Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of basic topics in classical studies
- 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. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 10 days, 1 support, 3 oppose. Fail. Scorpion0422 01:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An excellent overview of a complex subject. I've done as much as I can find/think of on it. But I'm sure it can be refined for excellence, which is why I brought it here. The Transhumanist 18:53, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Oppose There are no sources. -- Scorpion0422 21:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Query: What needs to be sourced? And in what context? The Transhumanist 03:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- "The field focuses primarily on, but is not limited to, Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome during classical antiquity, the era spanning from the beginning of the Bronze Age of Ancient Greece in 1000 BCE through the period known as Late Antiquity to the fall of the Western Roman Empire, circa 500 CE. The word classics is also used to refer to the literature of the period." That should have some kind of source. There should also be some kind of source that confirms that these things fall under the overall topic, otherwise, it's OR. As well, the lead should be expanded. -- Scorpion0422 02:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for the input. What needs to be included in the lead? And what kind of source would be sufficient to confirm an entry falls under the topic? The Transhumanist 07:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- "The field focuses primarily on, but is not limited to, Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome during classical antiquity, the era spanning from the beginning of the Bronze Age of Ancient Greece in 1000 BCE through the period known as Late Antiquity to the fall of the Western Roman Empire, circa 500 CE. The word classics is also used to refer to the literature of the period." That should have some kind of source. There should also be some kind of source that confirms that these things fall under the overall topic, otherwise, it's OR. As well, the lead should be expanded. -- Scorpion0422 02:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Query: What needs to be sourced? And in what context? The Transhumanist 03:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong oppose This is what Portals are for. Colin°Talk 16:38, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - portals are "doorways" modeled after the main page, and are designed to spotlight a variety of subtopics over time, with articles and other sections that get swapped out occasionally. They are not intended to be an outline of a subject as the lists of basic topics are. Portals are meant for readers and editors, while lists are just for readers. Portals are more like collages or scrapbooks. Basic topic lists are subject outlines, and as such they are more systematic than portals, and the lists' coverage isn't sporadic like portals. Each basic list is intended to provide the overall structure of a subject, in a standard "cheat sheet" format, serving as a table of contents to its subject. So no, this is not what portals are for. The Transhumanist 01:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Mostly issues identical to the geography and economics lists, plus:
- Using columns for less than 10 articles is disputable, for less than 5 is ridiculous
- A template must be improperly closed at some point because everything after the "Classical Latin literature" is jumbled for me.
- Maybe add some actual external links
- Circeus 04:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]