Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates | FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal 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 kept by User:Dweller 10:20, 2 July 2008 [1].

FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives

edit
Note: Notified are WikiProject FBI and WikiProject Law Enforcement. The original nominator of the list has left Wikipedia.

I am submitting this list because I think it fails as a Featured List:

  • A number of references are in the wrong place, either with a space between the punctuation and ref, or at the end of the wrong sentence.
  • Two parastubs in the Lede
  • Reference 8 should be formatted as a footnote
  • References aren't formatted using WP:CIT which makes it hard to update them, those that do all state format=HTML, even though {{cite web}} says not to as that is the presumed format
  • Table doesn't need a heading as the section heading would suffice
  • The fugitives' names are bold and linked in the description part, yet it would make more sense to bold the names in the line above
  • The list is numbered 1 to 10, even though the Lede says the FBI don't number the list. Here it seems to be in the order they were added to the list.
  • the list is out of date. One of the fugitives has been captured, so he should be removed. At the talk page a contributor says to leave it in until a new one is officially named...
  • The list should include more secondary sources for the descriptions of the fugitives, rather than relying on a primary source such as the FBI.
  • The list seems like little more than advertising (propaganda) for the FBI, than anything encyclopaedic. To quote propaganda: "Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented." which goes back to my previous point.
  • The Lede is missing references, such as the second paragraph, the last sentence of the first paragraph

I know it's not the norm, but I've bullet-listed my concerns so they're easier to address. -- Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed some of your points. I will work on the referencing later on. One thing though, can you be more precise when you talk about "propaganda?" Some examples would really help. Also, I did strike your comments when I felt I had fixed them, feel free to un-strike them if you have farther issues or I did not completely fix your comments. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 08:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it may not be relevant for FL status, but I think by using the FBI's info in the description parts, it is producing an emotion that the FBI would like the reader to feel. The FBI has selected the facts it wants the public to know, to generate a specific emotion. If it used secondary sources, it wouldn't be as bad. Nice work on the edits so far, though. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 18:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so that just goes along with getting some secondary sources for each description? I'll see what I can do with getting some sources and maybe tweaking some of the wording. Thanks, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 18:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think I have addressed your concerns so far. If you could review the list once again, that would be great. Any other comments would be welcome. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 19:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leave as featured list A few of these complaints make so sense to me. The list is not out of date. Check the FBI's list. They leave captured suspects on It's list until they are replaced with somebody else. In the past this has taken up to six months. Currently, Jon Schillaci is still on the list on the FBI's website. He should remain in the Wikipedia's page until a new fugitive is named. Also, please elaborate on why this is advertising propaganda. It shows all information we have available. It does not imply guilt or innocence. Only that these people are running from the law and have a warrant for there arrest. At any time they can step forward and prove innocense. I believe the rest of the issues in question have been fixed. --Npnunda (talk) 02:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing that may improve the page. This page used to have pictures of the suspects. I don't know if it is considered fair use or not but is that somthing that could be added again? --Npnunda (talk) 02:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the complaints were solid complaints. I can see how if someone is caught, then they probably shouldn't be on the list. All that was needed was an explanation of why he should remain for now. Matthew did elaborate about the propaganda, stating that not having secondary sources sort of made this a carbon copy of what the FBI may want us to hear, their wording is probably written to elicit emotions out of its readers. Now that their are secondary sources that can back up the info on each person, one can objectively see that the descriptions are neutral. I believe that I have addressed all the concerns, so we shall see.
As an aside, I have added photos for each person. Tell me what you think! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 03:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are right. When I look again he did elaborate. Somtimes my comments seem harsh even though I mean good faith. Thanks for adding the photos. One of the good things about people nominating articles for deletion or demotion is that it almost always improves the articles. --Npnunda (talk) 03:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand and I am sure Matthew does too. And your welcome! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 03:56, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do, don't worry about it. Nice work, Gonzo fan. I was worried when I saw that pictures had been added, thinking that it would have ten Fair Use Images. I'd forgotten that as they are from the FBI they're in the public domain! Article looks good now, if I knew it would have been that easy I would have commented on the article's talk page Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 04:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, I still don't get how a captured person can still be "Wanted" though. The FBI ought to pick a new crook already! :) Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 04:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, this is an American Government Agency...do I need to say more? (yes I am American so it is ok for me to make fun of America) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 04:12, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Featured As original author it met all criteria and still meets it today. Shane (talk/contrib) 15:30, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Comments

TONY (talk) 03:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs fresh eyes to run through and fix the glitches throughout. TONY (talk) 03:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it would be good for someone who is a better copyeditor then I to give it a good run-through. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 04:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks OK now. TONY (talk) 03:06, 27 June 2008 (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_removal_candidates/FBI_Ten_Most_Wanted_Fugitives/archive1&oldid=1225233588"