Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/January 2024
- 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 archived by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [1].[reply]
List of Green Bay Packers to win a most valuable player award
- Nominator(s): ]
Since the beginning of the NFL, six different "MVP awards" have been handed out. Six players for the Green Bay Packers have won one of these MVP awards a total of 29 times. Additionally, three players have won a total of four Super Bowl MVP awards.
]- Comments from RunningTiger123
- Comment: What justifies a stand-alone list for this article? A list of the team's MVP winners can be short enough to easily fit in an existing article while still conveying the key information (see User:RunningTiger123/sandbox#List of Green Bay Packers to win a most valuable player award as an example). RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:36, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- ]
- Here's an example of what I'm getting at: ]
- RunningTiger123, the following sources are in the article regarding the grouping of "Green Bay Packers who he won an MVP award": "Packers MVPs: The Great 10", "Green Bay Packers: Players Who Have Won the NFL MVP Award", "Aaron Rodgers: Comparing His 2011 Numbers with Past Green Bay MVPs", "Quiz: Remember past Packer MVPs?".
- Here's an example of what I'm getting at: ]
- ]
- I wasn't trying to state that just because the other list exists, this one must too. I was merely pointing to a past discussion where consensus was clear not to delete a list (one that went on to be featured) that resembles the size and scope of this list, so it may be of interest to you. In that discussion, the thing that changed most minds was the inclusion of the prose, which wouldn't be appropriate in a larger, summary article (this article has 1,145 words of readable prose that covers the history and reasoning for each MVP award).]
Setting aside the issue above, here are other changes that should be made:
- Pete Rozelle misspelled in lead
- Image and references columns should not be sortable
- Sort keys need to be specified for "Super Bowl (Season)" column so Roman numerals sort in numerical order
- Favre did not win Jim Thorpe Trophy in 1997
Assuming these are fixed, I'm neutral on this list's promotion (support based on formatting and style, oppose because I'm still unconvinced by the sources that this warrants a stand-alone list instead of
- ]
- Oppose – Just purely on the basis that I don't believe that the topic warrants a stand-alone list as RunningTiger123 brought up above, the routine coverage is obviously quality and FL standard. My stance on this is purely systematic and will help the nomination gather more attention. Idiosincrático (talk) 02:49, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @]
- Ultimately, it's about the size of this list for me. Other lists generally include more players/entries, which better justifies a split, or have more information that is relevant to include and makes the list longer (example: it's reasonable to expect a win/loss record in the head coaching list). As to some other points:
- I still think the retired numbers list should have been merged (and it's hard to form consensus from a "no consensus"), but if I had to offer one justification, there are some unique elements to that topic (i.e., "unofficial" retired numbers) that work in their own article. MVP winners don't really have that.
- If article size at Green Bay Packers is a concern, a brief list of MVP winners is probably more urgent than, say, a 250+ word paragraph about the hiring of Mike Sherman (see section starting at "In 2000, Wolf replaced Rhodes with Mike Sherman"). Or instead of a list, maybe the MVP winners could just be named in the prose.
but why would you want to [cut the prose]???
Because we link to the players' articles if readers want that level of detail. As a comparison, should we include a paragraph about every winner at the AP NFL MVP article? I would guess most editors would push back on that.
- I'm really trying to give this list a chance (which is why I !voted neutral instead of oppose), but I think it's good to acknowledge not everything needs a standalone page. That's not meant as a judgement of value, just as a way to keep articles more concentrated. RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:49, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ultimately, it's about the size of this list for me. Other lists generally include more players/entries, which better justifies a split, or have more information that is relevant to include and makes the list longer (example: it's reasonable to expect a win/loss record in the head coaching list). As to some other points:
- @]
- This list has 9 separate entries who have won 33 separate awards spanning six different types of season MVP awards and the SB MVP. It's just that the list itself has been merged into one table to better show the combined MVP awards. The table itself conveys a lot of information, even though it appears relatively short. The prose expands on the history of the awards and how they are decided, provides context for why they won their award, and provides additional details (most MVP awards, additional recognition for the players, etc). Re your question about having a paragraph every entry in ]
- Okay, let's ignore Super Bowl MVPs for a moment (since those could easily be one extra column WP:PAGEDECIDE is relevant and we should consider if]
it is better to cover a notable topic as part of a larger page about a broader topic
, which I argue it is. That's what I meant byit's especially important for the list to satisfy WP:N
earlier – as a small list, this would need to be a very clear standalone topic to justify a new page under PAGEDECIDE, and I don't see that within the context of overall coverage of the Packers. RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply- WP:LISTN?
- Regarding WP:PAGEDECIDE, there is nothing there that strongly applies to this topic. I will note under "Further information" in that section, WP:Article size is listed. I know that Green Bay Packers isn't a perfect article, but all I can operate is under the existing conditions. And right now, expansion of Green Bay Packers(especially with adding another table to an article that is already to reliant on tables) doesn't feel appropriate.
- Just wanted to note, I appreciate your "neutral" sincerely in a case where things aren't black and white, and I respect the dialogue we are having right now, if not for the only reason to assist any future reviewers in their thoughts. If this article were to survive an AFD, similar to ]
- In that case I would stay neutral – I personally would disagree and wouldn't seek to actively promote the list, but I wouldn't try to block it (in other words, the same stance I have now). RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, let's ignore Super Bowl MVPs for a moment (since those could easily be one extra column
- This list has 9 separate entries who have won 33 separate awards spanning six different types of season MVP awards and the SB MVP. It's just that the list itself has been merged into one table to better show the combined MVP awards. The table itself conveys a lot of information, even though it appears relatively short. The prose expands on the history of the awards and how they are decided, provides context for why they won their award, and provides additional details (most MVP awards, additional recognition for the players, etc). Re your question about having a paragraph every entry in ]
- @]
Withdrawing. --PresN 21:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the botgoes 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 archived by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [2].[reply]
List of Bath City F.C. managers
- Nominator(s): Krashaon19 (talk) 18:59, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe the article has good potential. I am currently attempting to gain featured status with all Bath City F.C. related lists. I also trust that with more experienced editors assistance, the review process would improve it's quality greatly. Krashaon19 (talk) 18:59, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Note
- This nomination was not transcluded to the FLC page until 31 December 2023 -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:35, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Initial comment
- There seem to be some significant sourcing issues here. Taking the Gary Owers row as an example, the refs confirm the exact date of his departure but only the calendar year of his appointment, and neither of them contains any data whatsoever related to the club's win/loss record during his tenure. The two refs against the Lee Howells row don't confirm either his arrival date or departure, let alone the playing record during his tenure. John Relish refs do not seem to support the dates of arrival (other than that he was "new" in late June 2005) or departure, the playing record, or the Somerset Cup wins. I think there is a not insignificant amount of unsourced content in this list so unfortunately I have to oppose at this time -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Airship
I've had a look at CTD's issues and I find them to be convincing. You can mark me down as an oppose as well, on the grounds of text-source integrity. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:30, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No action taken and the nominator seems to be inactive; archiving. --PresN 20:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the botgoes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.