This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Key visual novels for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:
I am nominating the recently promoted featured list List of video games developed by Key to take the place of Key (company) as the main article of the topic since it serves as a better definition of what should be the main article in a good/featured topic as is given at WP:FT? point 2: The topic has an introductory and summary lead article or list.. Also, there was some concern during the nomination process about having Key (company) as the main article, so I believe this will solve that problem. All of the other articles have not changed in status since this became a good topic, and no additional visual novels have been announced by Key. I also am proposing the topic name be changed from "Key visual novels" to "Video games developed by Key" to fit with the title of the proposed main article addition.--十八01:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This topic is already featured. It is also being re-nominated to remove items which are no longer part of the topic. See Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Retired Pacific hurricanes for the archived discussion of the topic's successful nomination. The removed items are:
The tropical cyclone Wikiproject had a discussion link, and we came to the agreement that two articles in the topic (Fico and Fefa) should not be considered retired Pacific hurricane names. We got confirmation from the National Hurricane Center that they were likely not retired. I'm not sure how to remove items from a topic, but I hope I did this right. If there is a problem, then I can omit the two removals for this topic addition.
Comment - I note that both of the removed articles still say that they're names are retired and have the retired hurricanes template at the bottom. It should be consistent. --PresN18:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, per the project agreement, I removed the template and info saying those two were retired. The data we have available do not confirm its retirement, rather that it was only removed, and the email we got from the NHC leans toward the names being removed, not retired. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I was waiting for someone to bring that up. I contacted the author earlier today, asking he remove Fefa and Fico, and add Alma. It is forthcoming, but I hope the image is not a major issue for this nomination. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
TBH, I didn't think it would be an issue. It's an image that is in the process of being changed. The accompanying image isn't an FT requirement, so it shouldn't be much of a concern. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A strong objection for something that is being taken care of? The above vote can't really be addressed, so I don't think it should be counted. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:31, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You should come up with another name for that section Lists of retired names. There are more than that, but that section just covers the ones retired due to damages. You should also note that in the template. Potapych (talk) 14:51, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The nomination process can take a week or two, and by then the picture should be up (right?), and no one should have any further objections. —Goodtimber (walk/talk)18:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Jesus College, Oxford for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:
The main alumni list has grown and spawned three sub-lists, all of which are now FLs in their own right, hence this supplementary topic nom. BencherliteTalk06:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not that there should be anything urgently needing my attention on this non-controversial supplementary nomination, but just to leave a note that I'm off Wikipedia for the next fortnight. BencherliteTalk18:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I support these additions somewhere but am going to throw out a suggestion. Because these 3 additional alumni FLs are so tightly connected with the main alumni list, might it be better to have a alumni subtopic of 4 lists. I know FTs should not be excessively subdivided, but I just thought I'd suggest it as those 4 lists clearly go together as a set. Good work on this! Rambo's Revenge(talk)22:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While both topics would be comprehensive within themselves, the total number of articles here is 9, hence I think this would break the "needlessly small" recommendation -- the only reason to split would be that it's more impressive which isn't really a reason IMO. I suppose there is another alumni topic so in a sense it seems a bit unfair that this topic doesn't get to be broken in two when that topic is one half of the resultant break, but if a USNA topic is brought up to scratch, and the number of articles is such that one merged topic wouldn't be too big, I would advocate merging there, too - rst20xx (talk) 23:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
List of alumni of Jesus College, Oxford: Clergy