Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of tanks in the Spanish Civil War/archive2

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 not promoted by The Rambling Man 17:18, 19 January 2011 [1].

List of tanks in the Spanish Civil War edit

Nominator(s):Catalan (talk) 10:36, 10 December 2010 (UTC),Macarenses (talk) 10:19, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because the issues raised in the previous nomination have been dealt with. --Macarenses (talk) 10:19, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, JonCatalan did virtually all the work on this list and i only added it because i stumbled across it, saw that the last review was going well but was halted by JonCatalan's wikibreak and after taking care of the very minor issues raised in that review (pp. instead of p. mostly) renominated it thinking no one will notice this very good list if i didn't. Any issues you find in the current review would probably be dealt by him since he is far more familiar with the list though i'll try to pitch in as well whenever i can.--Macarenses (talk) 06:10, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As the previous nominator, and contributor of the content, is there anyway that I can co-nominate now? JonCatalán^(Talk) 18:50, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added myself as a co-nominator, because I will be the one to most likely have the information to deal with any issues which are brought up during the FLC. If there is a problem, please discuss. JonCatalán^(Talk) 20:37, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would recommend aligning the columns in the various sections for visual purposes (in other words, use the same column widths for the tables). --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. JonCatalán^(Talk) 03:18, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I think the opening sentence could use some context of the Spanish Civil War before you say it was an opportunity for new technology to be tested out...
The little template under the image, oddly, doesn't contain a link to the tank in the image above it. This is a little confusing. Is there not an image of a Spanish tank? Or should the template be moved?
Trubia is not in that template, why not?
"the shortcomings of tanks" such as?
Are "Carro Trubia-Naval tanks " Spanish as well? They don't appear in the template.
First and second tables should have cols the same width from table to table.
I would avoid bold in the table, even if they are "headers" but that's just my opinion.;Done
You link "Sant Sadurní d'Anoia" as a location but not Oviedo, Bilbao, Zaragoza, etc. Why not?;Done

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taken care of the last two--Macarenses (talk) 19:31, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The template deals with tanks manufactured in Spain. The FT-17 was a French tank exported to Spain between 1919 and the mid-1930s. I actually do not have an image of a Spanish tank. There is an image of the Trubia, but it's copyrighted and is presently being used under fair use rationale in the main article on Spanish tanks. Regarding tanks fabricated in Spain that are not included in the template, there simply is not enough information on them for stand alone articles. They are, however, covered in "Tanks in the Spanish Army" (this includes all tanks used by the Spanish Army, including the FT-17 in the image above the template). However, the Trubia does deserve its own stand alone article. Before I went on wikibreak I did not have any type of publication to justify a stand alone article, but I recently acquired the only book on the tank that I know of. At some point early next year (January), a stand alone article will be made for the Trubia, but for the purpose of this list it's not especially pertinent.

Regarding the opening sentence, I added a clause of context (years). It deserves more, and I will certainly add some more when I have time, but presently I am strapped for time. JonCatalán^(Talk) 01:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not clear on what's been dealt with here and how, without re-reviewing the whole article. However, I would say the lead still needs more context, the template still seems to be missing Trubia tanks, regardless of whether there's an article for them or not, shortcomings have not been described, col widths of "Manufactured in Spain" section should be the same from subsection to subsection still. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:39, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have not yet expanded about the Spanish Civil War.
Why do I need to add Trubia to the template? There is no article for it. The template is a navigation templates between articles.
If the template is about Spanish tanks, then all Spanish tanks should be in it, article or not. And I don't see why a stub, at the least, shouldn't be created, if these tanks are notable enough. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but this is non-sensical. It's a navigation template. If the tank doesn't have an article then there's no point to create a navigational link to it. JonCatalán^(Talk) 21:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but create the article, or add it to the template to encourage someone else to do it. You are aware that many templates contain red links, right? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:18, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Col. widths in the tables were set to equal each other, but then were changed by another editor yesterday to allow themselves to adjust. JonCatalán^(Talk) 22:11, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but oppose. I think there should be a mention of what happened with the tanks in the war. Ok, they existed, but what were they used for, or where (like battles). Also, this may be a case of wp:CFORK. I don't know why the name has "List of" in it since without it seems better. Nergaal (talk) 23:45, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's a list of the tanks, not an explanation of where the tanks were used. It's a list of what tanks were controlled by what sides. It's an addition to the main article (which links to it) for clarification on that particular part of the subject, not for a re-representation of what was already covered. Should lists of football coaches explain every event the football coach undertook? No, because it's a list. It's a list of names, just like this is a list of names. JonCatalán^(Talk) 21:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but how is this list adding anything substantial that cannot be included in a collapsable table in Tanks_in_the_Spanish_Army#Tanks_during_the_Spanish_Civil_War:_1936.E2.80.931939? Nergaal (talk) 17:28, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What does any child article add that couldn't be included in a more specific parent article? The parent article is at 82kB, and the child article is a list. I mean, the list of Nobel laureates in economics could just as well be included in the article on the Nobel memorial prize in economics, could it not? JonCatalán^(Talk) 16:07, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nobles is a big enough topic that other issues than the list can be covered, including controversies. Nergaal (talk) 20:36, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't understand your comment. JonCatalán^(Talk) 19:58, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nobel memorial prize in economics is a notable enough topic that can cover other issues than the list itself. In this case, I fail to see a significant amount of novel information that cannot be put into the lead article to create a stand-alone list. Nergaal (talk) 00:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment has this nomination stalled? My comments have been ignored and no work has been done on the article since Christmas. Has Nergaal been asked to come back to help explain the comments? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:06, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.