Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of delegates to the Millennium Summit

List of delegates to the Millennium Summit

I have been able to compile this list using reliable sources. It is a list that complements Millennium Summit.--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 17:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hello???--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 02:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment HOw come 15 of the people don't have articles? Shouldn't they be notable? Besides that, the list is nice and sortable, refrences are formated bbut it would be nice not to have the titles in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. Once that is fixed (if possible) and a reason is given for the redlinks in the table, I will support. The Placebo Effect 22:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~I know this is being picky, but since all the people present and in the list were delagates of their county, shouldn't they all be notable? Is their any reason for the red links in the table?~~ The Placebo Effect 20:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good job on the table, this is a model list and am happy to support it now/ The Placebo Effect 20:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I think the lead should be expanded a little bit. At the very least it should be a bit clearer on where the summit took place, its goals, and its significance (even though the article isn't about the summit, readers should have an idea of the context and significance of the list). I also think that as it stands the lead is a bit ... "clunky" or something. Choppy sentences, I guess. I'm not sure what I mean, exactly, though, and I wouldn't oppose for that. Anyway, I also agree that the external links shouldnt' be in all capitals. --Miskwito 00:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I fixed all of the external links and titles, etc. I'll see what information I can get on the lead.--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 01:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Looks good. Support --Miskwito 22:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support One minor issue: The notes on DPRK delegate not attending: The delegates claimed diplomatic immunity. To say that they had it assumes the issue was resolved. It looks, however, that the issue was left open and never was resolved. That change makes the article seem more NPOV. Also, the image tag for the group portrait looks incomplete. Minor fix needed there as well. Other than that, looks good! --Jayron32|talk|contribs 20:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- reply to comments on my talk page. First fix looks good. The second fix is not what I was looking for. You need to click on the image and load it's image page. Then, you need to fix the image copyright tag, and fair-use rationale. Contact Ed for more help with this, since it looks like he/she uploaded it. Also see WP:UPIMG and WP:IUP for more information. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 22:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]