Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of official County Championship winners/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 19:57, 12 November 2011 [1].

List of official County Championship winners

edit

List of official County Championship winners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Harrias talk 12:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that it meets the FL criteria. It is loosely modelled off current FLs such as List of Israeli football champions. Harrias talk 12:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from HonorTheKing (talk) 18:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Very nice, just few things,
  • I see you refed the book Altham & Swanton (1938), but I don't see the book listed in any of the refs (ISBN and such). Only book I see refed is the #12 ref which is diff one.
Done Harrias talk 15:05, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Second, Maybe caption (the +) the tables for better understand.
I don't know what you mean, could you explain in more detail? Harrias talk 15:05, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When you put |+Some info here about the table bellow under {| class="wikitable sortable plainrowheaders"
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 16:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done Harrias talk 15:05, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The alt should realy say what we see the picture, for exemple, A black-and-white photograph of a man doing something something, holding a XYZ bat and looking at the camera.
The lead it self I find good, and I will support it once those minor from above will be fixed. Also, I seen you added a Bibliography maybe put the Notes by the Editor in that place aswell? and make it the same format as the General and Specific.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 16:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia:Alternative text for images says: Alternative text should be short, such as "A basketball player" or "Tony Blair shakes hands with George W. Bush". and that it is relevant to the article. I don't think it is really relevant that the photo is in black and white, or what he is doing.
  • As regards the bibliography, given that it only contains one book, I don't see a need to split it into three columns, and I don't think it is necessary to include the book from reference 12 given that I only reference it once: the bibliography only contains sources that I have used multiple times and refer to in short-hand notation. Harrias talk 18:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support, With those said.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 18:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 21:18, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "Since then no county has managed to achieve the same level of ascendancy" I think dominance would be better than ascendancy.
  • "Yorkshire hold the record for most championships, with 30 titles" I think titles is redundant as you've already indicated what the 30 is for.
  • The tables need a caption, HonorThe King alluded to this above, but I don't think he made it very clear. I'm not sure if you know how to add a caotion or not so I'll give you an example to be sure. So for the first table it would read: |+List of County Championship winners
  • I noticed in the table that some titles were shared I'd either make a note, or add a disclaimer in the lead stating why there are two champions, so readers unfamiliar with the sport understand what's being represented.
  • I'm not sure there is much point in having the last column sortable in the second table, doesn't seem to offer much.

Apart from these points the list looks in good shape. NapHit (talk) 22:56, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments, I have responded to each above. Harrias talk 17:21, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 15:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • When sorting by county in reverse, you need to force the single-digit wins (e.g. (2), (3) etc) to sort properly.
  • Rather than a blank for runners up in shared wins, I suggest a N/A is appropriate.
  • Any mileage in quickly discussing the scoring methodology for the championship (i.e. batting, bowling points etc)?
  • I don't think so, only because the scoring has changed so many times over the years: to explain how it is scored now would put, I think, unjustified bias on that system, but to explain them all could take an article in itself! Harrias talk 14:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would put the shared years in italics (and add a key) and remove the bold shared:.
  • Hmmm: I'm not convinced myself! As a compromise, how about listing them in the main list, but putting (shared) after the year:

{| class="wikitable sortable plainrowheaders" |- !scope="col"| Club !scope="col"| Titles !scope="col"| Championship-winning seasons |- !scope="row"| [[Yorkshire County Cricket Club|Yorkshire]] |align=center| {{sort|305|{{nobr|30 + 1 shared}}}} | 1893, 1896, 1898, 1900, 1901, 1902, 1905, 1908, 1912, 1919, 1922, 1923, 1924, 1925, 1931, 1932, 1933, 1935, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1946, ''1949 (shared)'', 1959, 1960, 1962, 1963, 1966, 1967, 1968, 2001 |} Harrias talk 14:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok, deal...! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:11, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done Harrias talk 20:30, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:28, 27 October 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_official_County_Championship_winners/archive1&oldid=1227538163"