Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of tallest buildings in Bucharest/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 removed by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC) [1].[reply]
List of tallest buildings in Bucharest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Notified: WikiProject_Romania
While I fully appreciate the difficulty of maintaining such a list up to date with the lack of available informatino, I am nominating this for featured list removal because if currently fails the Comprehensiveness and Stability criteria. The following issues are observable:
- The lead is not in sync with the inclusion criteria: it mentions 50 m, while the inclusion criteria is 60 m.
- Lacks some buildings present in the Romanian version, specifically older, communist blocks (e.g. "Bloc 15D").
- Sources do not support the data (e.g. for Ana tower the height is not mentioned in the source) or are outdated (e.g. for Monaco towers it seems to be an old version of the website from before the buildings were completed; the current completion date seems to be 2010).
- The notes are out of date (e.g. for Bucharest Corporate Center) or present original research not supported by the source (for Millenium Business Center).
- Abuses internal links by linking all entries of the same group of buildings to the article.
Before nominating I left the same message on the TP of the article and WikiProject Romania.Strainu (talk) 16:39, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- This looks salvageable but needs some work. Additional issues I notice:
- File:Bucharest Height Chart by Vlad Tronciu.jpg is all but sure to go out of date—August 2020 is alright enough for now, but this is a serious WP:ENDURE concern.
- Coordinates columns shouldn't be sortable, and there should be a references column.
- Some reference dates are formatting as YYYY-MM-DD.
- There should be images of all the buildings, as these aren't really hard to obtain for anyone living in the city. The image column should also probably be removed for the "under construction" section as its empty.
- A dynamic map of where the tallest buildings are located within the city would be nice.
- Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:36, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Please note that Romania doesn't have FoP, so images of every building should not be a requirement (per WP:FUC).--Strainu (talk) 00:01, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist This one isn't that bad. With a bit of work, someone could get it back up relatively quickly. ~ HAL333 05:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist- Certainly not up to current standards. Many outdated terminology "This lists ranks", some of the under construction buildings have dates indicating they should be completed last year. Lead year out of date. The "proposed" or "approved" sections shouldn't even be there, they run afoul of WP:CRYSTAL. Lots of work to bring it up to current standards. Mattximus (talk) 04:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist --Guerillero Parlez Moi 04:44, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delisted. --PresN 19:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been removed, 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.