (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"While in 2007,..." odd way to start a sentence and out of chronological order in this para.

Fixed. Miyagawa (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"sponsor the bill in 2009, and eventually through passage" some technical terms that aren't obvious to non-experts (bill, through passage)

That was my bad, I deal with these terms all the time where I work so I didn't even think twice about it. I've changed it now to read: "to support the bill in 2009, and with it becoming law in 2010.". Miyagawa (talk) 20:41, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another mid-review thought. Should this be "state dog breeds"? These aren't individual dogs, they're breeds of dogs, after all..

Changed title of article to U.S. state dog breeds. Miyagawa (talk) 20:37, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"state dog got as far as a" I don't like "got as far as" - it reads poorly.

Fixed. Miyagawa (talk) 20:45, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

" state dog breeds," see earlier query, okay, so now you need to be consistent, is it state dogs or state dog breeds?

State dog breeds. Miyagawa (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't see the relevance of a state cat!

Removed. Miyagawa (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer to see "Since" renamed as "Year of designation" and Ref(s) is simply Ref. in this case.

Changed as requested. Miyagawa (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No major trauma but surprised to see ref date formats dmy while it's a US list (so would most usually use mdy).

Fixed. Miyagawa (talk) 20:57, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Newspaper refs could use page numbers.

Added. Miyagawa (talk) 21:09, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

~~"Eleven states of the United States have designation an ~~as an~~ official state dog breed." The struck words need to be removed for the sentence to work grammatically.~~
~~Remove first word from "and with it becoming law in 2010."? That reads awkwardly when combined with the rest of the sentence.~~
~~The comma after Georgia State Senate should probably be a semi-colon.~~ Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:18, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed those points as suggested. Miyagawa (talk) 12:45, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:07, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment - I think the map in the lead image needs a tweak: Wisconsin (which has a state dog) is not highlighted while Minnesota (which doesn't) is. They're right next to each other, so I'm sure this was just an accident... Dana boomer (talk) 00:20, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I get for being a Brit and not being 100% on my state geography. Although my wife is from Wisconsin and she'd batter me if she thought I'd mixed her state up with Minnesota... fixed now anyway. :S Managed to make the border lines between states stronger in this version as well, so it's a general improvement. Miyagawa (talk) 09:58, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Having another section/table with proposed/suggested/related breed for other states would probably improve the list. Nergaal (talk) 09:46, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just thinking, but if the list of proposed breeds are restricted to only those which have been defeated in the various state senates/houses (rather than those which may be suggested by newspaper columnists) it'll prevent it from becoming a random list with additional entries being added on a miscellaneous basis. I'll put a table up under that criteria in the next 24hrs. Miyagawa talk 12:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just realised I hadn't left a note to say that'd been done. Miyagawa talk 12:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support always nice to see these kinds of lists here, and this is no exception. Good job, well done (apart from the new signature...!) The Rambling Man (talk) 22:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Switched the sig back to the old one - the review page for Cocker Spaniel at FA Nom looks like a complete mess because of all the black boxes! Miyagawa (talk) 12:53, 27 January 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.