Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The closure log

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
    • None
  • Delisted
    • None
  • FLRCs of special note
    • None

The nominator wishes to close the nomination. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore this. It looks like they changed their mind. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Third Nom[edit]

@WP:FLC director and delegates: I have two lists at WP:FLC that have substantial support for promotion: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Green Bay Packers draft picks (1936–1969)/archive1 with 4 supports including a source review and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Green Bay Packers draft picks (1970–present)/archive1 with 3 supports including a source review and one other comment addressed. Any issue with me putting up a third nom? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonzo fan2007: I think we want to keep it capped at 2 per nom for now, though I'd expect your oldest nom to be promoted in a few days anyway. --PresN 15:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, thanks! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PresN, any chance you could take a look at them again? Both have substantial support and no recent activity. I would appreciate it! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonzo fan2007: Promoted them both, actually! --PresN 18:36, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's been nominated, but it seems to not be listed on the FLC page. The Kip (contribs) 00:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@The Kip: You need to manually transclude the nomination page you created to WP:FLC. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a new FLC delegate[edit]

Hi everyone; traditionally, the FLC process has had at least three people running it, but for the last 2 years it's been just me and Giants2008. In order to spread the load out a bit and keep the process from relying so much on individual editors, we are proposing to add Hey man im josh as a Featured List delegate. Over the past year or so they have been extremely active as a nominator and reviewer, and have been visible helping out other editors with the process both here and on the WP:Discord server (as well as having a successful RfA), so we think they would make a good delegate. Before we make it official, in order to be transparent we wanted to post the proposal here for feedback. --PresN 17:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like those above, I Support this! I have seen nothing but great work and care from Josh's contributions to this site and particularly in these FLCs. He would be a perfect fit to help tackle this process! Trailblazer101 (talk) 03:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, with no objections raise and discussion concluded, I'd like to welcome Hey man im josh on as our newest Featured List delegate! They're now authorized to close nominations, and can be summoned along with Giants and myself with the {{@FLC}} template. If, now or in the future, anyone else is interested in becoming a delegate, feel free to reach out to any of us for consideration. --PresN 14:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How long does it take[edit]

@WP:FLC director and delegates: How long does it takes to complete nomination. I made a nomination about one and a half month ago-it has received three reviews now, but still pending...Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Women's Premier League (cricket) captains/archive1 Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 14:25, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vestrian24Bio: Typically we expect at least three reviews with supports, one of which would needs to be a source review. When PresN leaves the accessibility review message, it's not typically counted in this figure, as they're typically just evaluating whether the list meets accessibility criteria at a glance. It's more or less a reminder/explanation of a requirement that we have in place, as opposed to a regular review. For what it's worth, the key in your list still does not meet accessibility criteria (it needs the accessibility formatting as well). If you want to get more reviews on your nomination I encourage you to review nominations of other users. Even if you're not confident enough to do source or image reviews, prose reviews of other nominations can still be helpful. Lastly, this wasn't necessarily urgent enough to ping the coordinators, as I believe we all have this talk page watchlisted already. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:37, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I was just curious as its my first nom; I'm not exactly familiar with the review process but, I will get to it. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 15:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair @Vestrian24Bio, we all start out somewhere. That's why I typically suggest prose reviews for those new to the process. Most people can read through and call out when something sounds strange or a sentence just makes no sense. If that's all you can contribute while still learning the ropes, that's totally fine! Every bit helps. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Got it! Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 15:29, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]