Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of 1952 Winter Olympics medal winners/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 The Rambling Man 18:57, 12 March 2011 [1].

List of 1952 Winter Olympics medal winners

Featured list candidates/List of 1952 Winter Olympics medal winners/archive1

Nominator(s): Courcelles, Strange Passerby

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets the FL criteria – including being well-sourced with inline citations (after that ridiculous brouhaha brought on after my last FL got promoted). I expect minor changes might have to be made to the opening prose as with any FL candidate, but the body of the list is done. Redlinks are at a minimum right now (just four, down from about ten last month) and I expect that shouldn't be too much of an issue. I'm including User:Courcelles in this nomination for his work in helping to copyedit the prose and add all the inline citations. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs) 13:05, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I realise alt-text for some images is missing, I intend to add them asap. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs) 12:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 19:25, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I think I may have noted in another one of these lists that it seems reasonable to put "VI Olympic Winter Games" in quotes or something.
- We decided on italics in the 1948 FLC, did that here.Courcelles
Don't really think you need to link London.
- Unlinked. Courcelles
"On home snow.." I quite like this but some of it was on home ice wasn't it?

((I rather like Strange Passerby's turn of phrase there myself, but, you're right. Changed to home soil. Courcelles

You link "their return" rather than Germany, this is confusing since you linked United States and Norway directly.
- Moved the link. Courcelles
"Germany made their return to the Olympics after being barred from both the 1948 Winter and Summer Games for their involvement in World War II.[5] As a result of the war, Germany had been divided into two nations, the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany), and the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). At these Games, only West Germany competed. Germany ..." while factually accurate, count the "German(y)"s in these sentences... somewhat repetitive...
- Took a shot at it. Courcelles
You capitalise Men's but not women's in the final lead paragraph.
- Neither should have been... fixed. Courcelles
Not sure you need "Pictured is..." in that image caption.
- Fixed.
Alfred Van Allen redirects to Allen Van. Is the former the name referenced or should we be using the more common latter name?
- See the link below, for him the IOC has Alfred VAN ALLEN. (Capitalisation theirs). Courcelles
Ruben Bjorkman (according to our article) was actually Rubin Bjorkman.
- IOC given Ruben Eugene BJORKMAN, per [2]. Could user his nickname Rube if necessary, though. Courcelles 17:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorting by total is a little odd for me as I'd expect Andersen to be top (by virtue of three golds) but I get Buchner (1 silver, 2 bronze) instead. I'm using Safari, if that "helps".
- Another hack, this time making Andersen's three sort like a four, is the best I can come up with. See if it works. Courcelles 18:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:24, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: "he set both new Olympic records[9] and the largest winning margins ever seen at the Olympics" should be changed to "he set new Olympic records[9] and won by the largest margins ever seen at the Olympics". Tables appear consistent with the other FLs. Great work! Reywas92^Talk 03:21, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've rewritten that sentence, though slightly differently than suggested. Courcelles 03:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Just one little problem I see: the flow could be better in "At these Games, only the FRG competed, where they won...". The "where" is meant to go with "Games", not what follows. How about "Only the FRG competed at these Games, where they won..."?

Done, thanks. Courcelles 23:14, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~That was my comment. There's now a repeating "where they won" which should be addressed. Do that and I'm on the support side.~~ Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was my braindead action of the week. Too bad it's only Monday, fixed. Courcelles 02:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:04, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Harrias ^talk

Ref 2 uses DD MONTH YYYY, while throughout the rest of your referencing, you use MONTH DD, YYYY.
Exceedingly picky: Ref 1 is "p.4." while Ref 4 is "p. 75" probably best to add a full stop onto the end of Ref 4!

Support The fact that my points are SO picky tells you that this article must be in pretty good shape, so I do haven't any problem in supporting, knowing that you will get these copy-edits done. Harrias ^talk 13:03, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My bad on both; they have now been fixed. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs • Editor review) 14:33, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest I think this list should be merged with 1952 Winter Olympics medal table. Since only 13 nations won medals, I don't see a reason why that should not be included here as a section. Nergaal (talk) 02:29, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- That medal table could be merged, (I would oppose it, for the record) but not to here. Instead, it should be merged into 1952 Winter Olympics, by adding the last three nations to the ten given there, if anything is going to be so merged. This list is a daughter of the main article on the games, which already includes too much of the medal table to justify including it yet a third time. Courcelles 02:48, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Since countries win medals in team sports like hockey, I don't think listing the countries that were medal winners is a bad idea. Nergaal (talk) 00:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, but this is hwo daughter articles work, anyone who gets to here is assumed to have already read; or be willing to read; 1952 Winter Olympics. Repeating a table from there is not necessary. Courcelles 08:57, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I agree it is in a good shape. Ruslik_Zero 19:47, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you swap the images? The top image in the article is a little creepy and doesn't look like anything related to the Olympics.
Could you link to slalom? I have no idea what that is...
"Of the 13 NOCs, which won medals, 10 won more than one" - why the first comma?
Why is there a separate article for 1952 Winter Olympics medal table? It looks like something that can be included very easily.
Otherwise looks good! --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The people who won medals have nothing to do with the medal table. As mentioned above by Courcelles, repeating that table here would be redundant.
- Comma removed, slalom linked, images swapped. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs • Editor review) 05:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fair enough. Support. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:10, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support No issues.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 19:41, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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