Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/log/January 2022
- 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 kept by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC) [1].[reply]
- Notified: Klbrain, Howard the Duck, WP Tambayan Philippines, WP Politics
Has 9 inline citations, of which only two are actually sources, the rest are notes. The formatting in the age section needs some serious reworking, and most of the unofficial presidents need further explanation as to the circumstances that led them to get that classification. Top contributor not notified, as they were checkuser-blocked years ago. Hog Farm Talk 15:27, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- No contest. This list has a good run and I'm no longer interested in keeping this at FL standards. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:34, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd move for this to be speedily closed and delisted unless someone wants to put in the work. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:39, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment -- I can attempt to resolve the issues, as this list has potential to meet the FL criteria. However, it does have a few issues. Before making any bold changes, I want to ask what is the use of "By age", "Oldest living vice presidents of the Philippines", and "Timeline of living vice-presidents" sections? Most of these sections appear to be WP:OR. Recently, a few lists, including Living presidents of the United States, List of presidents of India by longevity, etc. have been deleted. So, I think that these sections can boldly be removed from the list. @Hog Farm, will that be fine? – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:56, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Kavyansh.Singh: - I think some of those were merged in through AFDs. Hog Farm Talk 17:32, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Hog Farm – Yeah, they were indeed merged in this list, but these sections still is full of original research. I have reformatted the main list, and am in process of adding citations. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:04, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Kavyansh.Singh: - I think some of those were merged in through AFDs. Hog Farm Talk 17:32, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Update (November 18, 2021)
I have boldly removed list of vice presidents by (1) age (2) longest/oldest living (3) timeline, as all of these lists are indiscriminate collection of trivial lists. Anyone who disagrees is free to apply WP:BRD. As for the main list, I have reformatted the list, and have added various sources for all the vice presidents. If the structure and sourcing appears fine, I can do the same for "Unofficial vice presidents". The work remaining to do:
- Reformatting the lead section, and adding references there.
- Adding ALT text to images.
- Reformatting and adding context to the "Unofficial vice presidents" section.
- Other general fixes like correcting some information, fixing the wording and prose, misc.
– Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:11, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Update (November 24, 2021)
Most of the reformatting things have been done. ALT text is added. The only issues left are:
- Sources and copy-edit of the lead.
- Some context in the "Unofficial vice presidents" section. Will do both soon.
– Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:06, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Update (December 20, 2021)
- Most of the changes I intended to make have been made. (my edits: [2], [3], [4]). The only thing I see still outstanding is adding context for Unofficial vice presidents. Except that, I think this list is completely re-written. @Hog Farm, has the list improved? Would appreciate your comments for improvements. Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- My primary question is if the ref for each VP is meant to source the ruling parties, presidents for each time span, etc, or if that does not have an effective source. Hog Farm Talk 03:41, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The reference for each vice president is supporting everything except (1) party affiliation (2) lifespan. For some cases, the citations are supporting everything, including the above mentioned two points. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:57, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, the nomination has been open for 2.5 months, with substantial work done and no votes to delist. As such, I'm going to close this nomination as kept; if anyone feels it still does not meet the criteria, it can be renominated. --PresN 23:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been kept, 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.
- 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) 00:26, 14 January 2022 (UTC) [5].[reply]
This 2007 promotion is not anywhere close to the standards that would be expected today. The location notes material is riddled with original research, and there may be other issues with problematic content, as well (I've never seen the show). Hog Farm Talk 05:57, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Another issue is that under the current criteria of MOS:TV, this likely should not be a standalone list, and should likely be merged back to the base TV series article. So I support delisting it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:09, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- In that case, maybe a merge discussion would be more appropriate. I think the list is salvageable with a few tweaks (mainly removing the location notes and trimming some of the summaries), but it probably isn't long enough to justify its own list. For what it's worth, List of awards and nominations received by Carnivàle (also an FL) might also be worthy of a merge, maybe even more than the episode list. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:07, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Since discussion doesn't seem to be going anywhere, I would move to delist. If it doesn't meet the criteria for a standalone list, it fails FLCR #3C. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:15, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - the original research concerns have not been addressed. Hog Farm Talk 17:31, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @FLC director and delegates: I'd hate to bug anyone but this FLRC has not been edited in almost two months. It seems to me that there is consensus to delist with three !votes for delist (IJBall's is not bolded, BTW). In any case, if that is not enough, I would support delisting this per Hog Farm's concerns. Pamzeis (talk) 14:22, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
After 3 months, consensus to delist and no work done. Delisting. --PresN 23:08, 13 January 2022 (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.