Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/James E. Sullivan Award/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 00:01, 16 March 2010 [1].

James E. Sullivan Award

Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Featured list candidates/James E. Sullivan Award/archive1

From 4,960 bytes to 26,284 bytes in under 48 hours, every athlete is now independently referenced, there are alt-texted images, no dabs, no breaches of MOS (as far as I can see), I've even tried to use USEng (but I could have fouled that up, feel free to correct me). I humbly submit this to the community. As always, thanks for your time and energy in reviewing this list (and all the others), and I'll do my best to address each and every concern as soon as I possibly can. Cheers folks! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from KV5

Comments from KV5

"Often referred to as the Oscar of sports awards,[2][3][4] it was first awarded in 1930. The award is named..." - award or a form thereof thrice in quick succession. I would suggest changing the second to presented to break this up.
- Good catch, I usually hate that sort of thing myself...! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Might a link to Amateur sports be appropriate somewhere in the lead?
- Indeed so, and now added. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Recipients are eligible for subsequent awards." - has this ever happened? If so, who won the award the most times? If not, might be worth noting that this has never happened (especially in the award's 70+-year history).
- No, it hasn't happened yet, and I believe the rules have changed rather recently to enable it happen although I cannot pin the tail on the suitable reference donkey. Added a statement that it hasn't happened yet. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Commas after "Curtis" and "Johnson".
- You have them. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Florence-Griffith Joyner" should be Florence Griffith-Joyner
- Indeed it should be. I seem to have developed a kind of-hyphen dyslexia... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well done otherwise. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for your comments, all bar the first addressed I think. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"'the outstanding amateur athlete in the United States'" - is "the" really a necessary part of the quote here? Might just be me but it makes it seem over-emphasized, rather like "the outstanding amateur athlete". I might suggest a change to "an 'outstanding amateur athlete in the United States'".
- I guess. It's probably a matter of a taste, and the quotation is directly from the award website. I may leave it for the time being and see if anyone else has issues with it, if that's alright? For what it's worth, I think the emphasis is intentional... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Certainly acceptable to me. I'll leave this comment uncapped so other reviewers are aware of it, but will consider it as ineffective toward my support. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support from KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:21, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Comments

Tangent to KV5's point above, could the infobox quote be reworded to replace the "goes" in the quote with "going" outside of it? As it stands the box reads "Awarded for... goes far beyond" which doesn't read nicely. I don't think it's altering the quote to pull that word out and replace it with a proper tense verb. Awarded for: going "far beyond".

Yeah, I agree it doesn't read nicely. I'll reword. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a rule that you can only win once? I ask because it seems odd to see no repeats. More later. Staxringold _talk^contribs 19:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think there used to be a rule which said you couldn't win it more than once, but I'm struggling to find it. I'll have another look. In any case, the most recent nomination form (ref 5 point 5) states that "AAU Sullivan Award recipients are eligible for re-nomination for this honor". The Rambling Man (talk) 11:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:21, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - No major issues, well-written and interesting. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:42, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comments~~ Support –
~~In the last sentence, I would move "only" to before "one occasion", the phrase it is intended to modify.~~
- Completely correct, modified and much the better for it. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Spell out WBNA in reference 71. Lacking this, at least correct the abbreviation (WNBA).~~
- WBNSNBANSA? Of course... Fixde ni boht locastion. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Ref 68 needs a publisher (Los Angeles Times).~~ Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:19, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It now has a "work". Many thanks Eagle-eyes.. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Gah, TRM, you devil! I can't find anything about which to quibble, and you know how I just hate that when it comes to your lists. Next time, I'll try to get here earlier and ~~wreck~~ ~~rewrite~~ get my suggested improvements in first. So, through gritted teeth my friend, support. Bencherlite ^Talk 15:16, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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