Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/February 2021

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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:45, 18 February 2021 (UTC) [1].

---

Mike Kable Young Gun Award

Nominator(s): MWright96 (talk) 18:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

The Mike Kable Young Gun Award recognises the best performing rookie in Australian touring car racing over the course of the season. Drivers such as Marcos Ambrose, Mark Winterbottom, James Courtney and Scott McLaughlin are past recipients of the award. This list has been revamped to a fully-referenced entry and look forward to receiving all comments and concerns. MWright96 (talk) 18:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• "The Mike Kable Young Gun Award (officially the Mike Kable Rookie of the Year)" - if it is officially the Rookie of the Year award, why is the article titled Young Gun Award? Is that the WP:COMMONNAME for it? If so, why do people call it that and not its proper name? Might be worth a clarification.
• "No one has won more than once as drivers from the second-tier championship have been honoured 13 times....." - this reads as if "as" is being used in the sense of "because" and it is saying that the reason nobody has won it more than once is because second-tier drivers have won it 13 times, which clearly isn't what you mean.
• Think that's it from me :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @ChrisTheDude: Have made changes in accordance to the two points raised above. MWright96 (talk) 09:59, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:42, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
• Quick comment – In "young racing drivers Mike Kable", I take it that the third word is meant to be singular? That's the only nit-pick I have. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @Giants2008: Changed MWright96 (talk) 07:37, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
• Comment - Is "A$15,000" the accepted way of writing "fifteen thousand Australian dollars" on Wikipedia? Since this list is dealing with a clearly Australian context is it necessary to specify that they are Australian dollars? I wonder if "A$15,000" could be misinterpreted in this context as meaning "American dollars" by a reader unfamiliar with that abbreviation. With regards to this I also have to question whether some sort of rough conversion to New Zealand dollars may be appropriate since Supercars Championship events are also held in Aotearoa and numerous prominent drivers in the series have come from New Zealand. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 22:16, 26 November 2020 (UTC)HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 22:25, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @HumanBodyPiloter5: Yes according to MOS:CURRENCY but have written it in word form anyway. With regards to conversion to NZ dollars, I'm quite different to the change. MWright96 (talk) 08:37, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Source review – Pass

Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 04:04, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

• Some of the "publishers" are actually the websites, and should be put under the "website" parameter which italicizes them
  • V8 Sleuth is published by AN1 Media
  • Crash is published by Crash Media Group
  • "FastLane.com.au" should be listed as the website
  • speedcafe.com seems to be the publisher and website
• Reliabillity looks fine
• Formatting looks fine and consistent other than the issues above Aza24 (talk) 04:24, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @Aza24: Have taken action on the points raised above. MWright96 (talk) 19:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Great, pass for source review – good work here! Aza24 (talk) 08:38, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support - the prose looks good, the images have appropriate alt texts, the table works as intended with entries sorting by family name - I have found no issues.--Alexandra^IDV 07:27, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Can't see any issue. Yashthepunisher (talk) 15:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 03:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:45, 18 February 2021 (UTC) [2].

---

List of World Heritage Sites in Greece

Nominator(s): Tone 08:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Greece has 18 WHS and 14 more tentative sites, making this nomination probably the longest list that I've worked on so far. Cyprus is already seeing support so I am adding this one. The style is standard. I am sure there can be several language improvements. Many of the images are "columns and ruins", but for Greece, this is to be expected. Lots of history there! Tone 08:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:40, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments Archive sources In both table headers, region should link to Administrative regions of Greece (since that's what the table uses) From a quick scan of the sources (not a source review), the Temple of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae should only be listed under criteria i, ii, and iii. I'm not sure if the criteria for other sites are correct — I checked a few others and they seemed okay, but I didn't check all of them. Archeological site of Olympia needs a semicolon in the UNESCO data column It appears that the second table uses scope="row" for the leading cells, while the first table does not. For consistency, they should be the same – I would suggest adding the scope to the first table. — RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:58, 6 January 2021 (UTC) @RunningTiger123: Done, thanks. I guess someone uses a bot to archive the sources at some point. --Tone 08:12, 16 January 2021 (UTC) You should be able to archive the sources with a bot on request – see User:InternetArchiveBot for details. RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:29, 17 January 2021 (UTC) Edit: here is a direct link to archive sources. You may have to give it permission to edit on your behalf if you haven't used it before. RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:32, 17 January 2021 (UTC) Sweet, thanks :) --Tone 08:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:40, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved comments from GeraldWL 10:08, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Gerald Waldo Luis I am willing to make List of World Heritage Sites in Indonesia a featured list, so am learning from nominations here. If all comments below resolved, I'll strike this to support. I think I'm literally the most chill person on FLCs because of this. Key: (Section number-Column number) Some sources are not archived. How is this done? I assume a bot is used for that? At least someone always achived the sources before the lists were promoted. Link Greek culture within "cultural"? Probably not. Some sites are Venetian or "Frankish" in origin, which is not what the article is about. I'm concerned about perfect typography in alt texts. Screen readers are not perfect; they will read exactly how it think it reads like. So for the Vergina image, "Facade of Philip II" may read "fe-sad of fi-lep ai-ai." I suggest changing that to "Facade of Philip 2". Good point. Never thought of that. I never understand the use of Template:Clear. Here, they cause a random blank space between the lead and the first list section heading. This is in order to make the table appear in full size and not to stack with the map on top, which is an issue on larger screens (Sweden WHS was especially tricky in that case). (1-1) Do you mean "Epicurus"? If so, suggest linking Epicurus. No, not related to the philosopher, Epicurus is the title of Apollo in this case. (1-4) I suppose Byzantine time hasn't been linked, so suggest linking it. No, that one is about time keeping, not the era. (1-4) Link Orthodoxy? Eastern Orthodox Church to be precise. (1-6) Link Spread of Christianity? Agree. (1-7) "...and the Theatre"-- of the same name? Perhaps include that? I'd write the name if it was different, I think it is kind of obvious in this case. (1-8) Why should you have a bracket that links to Knights Hospitaller, when Order of St John of Jerusalem is already a redirect? This is the name they are commonly known as, and to avoid a redirect. (1-8) Link Ottoman Empire within "Ottomans"? Done. (1-9) Link Mystras? Linked already in the site name in the first column. (1-9) Is Byzantine Empire linked prior? If no, suggest linking. No harm in linking more than once. The table is sortable, some editors say. (1-12) "Hosios Loukas is pictured." is weirdly placed. Added that it is a monastery. (2-1) "...listed here, is already a World Heritage site." Capitalize "Site". Done. (2-3) Is the "Classical period" this period? (2-last) So "Classical period" is linked here. I'm not sure if... You found it ;) I'll link the one above :) Suggest having a Template:Portal at See also with the Greek portal. Portal is already in the links below. I think that's enough. That's all the comments I have. GeraldWL 14:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC) @Gerald Waldo Luis: Done! Comments above where needed. --Tone 08:02, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

• Support — all my concerns addressed. Prime work. GeraldWL 10:08, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• "ran by monks from several Orthodox countries" => "run by monks from several Orthodox countries"
• "The Linear B tablets are the first testimonies of Greek language" => "The Linear B tablets are the first testimonies of the Greek language"
• "Mycenaean culture inspired Homer to compose Ilyad" => "Mycenaean culture inspired Homer to compose the Iliad" (that is the usual spelling in English-speaking countries)
• "The Romans reshaped it into a "small Rome", with adding public buildings" => "The Romans reshaped it into a "small Rome", adding public buildings"
• "Mining activities in the Lavrion area have been recorded already in the 4th millennium BCE and has continued well into the 20th century" => "Mining activities in the Lavrion area have been recorded since the 4th millennium BCE and continued well into the 20th century"
• "First temples and shrines on the site data back" => "The first temples and shrines on the site date back"
• "The site cover the most important palatial centres" => "The site covers the most important palatial centres"
• "The area around the Prespa lakes" - in the first column, Lakes has a capital L, but here it doesn't
• "They were built in non-urban areas and served defence purposes" => "They were built in non-urban areas and served defensive purposes"
• "People, who live in this remote area" => "People who live in this remote area"
• That's it from me. Great work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:46, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
  • @ChrisTheDude: Done, thanks! --Tone 08:08, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:04, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 19:14, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

;Comments The lede seems a little sparse imo. The Samaria gorge is one of the gorges --> The Samaria gorge is located in More concise. indispensable element of every urban centre --> indispensable element of urban centres During the Venetian period, a fortress has been built to protect the natural port of Elounda. --> During the Venetian period, [Greeks?] constructed a fortress to protect the natural port of Elounda. Link the first instance of endemic. Link to the Athenian navy. Nice list. ~ HAL333 16:15, 18 January 2021 (UTC) @HAL333: done, thanks! I expanded the lede a bit, but it is hard to be creative when being concise at the same time. No idea who built the fortress, probably the locals together with Venetian workers, so I'd leave that in passive. --Tone 17:48, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

• Support Must be amazing to actually see these in person. ~ HAL333 19:14, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
• Support - Eliko007 (talk) 09:42, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• "Temple of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae" source says the site appears to have been forgotten for almost 1700 years.
• Some close phrasing there too with the original: "After being forgotten for 1700 years, the temple was rediscovered in the 18th century and attracted the attention of scholars and artists" vs "The temple appears to have been forgotten for almost 1700 years until it was rediscovered in the 18th century and attracted intense interest from scholars and artists."
  • Rewritten.
• " and in Greek view the navel of the world " what does this mean? would put this in quotes.
  • That's why the Omphalos is linked. I put it in quotes.
• "Delphi was seen as" by whom?
  • By the ancient Greek world, I think this is rather clear.
• "The Acropolis has since then exerted a profound influence" reads like a brochure, according to whom and in what sense?
  • Rewritten.
• "has enjoyed an" not encyclopedic tone.
  • Changed.
• "Autonomous Monastic State of the Holy Mountain" source calls it "Autonomous region of Mount Athos"
  • I linked Monastic Republic of Mount Athos instead, as per the Wikipedia article.
• "run by monks from several Orthodox countries" didn't see this in the source.
  • Removed, indeed, this is only implied.
• "The Sanctuary is " no need for capital as you're not using the formal name.
• " is one of the most beautiful urban ensembles" according to whom? Brochure talk.
  • Changed.
• "the town for the modern town" repetitive.
  • Good point.

There's a start, more to come. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

• "with no added spaces" what does that mean?
  • Just an octagon, while the other two have a series of adjacent bays. How would you write it?
    • I just don't understand that "no added spaces" means "no adjacent bays". The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:10, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
      • What about now?
• " important personalities" seems a strange way to describe these people, they were philosophers/mathematicians rather than simply "personalities".
  • Agreed.
• "Mycenaean culture inspired Homer..." not clear on what direct relevance this has to the site.
  • Changed. Please check if it is not too close to the source.
• " 49-50 CE" en-dash.
• "As of 2020..." could update.
• "listed here," unnecessary.
• "Late Medieval Bastioned Fortifications in Greece" 11 disparate geographical locations are listed.
  • Well, I suppose that Akronafplia - Bourtzi - Palamidi all count as Nafplio?
• "National Park of Dadia - Lefkimi - Souflion" en-dashes.
• "three out of four European vultures, Egyptian" colon after vultures.
• Lesvos category is "mixed".
  • Right, not sure how this error appeared. I'll also add a sentence to show why the cultural aspect.
• " a 50 kilometres (31 mi) long" needs adj=on in the convert template for the adjectival usage.
  • Did I get it right?
• File:Nativity Eleoussa Prespa Church Fresco.jpg probably needs to be mentioned in the description.
  • I changed for the picture of the lake, makes more sense to me.
• Prespes Lakes is vii not viii.
• " Many churches have been built" -> "were built".
• "a fortress has been " -> "a fortress was"
• "White tower" the description capitalises it as "Tower".
• Zagorochoria is (v) not (iv).
• " area, belong to" no comma needed.

The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 12:36, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

• • @The Rambling Man: Done, thank you for a thorough review! --Tone 18:11, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Support I'd consider my review to be an ample source check too. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 12:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 03:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC) [3].

---

List of World Heritage Sites in Cyprus

Nominator(s): Tone 09:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Cyprus has three WHSs and 11 sites on the tentative list. The style is standard. Looking at the tentative sites, those are mostly older nominations that may eventually be reevaluated as a single nomination (six items related to the same phenomenon), but at the moment we have what we have in the sources. One item has no description for some reason, so not much can be done here. Since Switzerland and Poland are getting good support I am adding Cyprus. Greece will be next, and that will be a substantially longer list. Tone 09:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Alexandra

• Like in the previous WHS lists I have looked at, this has the weird alt text "List of World Heritage Sites in Cyprus is located in Cyprus". I have fixed this now, but would again recommend that you do this for any past/future lists that use {{Location map+}}.
• Per MOS:FIRST, leads in lists should not contain self-references like "This is a list of X" (similarly to how our prose-based articles don't begin with "This is an article about X")
• The villas were richly adorned with mosaic floors, the motives represent themes from mythology and from everyday life. - this does not seem to work grammatically. Alternatives might include "floors, whose motives represent..." or "floors, with motives representing..."
• This site is also a part of the Troodos Ophiolite. - because the table is sortable, there is no guarantee that one of these "is also a part" items won't be the one a reader sees first. I would recommend rewording so that all notes work if they are the first one read.
• The church was built in the 11th century over the ruins of a 5th-century basilica, additional chapels were added in the following centuries. - similarly to the "villas" bullet point above, the two clauses here aren't connected properly. I would suggest simply adding an "and" after the comma.
• The area is important especialls - I assume this is meant to say "especially"?
• from the Roman to the 20th century - am I reading this incorrectly, or are you missing a word here?
• Otherwise this looks good. Ping me when you have addressed the above or if you have any questions!--Alexandra^IDV 01:13, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @Alexandra IDV: Done! I removed "also" in those items, the Ophiolite should still be mentioned, if maybe not linked every time. I left the longer explanation where it appears first without sorting. I suppose that should work. Thanks! --Tone 09:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Excellent, I have confirmed the changes!--Alexandra^IDV 14:11, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support--Alexandra^IDV 14:11, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• "Cyprus was a place of worship of pre-Hellenic fertility deities since the Neolithic period (6th millennium BCE)" - until when? Presumably not 2021 :-)
• "with motives representing" - I think you mean motifs, not motives
• "upper mantle sequences are well exposed and where lower crustal and mantle processes can be studied and demonstrated" => "upper mantle sequences are well exposed and lower crustal and mantle processes can be studied and demonstrated"
• "A five-domed church of St. Barnabas and St. Hilarion." - this isn't a complete sentence so doesn't need a full stop
• Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
  • @ChrisTheDude: Done, thanks! --Tone 21:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:50, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Support + comments from Gerald Waldo Luis

I'll support this as a fine list with OK prose in my lens, with some comments.

• (Lead) Link Republic of Cyprus?
• (World Heritage Sites) "Criteria i through vi are cultural, whereas vii through x are natural." Roman numbers are rare on Wikipedia, so a "i" might look like a typo in first glance. Perhaps linking it to Roman numerals?
• {Painted Churches in the Troodos Region) "...during the time of the Byzantine Empire." Duplicate link.
• Link murals?
• (Choirokoitia) "The agricultural society was aceramic (without pottery)." Perhaps change "without pottery" to "not producing pottery".
• Link flint and anthropomorphism?
• "Fikardou is" felt vauge.
• {Chandria) The article Chandria has various images. Maybe it's usable?
• (Church of Panagia Aggeloktisti) Link chapel?
• This article continuously switches "The [insert building type]" with "This site". Please have it consistent.
• I archived references, however ref 8 is not yet archived.

Other than that, this is in good shape. GeraldWL 16:53, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Done, thanks! I prefer not linking the Roman numerals since it is pretty clear that this is what the article is using (there's even a link in the table). Linking chapel seems a bit too much as well. For aceramic, I went with the archeological meaning, as "not producing pottery" could mean something else. The problem with the Chandria images is that none of them depicts what the nomination is about, which are tectonic features. In any case, if Cyprus is going ahead with these nominations, they will likely merge them all into a single one at some point in furure. --Tone 09:25, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• I can't help but stare at that 126-word lead and think it's too short for featured material. I think we're going to need to try hard to expand that.
  • I tried to expand.
• We're 2021 now, so could update the "as of" year in the lead.
• Dates need to be properly formatted, e.g. ref 5 has "Aug" which should be "August".
• "considered by UNESCO" not really, UNESCO said "The mosaics of Nea Paphos are extremely rare and are considered amongst the finest specimens in the world" so UNESCO are just reporting that someone unknown "considers" them such.
• Sortable tables, link linked items each time, e.g. Byzantine Empire, Troodos Ophiolite etc etc.
• "showing the development of styles under international influences" what does that actually mean?
  • That should mean that these are the examples of the style. Rewritten.
• Aren't the painted churches 351bis?
• Isn't it (ii)(iii)(iv) instead of (ii)(iii)(vi)?
  • Yes, fixed.
• Choirokoitia ref is +bis.
• Any reason why the tentative lists don't have the reference numbers?
  • They never do in lists here. I guess we decided that at some point, as the tentative sites often get updates when the number changes as well. On the other hand, the WHS numbers are "official", eventually getting a bis or ter suffix if the site is extended.
• "Church of Panayia Chrysokourdaliotissa" is (ii)(iii)(iv) instead of (ii)(iii)(vi).
• "the site Painted Churches in the Troodos Region" -> "the Painted Churches in the Troodos Region site"
• Shouldn't "Year listed" really be "Year submitted" for the tentative list?
  • This is the style we are using. They were probably submitted earlier and listed (put on the list on the website) in the year mentioned.
• "ii, iii, , iv, v" something missing here.
• Ref 11 is the wrong URL.
• Location (District) only ever has one entry, and none of them are linked in the second table.
• "In Mt. Olympus," Mount.
• Why (for instance) is Malounta Bridge listed as Limassol when that's not mentioned in the ref and it was submitted by folks in Nicosia? Suspect this is not the only one...
  • Correct! This one and the next are in Nicosia. Not sure where I got it wrong. Funny enough, the coordinates in the ref point to the middle of the Caspian Sea. Clearly wrong :P
• "St. Barnabas and St. Hilarion" not mentioned in the UNESCO ref.
  • This is pretty much the translation of the names Varnavas and Ilarion to those we use on English wiki. I didn't want to leave the field blank.

A few issues that need to be resolved before I can support. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 18:52, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

• @The Rambling Man: Done. Some comments above. Thanks, I see I missed quite some thing this time around... --Tone 18:51, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Source review – Pass

Formatting

All retrieval dates, titles & publishers are formatted correctly and consistently.

Reliabillity

• The only source (UNESCO) is doubtlessly reliable

Verifiability

• Archive links are included so dead links not an issue
• checked refs 10, 20, 4 & 2, found no issues Aza24 (talk) 09:32, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

• " World Heritage Sites are places of importance to cultural or natural heritage" This is too vague. There are countless sites of importance which do not qualify for WH status. Also you cite a summary of the Convention which does not specify the criteria, not the Convention itself at [4]. The definition should be expanded and should quote "of outstanding universal value".
• "built in the Troodos Mountains during the time of the Byzantine Empire". Were they all built in the period of Byzantine rule which ended in 1191? Also, it would be helpful to give the timespan of 11th to 16 centuries.
• Choirokoitia. No change needed, but I find the dating puzzling. The summary of the citation says 7th to 4th millennium, below 7th to 5th. It seems very late for an aceramic culture as the Pottery Neolithic started in the mid-7th millennium in the Fertile Crescent. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:11, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
  • @Dudley Miles: Good points! As for the intro, I modified it as you suggested and added the other source. If that's ok, I'll go ahead and change the intros in other WHS FLs. Churches, fixed. I guess it is easier to state the centuries than go into the Byzantine/post-Byzantine details. As for the third one, I don't know ... maybe they were on the conservative side of the spectrum and were late with the adoption of pottery ... several thousands of years late. But that's what the source says. Curious indeed. --Tone 17:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• I think a summary of articles 1 and 2 of the Convention on the criteria for cultural and natural sites would be helpful for readers, especially as the lead is so short. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• I am playing with the intro. What about now? --Tone 15:12, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

• How about "The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) designates World Heritage Sites of outstanding universal value to cultural or natural heritage which have been nominated by countries which are signatories to the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, established in 1972. Cultural heritage consists of monuments (such as architectural works, monumental sculptures, or inscriptions), groups of buildings, and sites (including archeaological sites). Natural features (consisting of physical and biological formations), geological and physiographical formations (including habitats of threatened species of animals and plants), and natural sites which are important from the point of view of science, conservation or natural beauty, are defined as natural heritage." Dudley Miles (talk) 16:35, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

• Perfect! --Tone 17:42, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

• Support. Looks fine now. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:01, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 03:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC) [5].

---

List of Mage: The Ascension books

Nominator(s): Alexandra^IDV 03:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

With the Vampire list promoted yesterday, and my Changeling FLC now having two supports, it is time for FLC #4 in my World of Darkness project: Mage: The Ascension, one of the most popular games in the series (and therefore one with the largest number of books...). This one follows the same format as the Vampire and Changeling lists, with books organized by which game edition they were released for, and with a descriptive annotation for each item. As always, I welcome constructive criticism! Alexandra^IDV 03:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support - I aim to provide constructive criticism, but on this occasion I have none :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:47, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you!!--Alexandra^IDV 16:01, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Couldn't find anything of concern. ~ HAL333 18:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you!!--Alexandra^IDV 18:16, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support, not much to comment here. Nice work! --Tone 10:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you for looking over it!-Alexandra^IDV 13:15, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support. Cool work! I'll note that I view the table headers as vague/repetitive, and that some links are not archived (I've tried using Toolforge but it doesn't archive any). But that's all, and I've done some edits myself per WP:BOLD; I'll try help manually archiving some of the sources. GeraldWL 10:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

  @Gerald Waldo Luis: Thank you! Table captions are a mandatory accessibility feature (see MOS:DTAB), for the sake of readers accessing the article with screen readers.--Alexandra^IDV 11:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

  That's somethin' new. Prompted me quickly to add a caption at List of Latvian submissions for the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film. Btw it's a current FLC; adding that there in case you're interested in commenting. Cheers! GeraldWL 14:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

  Btw you don't have to ping me again, I've watchlisted this. GeraldWL 14:27, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Source review — Pass

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 20:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Formatting

• Okay I've fixed some of the tedious things
• Is ref 81 & 86 really page 0?
• no other issues

Reliability

• No issues here

Verifiability

• No issues here... ugh I was hoping to find some feed back to give you but the sources and sourcing are very thorough. Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 21:16, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
  • @Aza24: I'll make sure to leave in some intentional errors for you to pick up next time, don't you worry. Joking aside, yeah, pagination of ref 81&86 does start at 0, which for sure is an unusual choice on the publisher's part. Regarding the changing of ISBN format, I do have to oppose that though, based on WP:ISBN, which asks us to not convert to ISBN-13 if only ISBN-10 is given in the book, "because ISBNs are often used as search strings and checksum differences between the two forms make it difficult to find items listed only under the other type". This being a list of books, I could absolutely imagine readers wanting to find more about a list item and trying to use the ISBN to find it.--Alexandra^IDV 23:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Fine by me. IDK I've heard that reasoning before, but have never been convinced; I would assume the by far most common use of ISBN nowadays is searching in some online catalogue—whether that be WorldCat, archive.org, a local library etc—where the system would most likely have both ISBNS (all books with ISBN 10s now have 13s by now I would think). Not an issue however Aza24 (talk) 04:43, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 03:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC) [6].

---

List of Burnley F.C. players

Nominator(s): WA8MTWAYC (talk) 11:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm nominating this list about players who have made at least 100 apps for Burnley Football Club. Other, similar FLs were used as a benchmark. I'm looking forward to all feedback/reviews. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 11:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• The only thing I've really got is that notes (d) and (e) really should be the other way round, considering that the former is essentially a footnote to the latter -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
  • ChrisTheDude I've moved that information to the lead. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 21:53, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:05, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:00, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments Could link Professionalism in association football for "become professional". Done. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) I'm mildly confused by " putting pressure on the Football Association to permit payments to players", if they had turned pro, does this mean they were breaking FA rules? Yes, because the FA didn't permit professionalism/payments to players (until 1885). WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) "As a result, the team were able to enter the FA Cup for the first time" also confused by this, these days of course it's open to plenty of amateur clubs. Was it the case that back in the day it was only open to professional clubs? It was only open to amateur clubs, or at least to clubs who didn't make "illegal payments" (wages, bonuses) to players. Of course this also happened at other clubs (e.g. Darwen, Blackburn Rovers and Blackburn Olympic) but their owners were businessmen and owned local factories where the club's players worked, so they got around the system in terms of payments. I've tweaked the wording a bit, so hope it's clearer now. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) "Burnley have played in the top four tiers of English football from" I'm guessing the point here is that they've never been relegated out of the top four tiers? I wonder how a non-football reader would find this concept as it's currently written. Correct. I've changed it to "Burnley have played in all four professional divisions of English football from 1888 to the present day". WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) " all four professional divisions of English football" vs "the top four tiers of English football" possibly worth reorganising to keep these together without having to address the same kind of idea twice but with different terminology. Kept the same wording as above. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) Martin Tyler has an article so can be linked. Done. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) The lead image, whenever these are not shown in the "home" strip and not necessarily contemporaneous, I add "(pictured in X playing for England)" in the caption. Done. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) Where are the nationalities of each player referenced? Either in the book or in the Soccerbase refs. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) A lot of the dab names need commas (e.g. Steve Davis (footballer, born 1965). Added. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) Footnote A date format mdy instead of dmy. This is a hard one, as I only copied this note/template. I really don't know how to change it. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) Some Soccerbase archived, some not. I've not archived the refs of current players. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) Do we really need Category:Burnley F.C. when we have the players cat? Removed. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC) That's it, cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC) The Rambling Man Thank you very much for the review. I've addressed your points and left some comments. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Support I did a couple of minor tweaks, but now think this is good to go. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:00, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Support Looks good to me. ~ HAL333 01:09, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments by Edwininlondon

• The prose works very well for me. Nice work.
  • Thanks very much. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• Would an illustration of one of the most capped players in a Burnley kit not be better?
  • Agreed, replaced the image. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• All players who have ... --> I would have expected this bit to be in the list section itself, preceding the key I guess.
  • I've followed similar FLs, most of which also have this part in the lead. I think it belongs there, because it summarises some of the content/list. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• List of Manchester United F.C. players and List of Arsenal F.C. players have a section for the captains. Is there a reason why this list does not?
  • There are unfortunately no (reliable) sources which can provide this. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• Source spotcheck: #2, #3, #4, #5, #11, #12, #14, #48, #50, #52, #55 all check out
• #13 Kelly's transfer is listed as 6,500
  • Amended. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• #35 gives caps as 311
  • Ahh, I see what's the problem. Soccerbase has included four apps in the other section (the 2008–09 Football League Championship play-offs), but this should only be three. The same problem occurs at ref 51 (Steven Thompson). E.g. the unofficial club fans website has also credited Jensen with 310 apps. Also, when clicking on every individual season, all apps sum up to 310. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• #49 gives caps as 159
  • Tarkowski played today and I updated his stats after the match. His Soccerbase profile should be updated by tomorrow. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• #51 gives caps as 101
  • Same as with Jensen. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• #57 gives caps as 127
  • Same as with Tarkowski. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
• Based on that, I'd recommend a quick check on all the sums from the Soccerbase. Edwininlondon (talk) 20:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Done. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Edwininlondon Thank you very much for your time and review! I've addressed the points above. Let me know what you think. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome. As for the number discrepancies: I had failed to realise it was matchday and these were active players. I now support this nomination. Edwininlondon (talk) 07:13, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

• Source review – The reliability and formatting of the references look okay after the resolution of Edwin's issues, and the link-checker tool shows no problems. The source review has been passed. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:24, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 03:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC) [7].

---

List of Billboard Latin Pop Airplay number ones of 1994 and 1995

Nominator(s): Erick (talk) 18:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

My first time doing a FLC for a record chart and my first nomination for WikiCup 2021. I was inspired by ChrisTheDude's work on the Billboard county charts and modeled (with permission of course) this list after one of them. I look forward to resolving any issues. Erick (talk) 18:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 19:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments Whopper of a lead, looks like it might be best to have a brief lead paragraph and then a subsection for more details. MOS:LEAD generally doesn't go for more than four paras in a lead, and while this is a list article, it doesn't mean we can have a brief lead para and then a detailed section below. " by Nielsen Broadcast Data Systems " could this be "Nielsen's Broadcast Data Systems"? "The latter track was the longest-leading number one " not keen on this phrasing, what about "The latter song held the number one spot for the longest" or something? Not convinced two separate tables are required, especially as the last topper of 1994 is the first of 1995. Otherwise looks in good condition. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:10, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

• Support my concerns addressed, apologies for the delay. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 19:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

;Comments Five paragraphs is too many for the lead, I suggest reworking it into three of four and maybe trimming a bit of extraneous detail Could probably lose " in 52 issues of the magazine" "Castro is also the artist with the most number songs in 1995" => "Castro was also the artist with the most number-one songs in 1995" "Luis Miguel had two number one songs on the the chart" => "Luis Miguel had two number-one songs on the chart" "Gata sin Luna is missing the quote mark at the end "were the acts to obtain their first and only chart-toppers in 1995" => "obtained their first and only chart-toppers in 1995" "Laura Pausini is the only female act to have more than one chart-toppers" => "Laura Pausini was the only female act to have more than one chart-topper" Photo caption: ""Ese Hombre" by Myriam Hernández was named the best-performed" => ""Ese Hombre" by Myriam Hernández was named the best-performing" Think that's it from me. Great work, and thanks for your kind words citing me as an inspiration :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 01:14, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
;Comments Could you archive the rest of the sources? Could you replace the image of Myriam Hernández with one of her singing to keep it in line with the others? I'm not sure what is going on with ref 21: "Archived from "ese%20hombre%20myriam%20selena" the original"... That's all. Looks good. ~ HAL333 01:03, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333 01:14, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude:, @The Rambling Man:, @HAL333: Thanks for all your comments, they were all very helpful. I believe I have addressed all the issues brought up. Erick (talk) 23:37, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Just checking in to see if I have resolved the issues you brought up. Erick (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Just following up since it's been two weeks, does the article look good now? Erick (talk) 18:01, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Resolved comments from – jona ✉ 19:13, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

;Comments from AJona1992 According to the wikilink to Hot Latin Songs, the linguistic limits is that a song must rank on their charts if it is predominately recorded in Spanish. If that's right, then a minor change in the lead should help reflect that. "hit" is one of the words to avoid; Claudio's reference could be replaced with "recording", while Selena's reference sentence could be rewritten as "...song to peak at number one on the survey and..." just to avoid repetition of the word "chart". Want to clarify if Laura Pausini's record of chart-toppers is specifically for 1994-95 or a current record holder? Overall a good read. Good job Erick – jona ✉ 21:02, 30 January 2021 (UTC) @AJona1992: Thanks as always for the comment Jona! Regarding the Hot Latin Songs chart, Billboard didn't impose the linguistic rule until the chart's methodology change in October 2012. Its former methodology is used as the basis for the Latin Airplay chart which the Latin Pop Airplay is now a subchart of. Otherwise, I fixed everything else. Erick (talk) 01:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

• Support – jona ✉ 19:13, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Source review passed; note that I added a translation for one Spanish article title using the |trans-title parameter. Promoting. --PresN 03:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC) [8].

---

Johnny Winter discography

Nominator(s): Ojorojo (talk) 16:43, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Blues rocker Johnny Winter was a one-of-a-kind and his discography had a few twists and turns. This has been in the works for over a year and covers all of his recorded output, is carefully sourced and meets all the criteria. Hope you find it interesting & informative. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:43, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Alexandra

• The picture in the lead lacks alt text
• never remaining at any one for more than two or three albums, so sometimes remaining for more than two - change to "for more than three albums"
• Notes that are complete sentences should end with a period; ones that are sentence fragments are fine as is (see WP:CAPFRAG for details)
• The King of Slide and The Woodstock Experience should sort as "King of Slide, The" and "Woodstock Experience, The"
• Same goes for all the items under "Compilation albums" that begin with "The"
• Otherwise, this looks good - please ping me when you have addressed the above and I will take another look!--Alexandra^IDV 17:11, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

• @Alexandra IDV: Thanks, done. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you! I added archive links to the references and missing periods to a few more complete sentences, and I think everything's good to go now!--Alexandra^IDV 18:33, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support--Alexandra^IDV 18:33, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

;Comments Can't see any reason for "Gold" to be in quotes or to have a capital G (in a couple of places) "Winter's last studio album, Step Back (2014), is his most successful" => "Winter's last studio album, Step Back (2014), was his most successful" "Royalties were not Winter's primary concern, "I just....." - think that comma should be a colon "After signing to Columbia Records in 1969, Winter's former associates began....." - it was not Winter's associates who signed to Columbia, so this needs re-wording "Recorded: 1984–1984" looks weird - just put "Recorded: 1984" "Note: The Winter brothers are listed on singles as "Johnny and the Jammers"" - which singles? This wording suggests all of them, which obviously isn't the case....... AllMusic is not the author of the first book listed Why is one random issue of Billboard listed in the bibliography? If it is the source for one specific chart position, just put it against that. Think that's it from me - great work. Nice to see a bluesman's discog coming to FLC...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:13, 18 December 2020 (UTC) I've fixed the problems and made some tweaks for consistency, etc. I also added a Hendrix album with a song Winter played on (received a favorable mention in a review). I think that takes care of it. Thanks for being so thorough. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:13, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from HAL333 19:31, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
;Comments There is an issue with the ref order for the 1978 album I'm Ready. Everything else looks great.~ HAL333 20:40, 23 December 2020 (UTC) Fixed. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Nice work. ~ HAL333 19:31, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• "45 rpm record single" record single reads odd to me. One or the other but not both.

• Done. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Could tell us what that single was!

• Reworded, not noteworthy for the second sentence. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

• "recorded" used three times in three sentences makes for repetitive reading.

• Reworded. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

• " to Columbia Records.[1] With Columbia" repetitive.

• Reworded. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

• "the main American record charts" but you only mention (and list in the table) one, the Billboard 200.

• Fixed. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• "remaining at any" remaining with any?

• Done. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• I don't follow the last sentence of the lead at all. What was the "discography situation" that having a three-year break made more complicated?

• Removed, not important to his discography . —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Worth noting that his last studio album was a posthumous release?

• Added a mention. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

• Not clear why italics is required as well as the asterisk, it makes the numbers crash into the symbol making it harder to read. Also makes the double asterisk even harder to delineate."

• Since the other charts are not the one specified in the column header, I am thinking of moving them to efns, similar to the Canadian charts. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• I moved these to efns, which eliminates the need for the footers also. Now they are all consistent. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

• Sortable tables means everything that's linked should be linked every time. My advice: make them unsortable. I'm not sure what sorting adds here.

• Removed, doesn't add much. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• "Billboard's" not sure that 's should be in italics.

• Fixed. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Isn't the chart called "Top Blues Albums"?

• At one time, but it's been just "Blues Albums" for more than nine years.[9][10] —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• "c.1961" normally a space after c.

• Fixed. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• I would order the infobox the same as the sections, i.e. Bootlegs before singles.

• Done. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Why isn't, e.g. The Best of Johnny Winter notable enough to be linked as it hit 11 on the charts?

• Albums may appear in a specialty chart, but only receive a brief mention in a review or bio and may not meet the significant coverage criterion (and not "enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article"). Also, compilations are often discontinued/replaced after a few years, so may be unlikely to receive any further coverage. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• ""Rock and Roll, Hoochie Koo"" needs an en-dash in the chart place column before that footnote about Canada.

• Done. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• "Albums as producer and/or guitarist" section, Billboard in table heading needs italics.

• Fixed. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Concert videos not mentioned in the infobox.

• Added. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Ref 41 needs spaced en-dash, not hyphen.

• Added snd to Together (ref 40; 41 looks OK). —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

That's it from me. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: I'm going to come back to the lead. Meanwhile, how about moving the other charts and the unlinked albums? —Ojorojo (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

I trimmed some of the less important info from the lead, moved the footnotes from the bottom of the tables, and simplified the efns. That should do it. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Source review — Pass

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 09:19, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Formatting

Bibliography

• Your locations are inconsistent, either include all or none of them, just needs to be consistent

• Removed. The prior inconsistencies were due to only including locations as specified in the actual sources used (some have them, others don't). —Ojorojo (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

References

• ref 24 has a different year then biblo, not sure which is right

• Corrected typo. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• some of the page numbers, such as refs 24, 86, 95, 115 are missing periods

• Fixed. Template:Sfn automatically adds a period, while Template:Harvnb doesn't. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Reliability

• I see no issues here; AllMusic has a history of trusted critics, and non-authored links are just statistical information Aza24 (talk) 06:32, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Verifiability

• Have glanced at some of this and found no issues. Aza24 (talk) 06:32, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• Fixed the issues. Thanks for a thorough source review. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• Great! Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 00:03, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 03:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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.

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions and support. Also, thanks to Mudwater for their contributions. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

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