Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Gaylactic Spectrum Awards

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 01:00, 25 February 2009 [1].

Gaylactic Spectrum Awards edit

The lists of nominees for the 3 categories of this award all already made FL, so this is the final part to make it a featured topic (i forgot i hadn't submitted it, this was essentially finished months ago!). It is very much a niche award, with no controversy, so 99% of sources are just list results, hence our article reflects that. All the formatting and sources are essentially the same as the sublists, so should have no problems. ThanksYobmod (talk) 14:21, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please fix the disambiguation links. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:28, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all links except the Buffy one. The awards for buffy are for the TV series, comic and a novel, so in that case i think the disambig is the best destination. Thanks for pointing outthat tool, it will make finding these much easier!Yobmod (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Rambo's Revenge (talk · contribs)
Strong Oppose
  • Sortability of names should be by surname.
  • Nobody published "Angels in America"?
  • Note A: "People's Choice award winner" - what does that mean?
  • "Comic/GN" seems to be centered in one of the columns
  • Inconsistent linking (e.g. you link "Warner Aspect" in 2000 & 2006 but not in 2004)
  • The image causes the ==Regulations== text to be further down in the article than it should be. Please fix this.
  • The ref column should not be sortable.
  • The lead is too short.

Please note these are all points I quickly noticed without reading a single bit of prose. FLC is not a substitute for peer review, and this should have had these simple problems solved there not here. Regards, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:38, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of these issues are rather minor, so unless there is a major concern that you did not note, I don't see the reason for a strong oppose. Granted, the lead may be a bit short, but note that the next section is all prose. Maybe the lead should summarize the regulations a bit more. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:30, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you are quite right and have ammended accordingly. When I found those errors without looking at the prose I became a little exasperated that this had not been to PR. Please forgive me if I appeared hostile in any way. I will endeavour to give a full review later on in this FLC. Sincerely, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:43, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think i can fix all of these in the review time:
  • Names are now sortable by surname (and double checked)
  • Missing publisher added (was HBO).
  • All publishers with articles linked (and diambigs checked).
  • Cateogry column justification made consistant.
  • Refs are already unsortable (did you fix this?).
  • People's Choice was an extra award for a couple of years. It always ended up going to works that got the juried award, so was scrapped. I make sure it is clarified in the prose.
About the lead - i purposely made it shorter so as not to be repeating information in the immediately following prose section. I can beef it up easily enough, if such repitition is not a problem? To me it seemed to close together. Or i can put the regulation directly in the lead, but then that looked like to much in depth info for the lead.Yobmod (talk) 19:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I like the lead as it is. Why don't you merge the two paragraphs together? Dabomb87 (talk) 19:19, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to increase it slightly (with sentences about regulations, major winners and one about the latest award), but keep it to 2 paragrpahs. Would this be a good comprimise? Hopefully this will also make the picture not mess with titles - on my setting it fit perfectly, d'oh.
This is acceptable and I have struck above. I just have a few additional comments below this. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:35, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "G K Hall" -> G. K. Hall
Done
  • For "Comic/GN" I assume GN means graphic novel but you need to spell it out for people.
Done
  • Award process section: "Novels, Short fiction and Other works", don't CAPS novel, short and other. This also needs changing in the following sentence. And for "winners in the Best Novel category" at the end of the paragraph.
Done (also in lead)
  • "calendar year in English in North America that includes" second in should be or/and? Includes -> include
done (changed to "English-language works in NA that include..."
  • "from the SF genre" -> spell out SF.
done
  • Is the Hall of Fame still active as I note no inductees since 2003

Rambo's Revenge (talk) 00:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made an addition that no Hall of Fame inductee since 2003. There has been no anouncement about it being dropped (so i can't cite that), they just haven't been given.Yobmod (talk) 15:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hall of fame "Ballantine/ Tor". Can you explain, did they both publish it? Also if that is the case, don't use a slash as it will appear from the title that Ballantine published & Tor produced. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:20, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For the Holdfast Chronicles? That is a series of 4 books, so some were published by Ballantine, and others by Tor. I can change it to an & sign, but thought that made it sound like they were cooperating, rather than competing. none of the books were published by both companies. I made it into a comma, is ok?.Yobmod (talk) 07:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all my issues have been resolved. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Question (or Help! :-)). The images on my settings overlapp with the first heading, they don't cause it to move. This happens whether or not the TOC is expanded and on different monitors. Is this the same for everyone else? If this is something that settings can affect, can someone explain how to change it? I always make sure images don't move any tables, but thought that overlapping the headings was normal.Yobmod (talk) 10:01, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed this. If this is not what you desired please feel free to revert or enquire further about what to do. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 00:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Looks better.Yobmod (talk) 09:15, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
  • "Established in 1998, the awards were initially presented by the Gaylactic Network, with awards first awarded in 1999." This is contradictory; awards were first presented in '99 but established in '98?
    • The awards go over the year boundary, ie They were open to submissions in 1988 and announced long-lists, then in 1989 they announced the winners.
  • "The most recent awards were presented in October 2008 at the Gaylaxicon science fiction convention in Washington, D.C., in October 2008, with Gin Hale and Joshua Lewis winning the awards for best novel and best short fiction respectively."-->The most recent awards were presented in October 2008 at the Gaylaxicon science fiction convention in Washington, D.C.; Gin Hale and Joshua Lewis won the awards for best novel and best short fiction respectively.
    • changed per suggestion.
  • "with the winners and short list of recommended nominees decided by a jury." Make this a separate sentence.
    • changed per suggestion.
  • "Since their inception, awards"-->Since their inception, the awards
    • changed per suggestion.
  • "This includes but is not limited to"
    • changed per suggestion.
  • "Melissa Scott has likewise received"-->Melissa Scott has also received
    • changed per suggestion.
  • Blank table cells should have em dashes.
    • I wrote "Novel" in most of them, as i thinkit looked better and sorted better (even though it is repeated in the next cell).
  • I forgot to mention this in your previous FLCs, but there should be a note that explains that the year links in the table link to the year-in-literature article for that year. See List of Washington Wizards head coaches as an example. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I added a sentence to the table description, with links to the master lists for each subject area

Sources

  • Many of the web refs are not formatted. Use {{cite web}} and include at least the URL, page title, publisher and last access date. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fixes with be along shortly :-). And i'll apply changes to the previous lists too. Sorry about the refs, they were newly added, and i'll use a tool to convert them all in one go. Done with reflinks.Yobmod (talk) 08:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support if the links for the dates in the table are fixed. Some of them do not point to the correct article location (for example films with dates that link to the year in literature.)Dillypickle (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, checked them all, and fixed the five i found going to lit instead of right aricle. Evil copy/paste to blame!Yobmod (talk) 18:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
struck my comment, leaving the support.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Gaylactic_Spectrum_Awards&oldid=1138480150"