Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates
 | Please note that this talk page is for discussion related to Wikipedia:Featured list candidates. Off-topic discussions, including asking for peer reviews or asking someone to promote an FLC you are involved in, are not appropriate and may be removed without warning. Thank you for your cooperation. |
|
The closure log
Comments from Giants2008 (talk · contribs), PresN (talk · contribs), and Hey man im josh (talk · contribs), and other notes of pertinence. Should you wish to contact the delegates, you can use the {{@FLC}} ping facility.
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Triple Nomination
[edit]I was told that there was a maximum of two nominations per person, User:Vanderwaalforces has three currently. I informed them on their 3rd nominations page already, but I just thought I should let the coordinators know. History6042😊 (Contact me) 22:30, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, I actually saw that but forgot to reply. I thought for FLC regulars, it (three) could be allowed, especially since it is not mounting pressure on me. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:36, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- It might be fine but I would suggest asking the coordinators first before you try that. History6042😊 (Contact me) 22:41, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- Please stick with 2 at a time for now - you can leave the 3rd up for now since it already has reviews, but for the future. It's not just whether you can handle multiple nominations at a time - many of us could handle more than 2! - but ensuring that the queue as a whole isn't too onerous to get through. I let the Spanish municipality list go because they're joint nominations, but I'd prefer not to let anything else get a third because right now we're at about 8 weeks old at the bottom of the queue, and I'd like it to be more like 4-6 weeks. It really is a pain for everyone when there's 40 lists, all with 1 or 2 reviews so nothing is clearing. --PresN 01:10, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- @PresN Gotcha! Thank you for your hard work, very much appreciated. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
Happy Anniversary!
[edit]Just a coincidence, but it has been one year since my first FL promotion: World Figure Skating Championships cumulative medal count. Although my first experience here was in rescuing List of Olympic medalists in figure skating, which was up for FL removal. Thank you to everyone's kindness and patience over the past year. Lots more skating articles to go for year two. 😃 Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:52, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
Question about Source Reviews
[edit]Is a spot check enough to pass source review or do you need to check every single source? Easternsahara (talk) 13:54, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
- Late reply: spot checks are sufficient. --PresN 00:35, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Clarification, are source reviews required?
[edit]I am bringing this here because of this comment at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates: "Many FLCs pass without spotchecks, see e.g. Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of World Heritage Sites in Côte d'Ivoire/archive1." I was under the impression that source reviews were required for all FL nominations. @FLC director and delegates: asking for clarification. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:26, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, we do require that FLCs pass a source review. There was a source review done for this FLC by Easternsahara, who I'll ping in case they want to comment. I believe that the original comment was referring to reviews that include checks for text-to-source integrity and close paraphrasing/plagiarism (not just formatting and the like), which FAC requires for first-time nominators, but I admittedly haven't gone through all of the conversation that followed on that page, though I'm surprised that an experienced user would have wanted to lessen the requirements at the GA process (which I don't remember being that onerous on the occasions that I had noms there). Giants2008 (Talk) 22:32, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
- User:Giants2008: To clarify, I have zero concerns with the Côte d'Ivoire review. My concern was with the statement that FLs did not require a source check. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:44, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
- I did do a spotcheck on the location and criteria for all the sites, so the roman numerals and (natural)/(cultural)/(mixed) indicator. I also checked the information in the description of some of the entries to see if it was in the sources and it was, I didn't think this was worth noting so I didn't. Tone is an experienced editor who has tons of FLs so I did a spotcheck and just passed it saying the sources were compliant with standards. In other places, where some sources aren't the best or if original research was done, I do note which sources are good, you can see this Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Michelin-starred restaurants in South Korea/archive1#Source_Review and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Iowa tornadoes/archive1#Easternsahara. Easternsahara (talk) 22:46, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Goings-on
[edit]@FLC director and delegates: Please note that the five articles promoted yesterday did not make the goings-on page, because it is now for week starting 27 July 2025. The Bot runs about an hour after midnight Zulu, so this may happen if you promote articles on Saturdays. I can alter the bot schedule, but maybe you should consider promoting articles on Sundays. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:37, 27 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Hawkeye7: Thanks for letting us know! I'll try to remember that in the future. --PresN 01:45, 27 July 2025 (UTC)