Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States by time in office

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 02:30, 10 January 2008.

List of Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States by time in office edit

OCNative created this list in January 2006. I added parser functions so that it updates itself, and added sortability by name or time. The list is complete (all 110 justices) and accurate (referenced, too), and I think it meets the qualifications of a featured list. Coemgenus 15:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would prefer to see a Notes section using {{cite web}} than the ref section.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 18:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean a separate note for each Justice? The information all comes from the same two sources. Or do you just want me to change the format of the reference? Coemgenus 18:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just change the format.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 02:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think they already are in that format. I copied them from a similar page, List of Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, checked to see that the websites were still there, and updated the access dates. Coemgenus 15:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is that inline citations are preferred to page links in a general reference section.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations are now in-line. Coemgenus 14:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Oppose. As in all FLs, the list should have a suitable lead. You should first mention what the blue rows mean (even if it's obvious), and add some interesting facts about this subject (the longest term, the first...) CG (talk) 15:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll work on that this week. I wasn't sure how much of a lead was necessary, since the title kind of explains the point of the list, but I'm new to the Featured List arena, so what do I know? Coemgenus 15:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've attempted a longer lede, explaing the range and the row colours. Will ^(talk) 01:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will -- thanks, that says it all, I think. Coemgenus 15:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LEAD could still be beefed up. Explain does first day start with day nomination is approved, day they are sworn in, day they first sit on the court, day they issue their first order, or what have you. Possibly same confusion for last date, (death date, resignation date, last order date, if they take a medical absence before dieing what is last date).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 15:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I explained that, based on the info in the Supreme Court source. Coemgenus 14:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment When you said this updates itself, did you mean that Souter would move ahead of Berger on the list in two weeks or just the number of days will update itself?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the latter. Now that it's sortable, someone could sort them by number of days, but the rank will have to be updated manually. I'm not sure how to make the rank automatically correspond to the number of days. Coemgenus 21:11, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

comment Unless the 'Rank' column can be made into an auto-calculated number, maybe the rank column should just be removed. Hmains (talk) 01:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think the rank column is useful. This table will just take a little rearranging every so often. Many list require updating every so often. I was just asking for clarification.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 14:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would love for it to be auto-calculated, but I could not figure out how to achieve this result. In the meantime, I don't mind updating it. Coemgenus 15:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the usefulness of rank and withdraw my idea of deleting the column Hmains (talk) 01:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SUPPORT My suggestions have been handled well.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support: with two questions/comments: a) One or two more images, if they're available, would fill that space. b) Can the last column be sortable as well - as in "sort by start date"? Otherwise, very nice list. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 02:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support. I think that sorting by start date is possible, but will take some extensive editing. If I restored the sortablilty now, it would sort alphabetically -- April, August, etc. -- but I may work on that if I have time this week. As for the pics, I could certainly add a few more. Coemgenus 14:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it turns out sorting by date won't work because (1) the changing dates of the current Justices don't mesh with the sort template, and (2) two Justices had two separate terms each, making two separate start dates. Coemgenus 14:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a pic of Justice Stevens, the longest-serving of the current Justices. Coemgenus 15:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. My only thought is that it is unnecessary to have both the rank and the length of term columns as sortable, since they produce the same result! Bencherlite ^Talk 22:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice list! And it looks like the review process helped to make it an even better (e.g. more complete) one. MeegsC | Talk 09:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Good list. Meets FLC. Rudget . 19:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A very nice list. Good job! It seems as though all complaints brought up have been resolved and I can't think of anything bad to say about it so I will happily support this fine list. Silver Sonic Shadow (talk) 01:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.