Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States cities by population

List of United States cities by population

Again, I don't recall making an edit to this one, but it's a pretty important list and looks fine to me. PhoenixTwo 07:36, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - notes marked with * should be converted into in-line citation. There is the alternative to <ref> tags: {{ref}}. Renata 23:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll get that done this evening at some point...would {{Cnote}} and {{Cref}} be better than renaming the References section to Footnotes and adding them there? -Phoenix 01:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done -Phoenix 04:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support, just when you have time add more pics of cities - there is still a lot of space. Renata 12:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll look into that later today. -Phoenix 15:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional support on fixing the sort order for the Population column. I believe there are tricks you can do to ensure the Javascript orders properly (search for "wikitable sortable"). Other comments: Your main table probably doesn't need a title (repetition). Please can you provide a short lead/explanation for the table in "Other cities". The "Other source" section is redundant since those sources are already given in your References. The layout of "States with multiple cities over 100,000" is a little confusing at first, with two different presentations (over 10/under 10). It might be better to do this as another short table with two columns. Colin°^Talk 16:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the trick is {{commas}}. Renata 19:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Alrighty, I'll give that a go. -Phoenix 16:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done, looks like the numbers sort correctly now. I also removed the title on the table and the 'other sources' section. -Phoenix 17:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. List looks real good, but I think the "States with multiple cities over 100,000" section needs to be re-worked since it's a little confusing at first glance to understand the information presented. Once this has been looked at, I would give my support. RyguyMN 03:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll see what I can do to rework that. -Phoenix 16:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  - Done - I tabled the values, with two columns entitled "State" and "Cities". As for the "Other cities" section, I myself am uncertain what's going on there. Would anyone prefer that it just me removed? -Phoenix 17:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Comment. Having "States with multiple cities over 100,000" removed did cross my mind pending how your changes came out. After looking at this section again, I'm not real sure it adds any real value to the list. It would probably be best to just get rid of it. The section below it showing the number/different sizes of cities in the U.S. is great, keep that for sure. RyguyMN 16:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Done, I added a few tidbits of information to the LA and NYC captions to somewhat compensate for the removal of the table. -Phoenix 20:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Support. Looks great now! The only other area where there could be a change is with the label "Other Cities". It doesn't seem real descriptive. How about "Population Distribution"? RyguyMN 02:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Done -Phoenix 02:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support as per Colin. --Krm500 11:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The map should have a caption (The ten most populous cities). In addition, try to add a small marker (a red point) to indicate the exact location of the city. CG 10:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. -Phoenix 16:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support though it should be noted that the maps need a border to avoid having the captions clash with the surrounding text. Also, I cleaned up the lead some to remove self references and made some other minor cleanup. Hope you don't mind. I got bored checking ALL of the images for free use status. I got through like 5-6 of them. Someone should make sure they all are free use... --Jayron32|talk|contribs 01:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Bordered the template there because it looks better anyway, but I couldn't get the caption to fall into the box! So really it accomplished nothing. Someone that knows more about div elements (is that what they're called?) needs to fix that up. -Phoenix 02:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC) Done, all images are free too. -Phoenix 03:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]