This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Featured lists page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 60 days

This talk page is for discussion related to Wikipedia:Featured lists. Please do not start off-topic discussions, including those asking for peer reviews or asking someone to promote an FLC you are involved in. Thank you for your cooperation.

Shortcut WT:FL

	This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Lists This page is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles

Wikipedia:Featured lists is a reader-facing page intended for viewing by non-editors. Please prioritize their needs when adjusting its design, and move editor-facing elements to other pages.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Moved to User talk:Crisco 1492

During the FLRC for 30 Rock season 1, the topic of how articles for TV seasons should be listed came up. There are currently 79 FLs for individual TV seasons, including this example. However, these lists tend to be older and newer season articles seem to go through GAN/FAC instead (I currently count nine FAs and ~130 GAs). For the FLRC, I thought the distinction was relevant because the FL works reasonably well in its current form as a list of episodes from that season, but not as well as an article about the season, if that distinction is clear. As far as I know, there is no formal consensus on how season articles should be promoted, so I was wondering if (a) we should make the consensus clear on this topic and (b) we should retroactively apply those standards to current FLs. Currently, I'm just curious about feedback from the FL side; obviously a full discussion would need to include other WikiProjects. RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240913194700","author":"RunningTiger123","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-RunningTiger123-20240913194700-FLs_for_television_seasons","replies":["c-TheDoctorWho-20240913214600-RunningTiger123-20240913194700","c-Hey_man_im_josh-20240913220400-RunningTiger123-20240913194700","c-Caeciliusinhorto-20240914114100-RunningTiger123-20240913194700","c-Favre1fan93-20240914155100-RunningTiger123-20240913194700","c-Gonnym-20240915090000-RunningTiger123-20240913194700"]}}-->

I fully believe that any season articles should go through the GAN/FAC process rather than that at FLC. Most television series already have a specific page for a list of their episodes (List of 30 Rock episodes in this case) and it seems to me that season articles expand beyond just a list. I've honestly never considered season articles a list because it would be pointless to have two lists covering the same topic. As for those that are already FL's, yes, they should probably be removed, and if they're still of the standard we expect these days they can go to FA instead.

I added a {{please see}} message to the talk pages of MOS:TV and WP:TV. TheDoctorWho (talk) 21:46, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240913214600","author":"TheDoctorWho","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-TheDoctorWho-20240913214600-RunningTiger123-20240913194700","replies":["c-RunningTiger123-20240913220300-TheDoctorWho-20240913214600"]}}-->

@TheDoctorWho: Just to clarify, when you said go to FL, did you mean go to GAN/FAC instead?

I wonder if automatically removing these lists is the correct approach – many of them are still solid, and re-reviewing all of them may be an unnecessary timesink. If I had my way, I'd convert them all to GAs and let them work up to FA or down to delisting from there (FA standards are typically higher than FL so GA seems like a safer option). But I know that has its own issues. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240913220300","author":"RunningTiger123","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-RunningTiger123-20240913220300-TheDoctorWho-20240913214600","replies":["c-TheDoctorWho-20240913222900-RunningTiger123-20240913220300"]}}-->

I did, thanks for asking. Ive correcred it in my message. I would be perfectly fine with your suggestion as well, my main point was that these types of articles should not be classified as lists/go througg the FL process/or be listed as a FL, and was nore that those that are currently listed should be delat with somehow. That said, I'd have no issue with a GA conversion. TheDoctorWho (talk) 22:29, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240913222900","author":"TheDoctorWho","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-TheDoctorWho-20240913222900-RunningTiger123-20240913220300","replies":[]}}-->

I say skip the side discussions, start one at a central place, then leave notices to both projects. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240913220400","author":"Hey man im josh","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Hey_man_im_josh-20240913220400-RunningTiger123-20240913194700","replies":["c-RunningTiger123-20240913220900-Hey_man_im_josh-20240913220400"]}}-->

Fair enough, I left notifications at WT:GA and WT:FA to go with TheDoctorWho's notifications. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:09, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240913220900","author":"RunningTiger123","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-RunningTiger123-20240913220900-Hey_man_im_josh-20240913220400","replies":[]}}-->

While I see the argument that something like 30 Rock season 1 is an article which includes a list of episodes, at least some of the TV season FLs definitely are lists rather than articles: see e.g. List of The Simpsons Treehouse of Horror episodes or One Piece season 5.
If I saw either of those at GAN I would advise the nominator to submit them at FLC instead... Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 11:41, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240914114100","author":"Caeciliusinhorto","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Caeciliusinhorto-20240914114100-RunningTiger123-20240913194700","replies":["c-RunningTiger123-20240914155200-Caeciliusinhorto-20240914114100"]}}-->

I think the issue at hand is that some editors think articles like One Piece season 5, despite currently being structured as a list, should be structured as an article with more context (production, reception, etc.). In other words, a season article that looks like a list should be expanded instead of submitted to FLC. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:52, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240914155200","author":"RunningTiger123","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-RunningTiger123-20240914155200-Caeciliusinhorto-20240914114100","replies":[]}}-->

I think "season" articles should go the GAN/FAC route. If there is an article that is just largely an episode table (like One Piece season 5 Caeciliusinhorto noted above), perhaps that article shouldn't be called a "season" article and that should be reevaluated. As RunningTiger pointed out, the expectations of a season article within the TV project as largely changed, I believe, from some of those initial nominated ones such as 30 Rock, and the expectation is it to have a good amount of prose content amongst the episode table; it shouldn't simply be that. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:51, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240914155100","author":"Favre1fan93","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Favre1fan93-20240914155100-RunningTiger123-20240913194700","replies":[]}}-->

A season article is not a list. It's an article that its scope is the entire production and release (and everything that goes before and after) of a season. It also includes a list of episodes from that season. An article like One Piece season 5 is not a FL, but a C class article at best. Gonnym (talk) 09:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240915090000","author":"Gonnym","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Gonnym-20240915090000-RunningTiger123-20240913194700","replies":[]}}-->

So judging from the replies here, I think the consensus is that TV seasons should be promoted as articles instead of lists. The question then is should the current FLs be demoted? That would almost certainly overwhelm WP:FLRC if it was done all at once. Similarly, nominating all of the current FLs at GAN would overwhelm that board. Maybe we could slowly nominate the season FLs at GAN a handful at a time, and if they don't pass there, a FLRC could be started. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240929233700","author":"RunningTiger123","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-RunningTiger123-20240929233700-FLs_for_television_seasons","replies":["c-TheDoctorWho-20240930025700-RunningTiger123-20240929233700"]}}-->

I do fear that one issue which may arise from sending these to GAN/FAC may be lack of participation in that process. I don't know how many of the initial FLC nominators for these season articles are still active. While I do feel strongly that they shouldn't be FL's, I don't personally have the time or interest in overseeing GAN/FAC's for all of them. Taking the 30 Rock example for a moment, that nominator hasn't been active in nearly a decade and a half, while the One Piece nominator hasn't been active in 9 years. I assume we would need to find editors who would be willing to take on that process for specific articles? TheDoctorWho (talk) 02:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240930025700","author":"TheDoctorWho","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-TheDoctorWho-20240930025700-RunningTiger123-20240929233700","replies":["c-RunningTiger123-20241001020600-TheDoctorWho-20240930025700","c-RunningTiger123-20241005213500-TheDoctorWho-20240930025700"]}}-->

I could take on some of the work; I was thinking about going through the current FLs and seeing which ones would be good GANs, as well as which ones would probably be quick fails and should go to FLRC instead. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241001020600","author":"RunningTiger123","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-RunningTiger123-20241001020600-TheDoctorWho-20240930025700","replies":[]}}-->

Following up on my previous note, I've made a list of season FLs to start tracking which ones may be good fits for new nominations at GAN. In general, I'm hoping to work with the existing nominators on this, though I can take on a few myself. I plan to start with the most recent nominations (since the nominators are more likely to be active now) and shorter seasons (since their list aspects are downplayed). RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241005213500","author":"RunningTiger123","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-RunningTiger123-20241005213500-TheDoctorWho-20240930025700","replies":[]}}-->

Are dynamic lists eligible to be a featured list? I'm just asking as I'm currently working on a draft on Tropical cyclones in Russia, which is a dynamic list. Tavantius (talk) 14:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240926145000","author":"Tavantius","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Tavantius-20240926145000-One_quick_question","replies":["c-PresN-20240926151800-Tavantius-20240926145000"]}}-->

@Tavantius: They are, yes. We have many, such as List of Category 5 Atlantic hurricanes. --PresN 15:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20240926151800","author":"PresN","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-PresN-20240926151800-Tavantius-20240926145000","replies":[],"displayName":"Pres"}}-->

I believe the feature list status of this article needs to be addressed, it was promoted when each goal was cited by BBC Sport. [1] However since this old edit by Mattythewhite I would fail any featured listing status. I was pretty clear in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international goals scored by Harry Kane/archive1. Can we demote the article until addressed? I am seriously concerned by this issue, as soccerway does not discuss goals. Govvy (talk) 09:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241013093100","author":"Govvy","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Govvy-20241013093100-List_of_international_goals_scored_by_Harry_Kane","replies":["c-Mattythewhite-20241013162800-Govvy-20241013093100"]}}-->

BBC Sport and Soccerway are both reliable sources so either *should* be fine. However, after BBC Sport recently revamped the format of their online match reports, some data including goal times no longer appear. For example, see their report for France v England on 13 June 2017 in which Kane scored. I would argue therefore that Soccerway is more appropriate. Whether they "discuss" the goals is immaterial; this is a list, after all, not an article which provides detailed descriptions of Kane's goals. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241013162800","author":"Mattythewhite","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mattythewhite-20241013162800-Govvy-20241013093100","replies":[]}}-->

Letting any watcher or regulars of Featured lists that the W Awards are back up and running since it's long sleep of 10 years. It'd be helpful if you'd like to become a reviewer or nominate people who you think fit the criteria in any of the awards (Bronze, Silver, Golden, Platinum) and give any suggestions on awards or changes that you think should happen in the talk page! Thanks, W Award Coordinator Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20241023014100","author":"Cowboygilbert","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Cowboygilbert-20241023014100-WP:WAWARDS_are_back","replies":[]}}-->