Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of 2010 Winter Olympics medal winners/archive1
- 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 Dabomb87 02:35, 22 April 2010 [1].
List of 2010 Winter Olympics medal winners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Nominator(s): Scorpion0422 21:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox |
---|
Modelled after the List of 2006 Winter Olympics medal winners, there's really not much else to say. Enjoy! -- Scorpion0422 21:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment how about adding times/distance/score in somewhere. The more details the better I think, and why is there only 8 references?--intraining Jack In 23:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- This is meant to be a general page, if readers want details, then they can go to a specific article. As for references, there are two general refs (one was just added - I knew I forgot something) which cover all the medal winners, so why would more specific citations be needed? -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 10:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose List is too general, obviously not up to FL standard if it is missing valuable references. Anyone can copy a list from 2006.--intraining Jack In 12:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Please specify what in the list is unverified. Saying "it is missing valuable references" means nothing. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I was referring to the list as it stands at point of nomination. I beleive it should have more details, Just accept my vote for what it is; other users may disagree with me.--intraining Jack In 13:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- everything listed is unverified if it doesn't have it own realiable source.--intraining Jack In 13:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- All the table information is referenced under "general" in the references. In-line citation is not necessary for lists where the bulk comes from a single or very limited number of sources. Arsenikk (talk) 15:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- everything listed is unverified if it doesn't have it own realiable source.--intraining Jack In 13:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I was referring to the list as it stands at point of nomination. I beleive it should have more details, Just accept my vote for what it is; other users may disagree with me.--intraining Jack In 13:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Please specify what in the list is unverified. Saying "it is missing valuable references" means nothing. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- First of all, it is not "copied" from the 2006 list; the formatting was modelled after it. As for your claims of being unsourced, I admit that I forgot to add a general ref until this morning. However, this ref is in place now, so the table is covered. Every medal winner is either on or linked to from that page. I could ad in 86 individual citations to that page, but what would the point of that be? -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 17:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Arsenikk (talk) 20:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
;Comments
Arsenikk (talk) 15:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support Arsenikk (talk) 20:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Parutakupiu (talk) 19:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
Parutakupiu (talk) 21:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support. Parutakupiu (talk) 19:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. No issues from me, lead reads well and the overall list is well structured. Salavat (talk) 06:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – "while figure skating was the only to...". Feels like a word is missing from there.Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]- Fixed. -- Scorpion0422 02:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – Meets FL standards. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:04, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. -- Scorpion0422 02:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 19:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 10:41, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.