Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:FLC)
The closure log
edit · history · watch · refresh

Comments from Giants2008 (talk · contribs), PresN (talk · contribs), and Hey man im josh (talk · contribs), and other notes of pertinence. Should you wish to contact the delegates, you can use the {{@FLC}} ping facility.

FLC
  • FLCs of special note
    • We now have many lists in need of more attention. See here for the oldest ones. Please do what you can to contribute to these nominations!
FLRC
  • Kept
  • FLRCs of special note
    • None
Shortcut

For a "table of contents"-only list of candidates, see Wikipedia:Featured lists/Candidate list and Wikipedia:Nominations Viewer. To send a message to the FLC director and the FLC delegates, use the {{@FLC}} template.

Question, re: Internet Archive

[edit]

Since the IABot is not working for me, I've been spending some time this afternoon manually archiving sources – which, that sucks, by the way – but the Internet Archive cannot access articles I've added via Newspapers.com or the New York Times. I have a NYT subscription (for the puzzles) which grants me access to their archived articles. How do we deal with these? Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:22, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TheDoctorWho, do you know the answer to this? I've seen you do source reviews before. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:32, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgsu98: Are you referring to the "Sorry, you have been blocked" message that pops up when you attempt to archive a source? I've never personally seen that issue before, I've only ever had URL's that are "excluded from the WayBack Machine".
I thought it might be a similar issue and attempted to archive using other methods I've had luck with in the past (archive.ph and ghostarchive.org), and while they did "archive" it, they didn't bypass the paywall so it's probably not of much use to you. TheDoctorWho (talk) 22:15, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can I assume then that when an article is source-reviewed here, it's just understood that some source aren't able to be archived? Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:22, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgsu98: guessing you already noticed but I ran the IABot on the list a bit earlier today with the option selected to add archives to all live links too and it only really edited one ref I think though I noticed there's still a few refs missing archives. Maybe this might be something to bring up with Cyberpower678 given they're the bot operator and could modify the bot operating params to help out. Dan the Animator 04:40, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did see that; thank you! It actually was a different article I was working on. I saw where several sources on the Ukrainian article had not been archived (or hadn't had their archived copies logged in the citations), but I took care of them last night. It didn't take long, and now all of the sources are archived. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgsu98: I can't speak for others, but I would personally pass the source review under the understanding they can't be archived; especially if all the other information generally expected of a source is there. I would just be prepared to mention that to whoever does the source review and potentially link to this talk page section. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with The Doctor, you did more than enough with the refs :) Dan the Animator 04:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mid-table headers

[edit]

Hey all, is there any policy for FLs against having multiple table-headers in the middle of a sortable table? I added in multiple table headers to keep the list List of Ukrainian placenames affected by derussification sortable and organized though Bgsu98 said it's not standard. I really think having the in-table headers adds a lot so would prefer to keep them. Thanks in advance for the help! Cheers, Dan the Animator 01:29, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe MOS:COLHEAD advises against it. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, that's the one. Pseudo-headers like that look like headers, but that's not the way screen-reader software interprets them because they aren't actually headers. I'll make a more detailed post on the nomination. --PresN 01:56, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question

[edit]

Hi! I have two pending FLCs now, one has 3 support votes and one has 2 support votes. Am I allowed to go for a third nomination... Vestrian24Bio 07:20, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Previously, the answer has always been "wait for one to them to become an FL". -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but no @Vestrian24Bio. We're fairly strict on the two nominations, otherwise I myself would be taking advantage of this, as would a couple other regulars who quickly get support on their noms. The one exception may be if you had two FLCs already and someone nominated something with you as a co-nom, in which case, it would apply to your two-FLC limit once one of the original two was promoted. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Filmography v List of performances

[edit]

I'm thinking of working on List of performances by Josette Simon and then nominating it. Should it be titled "Josette Simon filmography" rather than the current title? (I'm looking at Peter Capaldi filmography which also lists non-filmed performances.) If you have nay other observations on the current article, please add them at its talk page. Thanks. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that maybe the "Actor filmography", "Actor on stage and screen", and "List of Actor performances" should be standardized Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:35, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FLC material?

[edit]

Would something like Joe Biden's presidential campaigns be possible to get to FL? Its considered a set index article because it used to look like this. I ask as 2/4 of Biden's presidential runs are at GA and I was considering get the other 2 to GA for a GT Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 21:51, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@OlifanofmrTennant: It's considered a set index article because it just presents short descriptions four things with similar names, so a disambiguation page with extra content. To be a list, it would first need sources talking about the concept of his presidential campaigns as a whole, rather than any particular one, and then some sort of direct comparison between them. It would not be eligible for FL, though, with only 4 items. --PresN 22:19, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That’s a shame, oh well thanks anyways Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:28, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant: I suppose it would be question for WT:GTC to see if it would qualify, but you might be able to request a PR on the index instead? TheDoctorWho (talk) 22:32, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you expand it to "electoral campaigns of Joe Biden" it could become an FL. TheUzbek (talk) 10:44, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Electoral history of Joe Biden is an article Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 12:47, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@PresN: would Electoral history of Joe Biden be able to be FLCed? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 17:52, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That looks pretty list-y to me, yeah. --PresN 18:53, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Featured_list_candidates&oldid=1281168203"