Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/WCW Hall of Fame
- 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 Matthewedwards 18:02, 14 February 2009 [1].
| Toolbox |
|---|
- I am renominating this list because FL director Matt stated I could immediately renominate it since the last FLC only had one support, and only one reviewer reviewed it. The same statements I made in the previous FLC apply here as well, any other comments will be addressed.--TRUCO 18:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support My issues were resolved at the last FLC. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:07, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The only problem are the images, that are not being next to the table in my browser. Cannibaloki 18:22, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- How about now?--TRUCO 18:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, not changed at all. You should remove those images, see Wikipedia:Layout#Images. Cannibaloki 19:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]Or convert them into a gallery.Cannibaloki 19:27, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]- How about now? I'm not sure what resolution you're using, but I am also using FF 3, and they work fine for me. If it still doesn't I'll just remove them.--TRUCO 19:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, looks good now. (1024×768) Cannibaloki 19:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Cool cool. It was the coding of the thumbnails and the width of the table, so I fixed it.--TRUCO 19:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, looks good now. (1024×768) Cannibaloki 19:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- How about now? I'm not sure what resolution you're using, but I am also using FF 3, and they work fine for me. If it still doesn't I'll just remove them.--TRUCO 19:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Some of the first paragraph and all of the second paragraph, which is basically half of the article itself, contains no citations of where the information came from. — Moe ε 19:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Lets start this over, the first paragraph is sourced by the refs that are there. The beginning of that paragraph is sourced by the general reference, which serves as a ref to the entire article (prose and list). The second paragraph is not sourced because per an accepted FL standard, the summary paragraph does not need references because since it is a summary of the list, the references in the list cover for that paragraph, so there is no need for inline citations for that paragraph. In addition, that paragraph is also sourced by the general reference.TRUCO 20:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I still prefer inline citations, but if the information is actually cited in someone way then I'm fine with it. — Moe ε 21:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, so you still oppose it?--TRUCO 21:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No. — Moe ε 21:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- May you cross it out, you don't have to support.--TRUCO 21:38, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No. — Moe ε 21:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, so you still oppose it?--TRUCO 21:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I still prefer inline citations, but if the information is actually cited in someone way then I'm fine with it. — Moe ε 21:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
CommentPlace separate numbering for notes and citations. Perhaps change the four notes numbering you have to a, b, c, and d. Examples: Packers, Saints, and Eagles. --Gman124 talk 15:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done.--TRUCO 16:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Very well written article, and can find nothing else wrong with it. Gman124 talk 16:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done.--TRUCO 16:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I only saw one suspect thing: "WWWF World Tag Team Championship". Too many W's? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:03, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- At one time WWE was called the "World Wide Wrestling Federation", hense WWWF.--WillC 07:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)--WillC 07:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- In addition to being explain in footnote C.--TRUCO 503 21:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- At one time WWE was called the "World Wide Wrestling Federation", hense WWWF.--WillC 07:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)--WillC 07:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.