Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

Nominating featured lists in Wikipedia Welcome to featured list candidates! Here, we determine which lists are of a good enough quality to be featured lists (FLs). Featured lists exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and must satisfy the featured list criteria. Before nominating a list, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at peer review. This process is not a substitute for peer review. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the featured list candidate (FLC) process. Those who are not significant contributors to the list should consult regular editors of the list before nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly. A list should not be listed at featured list candidates and another review process at the same time. Nominators who have previously successfully nominated a list may have two concurrent featured list nominations only if the first active nomination has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed. The featured list director, Giants2008, or his delegates, PresN and Hey man im josh, determine the timing of the process for each nomination. Each nomination will typically last at least twenty days, but may last longer if changes are ongoing or insufficient discussion or analysis has occurred. For a nomination to be promoted to FL status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. The directors determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the director who considers a nomination and its reviews: actionable objections have not been resolved in a timely manner; or consensus for promotion has not been reached after significant time; or reviewers are unable to judge whether the criteria have been met. It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the process focuses on finding and resolving problems in relation to the criteria, rather than asserting the positives. Declarations of support are not as important as finding and resolving issues, and the process is not simply vote-counting. Once the director or a delegate has decided to close a nomination, they will do so on the nominations page. A bot will update the list talk page after the list is promoted or the nomination archived, typically within the day, and the {{FLC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates or adds the {{Article history}} template. If a nomination is archived, the nominator should take adequate time to resolve issues before re-nominating.  – Table of contents – Closing instructions

Featured content: Featured articles Featured lists ← Featured pictures Featured topics Featured list tools: Featured list criteria Featured list candidates Featured list removal candidates Featured list statistics Wikipedians by promoted featured list nominations Today's featured list This month's queue TFL submissions TFL statistics Featured lists that have appeared as TFL Featured lists yet to appear as TFL Featured list log Random featured list Former featured lists Removal candidates log

Nomination procedure Before nominating a list, ensure that it meets all of the FL criteria and that any peer reviews are closed and archived. It is recommended that the list have no other open discussions. Place {{subst:FLC}} on the talk page of the nominated list. From the FLC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please leave a post on the FLC talk page for assistance. Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~ and save the page. Finally, place {{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/name of nominated list/archiveNumber}} at the top of the list of nominees on this page by first copying the above, clicking "edit" on the top of this page, and then pasting, making sure to add the name of the nominated list. When adding a candidate, mention the name of the list in the edit summary. Reviewing procedure Please read a nominated list fully before deciding to support or oppose a nomination. To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the list nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole FLC page). To support a nomination, write * '''Support''', followed by your reason(s). If you have been a significant contributor to the list before its nomination, please indicate this. Supports are weighted more strongly if they are given alongside justifications that indicate that the list was fully reviewed; a nomination is not just a straight vote. To oppose a nomination, write * '''Oppose''', followed by your reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, the director may ignore it. Please focus your attention on substantive issues or inconsistencies, rather than personal style preferences. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed, and nominators are encouraged to use {{reply to}} or other templates to notify reviewers when replying. To withdraw an objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>), rather than removing it. If a nominator feels that an oppose vote has been addressed, they should say so, rather than striking out the reviewer's text. Nominators should not cap, alter, strike, or add graphics to comments from other editors; replies are added below the signature on the reviewer's commentary. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page. Graphics (such as {{done}} and {{not done}}) are discouraged, as they slow down the page load time. To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write * '''Comment''' followed by your advice.

Nominations urgently needing reviews edit · history · watch · refresh The following lists were nominated almost 2 months ago and have had their review time extended because objections are still being addressed, the nomination has not received enough reviews, or insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met. If you have not yet reviewed them, please take the time to do so: Ken Carson discography (FLC) Timeline of the first Trump presidency (2017 Q1) (FLC) List of constituencies of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly (FLC) Grand Prix of Figure Skating Final (FLC) Source reviews needed List of constituencies of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly (FLC) edit · history · watch · refresh The following lists were nominated for removal more than 14 days ago:

Nominations

List of vice presidents of the Maldives

Nominator(s): Unilandofma^Talk 19:22, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

This is the second list that I had planned to nominate to FL to promote articles relating to the Maldives on Wikipedia. I believe this list also meets the criteria. Unilandofma^Talk 19:22, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

ES

Good work, my comments are only nitpicks

• 1st footnote needs a ref, 2nd is fine u can just count
• "the republic did not last long when the regime of Mohamed Amin Didi was overthrown by the people of Malé"→"the republic did not last long, with the regime of Mohamed Amin Didi being overthrown by the people of Malé" "when" implies that it was a discrete moment in time and a comma is needed.
• "the president's absence or incapacity"→"presidential absence or incapacity" presidential implies more that it is generally any president"
• "in writing and"→"in writing, and" sequence of events
• "assume the duties" the not needed
• "monarchy following"→"monarchy, following"
• "changed the country back to a republic"→"made the country a republic again" i think its more formal
• "Presidents;"→"Presidents:" since you're listing examples, you should use a colon
• I think MOS:EASTEREGG applies when you link "ruling party" to Progressive Party of Maldives. If it is in the source, then you can just make it "ruling party, Progressive Party of Maldives."
• Mostly you use the Oxford comma but you do not when listing "[...] Ali Maniku and Hassan Zareer". Ideally use of the oxford comma should be standardized
• "term and"→"term, and"
• In this article, and the article about the vice president's post in the maldives, vice president is written with capitals. this is how it should be in the title too then, and
  • "vice president" appears 10 times in the articles, including quotes, the title and categories. "Vice President" appears 40 times. It should be standardized
• Technically all titles for the sources should be in either title or sentence case, regardless of how it appears in the source. there is a gadget which converts ref titles, but I am not sure what it is called. You should run it on this article

User:Easternsahara 23:57, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

List of works by Gu Yanwu

Nominator(s): Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 13:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

My first FLC in a while! Gu Yanwu was a scholar during the last days of the Ming dynasty. Upset at the very violent Qing conquest, he wandered around China for most of his life, compiling and commentating on historical works. He had a very negative perspective on essentially all Chinese philosophy since the time of the Confucian classics, but ended up laying the groundwork for future generations of scholars, leading to the concept of Hanxue - Han studies.

The list here draws from Ian Johnston's listing of his bibliography, which itself is based off lists by Jean-François Vergnaud and Jan Hagman. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 13:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

List of World Heritage Sites in Jordan

Nominator(s): Tone 10:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Jordan has 7 WHS, including Petra, and 14 tentative sites. Standard style. The list for Libya is already seeing support so I am adding a new nomination. Tone 10:35, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

ES

If you have any questions, feel free to ask away. It might seem like a lot of changes, but most are really minor (like adding a comma, "the", "a" or "and). Other changes are also pretty minor, like changing tense. Good work, as always.

• Um er-Rasas is spelled "Umm ar-Rasas" on the map, please fix the spelling
  • It also has 2 sites, can you add this to the map?
• "Umm Al-Jimāl is spelled "Umm el-Jimal" on the map, please fix it
• "as far as to"→"as far as"
• "of Roman Empire"→"of the of Roman Empire"
• "system that"→"system, which"
• " Al-Khazneh, or the treasury, is pictured." move this after the citation, it is not covered by that citation and it doesn't need to be, it is a fairly conservative application of WP:SKYBLUE
  • "or the treasury"→"transliterated the treasury" or something similar. "or" is used in these cases but it is confusing+weird in this one
• "monks The"→"monks. The"
• "illustrating several"→"similar to several"
• "landforms including"→"landforms, including"
• "different languages of the region"→"various local languages"
• "region and reached"→"region, and reached"
• "communities who"→"communities, who"
• "Merchants and craftsmen from the region settled in As-Salt" specify which region
• "creating a distinct city built with yellow limestone that had European Art Nouveau and Neo-Colonial styles combined with local traditions"→"creating a distinct city, built with yellow limestone, that incorporated European Art Nouveau and Neo-Colonial styles with local traditions"
• "site of Roman"→"site of a Roman"
• "It represents a typical settlement of the agricultural communities of the Hauran region of the period."→"It is a typical settlement of the Hauran region's agricultural communities of that period." If the sources say which period it is (ie. Byzantine, Greek, Later Roman) then you can specify what "that period" is
• "Numerous inscriptions in different languages found on site demonstrate the changing "→"Numerous inscriptions, located on the site, in different languages demonstrate changing"
• "Al Qastal is one of the oldest Umayyad settlements in the region" specifying what "the region" allows the reader to better understand the significance of this statement
• "during the Abbasid period, abandoned, and resettled"→"under Abbasid rule until being abandoned, and was later resettled" period appears 13 times in this article but rules does not appear at all. changing it here varies the prose.
  • However, the exact wording depends on what the sources says. if it means that it was both abandoned and later resettled under the Mamluks then you can rephrase it as "under Abbasid rule, until being both abandoned, and resettled". However, if it means it was abandoned after abbasid rule, then the mamluks came in to resttle it, then you can use the first rephrasing
• "bathhouse, and water reservoirs and cisterns"→"bathhouse, cisterns, and water reservoirs" there is no need to use two "and"s in this case
• "Early Islamic tombstones found and remains of mosaics found"←"Early Islamic tombstones and remains of mosaics found" you don't need to repeat "found"
• "church dating from"→"church, dating from"
• "Byzantine Greek inscription" link "Byzantine Greek" and should inscription be plural? It usually is, but not always which is why I am asking
• "1115 to strengthen the control of the land and to control the desert road."→"1115, to strengthen the control of the land and desert road." which desert road, should specify
• "by Saladin until"→"by Saladin, until"
• "periods, the"→"periods. The"
• "fortresses of the region"→fortresses in the region"
• "square plan with a side of 56 m (184 ft), with towers at the corners"→"square plan, with sides of 56 m (184 ft) and towers at the corners"
• "horses and was"→"horses as it was"
• "settlements and findings"→"settlements, and findings"
• "The remains of a Byzantine basilica are pictured." move citation before this
• "the largest and the most ambitious"→"the largest and most ambitious"
• "representing an important period of early Islamic art" should this be important period or important feature?
• "carvings were sent"→carvings were given away"
• "Wilhelm II and are"→Wilhelm II, and are"
• "of Decapolis"→"of the Decapolis" all 3 instances
• "building that has been at one point converted into a Christian basilica"→"building that was converted into a Christian basilica" the current wording implies that it later became something else later, specify what it became if that was the original meaning
• "century and the ruins were rediscovered in 1806. The UNESCO nomination documentation provides no description.[21][22]"→"century, and the ruins were rediscovered in 1806.[22] The UNESCO nomination documentation provides no description.[21]" the unesco citation should go only after the part where it says the unesco nomination doesn't provide any documentation, with the Britannica entry before the last sentence.
• "mountains and wadis and"→"mountains and wadis, and"
• "sempervirens while"→"sempervirens, while"
• "migratory and resident birds" link resident bird and migratory bird
• "endemic fist Aphaniops sirhani" what does "fist" mean in this context?
• "has essentially dried out by 1993 but then an internationally backed project managed to restore a significant portion of the wetland"→"essentially dried out by 1993, but an internationally backed project restored a significant portion of the wetland"
• "wadis and parts of"→"wadis; parts of"
• "Jordan Rift Valley and"→"Jordan Rift Valley, and"
• "species recorded "→"recorded species"
• "vulture. Mammal"→"vulture; mammal" flows better with a semicolon since they're very related
• "CE which"→"CE, which"
• "The area around Jawa is pictured." move citation before this

User:Easternsahara 01:47, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

List of bathyergids

Nominator(s): PresN 03:11, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey y'all, mammal list #67 in our perpetual series and rodent list #12: Bathyergidae. This is our second and final list in the Phiomorpha parvorder, a group of odd African rodents, and these guys are the mole-rats. They're down underground in the southern half of Africa, eating roots and insects underground. There's 21 species of these guys, all looking pretty similar at different sizes with big teeth. As always, the list reflects the scientific consensus as well as the results of prior FLCs. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 03:11, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Reconrabbit

I had some pause at the description of these species being found in southern Africa when several are extant in Somalia. It could be worthwhile noting the vulnerable status of F. kafuensis in the lead too, if not the status of every species. I'm also not convinced of the individual notability of the Matabeleland mole-rat, which could be redirected to the species and removed from the subspecies list as a link. Regarding this - where is the list of subspecies coming from? I am not finding it on the IUCN site, nimrodi is listed by MSW3 as a synonym of C. darlingi, this 2024 paper describes at least 4 subspecies (excluding nimrodi), and ASM very recently describes it as a distinct species. I find nothing else in the text that looks off. I'll provide an image review in a little bit. -- Reconrabbit 16:20, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

I consulted with my mammal handbook (2016) and found two things: a decent descriptor for the family's range would be "sub-Saharan", and in 2016 Don E. Wilson et al. accepted four subspecies: hottentotus, natalensis, nimrodi, and pretoriae. (page 368) -- Reconrabbit 00:41, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@Reconrabbit: Corrected to Sub-Saharan, and removed all subspecies- I skipped a step with this list, which is validating that the IUCN reports the subspecies (the subspecies lists as given come from MSW3), and the IUCN doesn't list subspecies for any of these species. --PresN 20:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Chinua Achebe bibliography

Nominator(s): Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:59, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I have worked on it and I believe it deserves to be a FL. Achebe was a proficient Nigerian writer and his works has been studied by scholars and academics. This is a also a good read for people who want to read his works. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:59, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

ES

Good work as always, so my comments are only nitpicks

• Please put dmy dates and nigerian english tags
• could there be more citations for "father of modern African literature", i agree with the statement but it seems like a big title to give someone. I would say 2 more high quality sources are okay
• I am not very experienced with writing the lead of articles but i think the second paragraph would work better as a embedded list. Not sure if this is allowed in the lead
• Either redlink "Oxford Research Encyclopedia of African History" or link to Oxford Research Encyclopedias
• James Currey should be linked on mention as a publisher in the references
• link Weaver Press, Mkuki na Nyota, Ohio University Press, Wits University Press (only a redirect currently)

Pass image review, there is only 1 (the covers of the books wouldn't qualify for fair use), the alt is good, licensing is good, used appropriately. User:Easternsahara 07:28, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

• Thank you for the compliment. I have done following the above corrections including writing the second paragraph as prose; I also don't think embedded list do work in the lede (part).SafariScribe^{Edits! Talk!} 00:30, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

  Support on prose (and images, as aforementioned) good to see that content related to Achebe is being improved. User:Easternsahara 01:44, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Kim Seon-ho filmography

Nominator(s): Preferwiki (talk) 03:14, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Second attempt of me nominating a list for FL! I check all the criteria for Feature List by incorporating feedback from previous one I submitted too. So I hope this one is qualified too.Preferwiki (talk) 03:14, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• The most obvious thing to pick up is that nothing in the lead is sourced. Some of it is covered by the refs in the tables, but things like "He began his career in theater, making his debut on stage in 2009", "After performing exclusively on stage for eight years, he auditioned for a television role", "Following this, he auditioned for a supporting part in Strongest Deliveryman (2017) but was upgraded to the second male lead", etc need sourcing -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:17, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

  Done adding source (citations) to the lead paragraph. Thanks for the feedback @ChrisTheDude Preferwiki (talk) 06:15, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

• "pre-produced historical series" - what is meant by "pre-produced"?
• tvN only needs to be linked once in the lead
• "action noir film The Childe (2023) by Park Hoon-jung" - does that mean Park was the director? If so, say "directed by..." rather than just "by...."
• "Special appearance, episode 9–16" => "Special appearance, episodes 9–16"
• "Season 4 (Episode 1–95)" -> "Season 4 (Episodes 1–95)"
• "Music video" heading should be "Music videos" as more than one video is listed
• That's what I got on the prose and tables. I have not looked at the refs -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:41, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

  All Done. As for pre-produced it is a format in korean drama. It has a separate category in wikipedia Category:South Korean pre-produced television series. Also refer to this link for further explanation [1].

  Thank you @ChrisTheDude Preferwiki (talk) 01:04, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude What do you think if I moved all the sources from the lead to the table instead and create multiple ref for relevant sources in the table? It feels cleaner. Those source s related to Good Manager, Strongest Deliveryman and Two Cops. Preferwiki (talk) 01:12, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

2017 NHL expansion draft

Nominator(s): The Kip ^(contribs) 07:33, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Was originally targeting GA for this, but realized thanks to the nom for 2021 NHL expansion draft that FL would be a more appropriate target. I've spent the last few days overhauling the article, significantly improving the refs. I've also turned the long list of concession trades into a table, and prose-ified the "Post-draft" section. I've also made various updates to bring it in line with the 2021 article, currently under FL consideration as well. The Kip ^(contribs) 07:33, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Quick comment

On the table, italics cannot be the only means of conveying information per MOS:ACCESS. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:11, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Done and sorted. The Kip ^(contribs) 08:24, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• "After Las Vegas' expansion bid was approved in June 2016, one year beforehand, " - last three words are redundant
• "Vegas selected 30 players from each of the league's franchises" - if they had selected 30 players from each of the franchises, that would have been a total of 900 players. They actually selected one player from each of the franchises
• "The Vegas bid was the first "Big Four" major professional sports league to place a franchise in Las Vegas" => "The Vegas bid would make the NHL the first of the "Big Four" major professional sports league to place a franchise in Las Vegas"
• "but the NHL previously had" => "although the NHL had previously had"
• "was named Las Vegas' first-ever general manager " => "was named Las Vegas' first general manager "
• "Five days after formally entering the league on March 1, 2017,[10] the Golden Knights signed Canadian center Reid Duke to a three-year, entry-level contract on March 6" - if it was five days after March 1 then obviously it was March 6, no need to state both
• "making him the franchise's first-ever player." => "making him the franchise's first player."
• "The initial proposal of the rules for the draft were decided upon" => "The initial proposal of the rules for the draft was decided upon" (the subject of the sentence is "proposal", which is singular
• "or, one goaltender and eight skaters regardless of position" => "or one goaltender and eight skaters regardless of position"
• "Because the NHL wanted to ensure the competitive viability of any new teams" => "Because the NHL wanted to ensure the competitive viability of the new team"
• "would lose one top-four defencemen" => "would lose one top-four defenceman"
• "and had to still be contracted for the 2017–18 season." => "and were still be contracted for the 2017–18 season."
• "or became a restricted free agent in 2017" => "or have become a restricted free agent in 2017"
• "RFA or UFA, one per team" - what do these initialisms mean?
• "as third lowest finishing team" = "as the third-lowest finishing team"
• " they were subject to same draft lottery rules" => " they were subject to the same draft lottery rules"
• "The NHL's deputy commissioner, Bill Daly, said that teams that do not follow the expansion draft rules" => "The NHL's deputy commissioner, Bill Daly, said that teams that did not follow the expansion draft rules"
• Draft results table should sort based on surname, not forename
• "Center Jonathan Marchessault would go on to win the Conn Smythe Trophy with Vegas in 2023" - complete sentence so needs a full stop
• ....and the same for all the other photo captions in that section and the next one
• "until was his contract was traded" - there's a stray extra "was" in there
• "First-overall-pick Calvin Pickard" - no reason for those hyphens
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:21, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude Sorry for the delay - all taken care of. The Kip ^(contribs) 07:37, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:12, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

List of Buffalo Sabres draft picks

Nominator(s): Kline • talk • contribs 21:14, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Round three of me nominating a list for FL! As you might be able to tell from my userboxes that the Buffalo Sabres are my favorite hockey team, I decided to take a stab at finishing off some of the lists for the Sabres. They have had a wide variety of picks that they have made, ranging from some all-time greats to some... questionable first round picks that busted in quick fashion. Hope you enjoy! Kline • talk • contribs 21:14, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• "As of 2025, the Sabres have made 521 selections in 55 entry drafts" - I would move this to later in the lead (probably the end of the second paragraph), as it makes little sense to say this and then only afterwards explain what an "entry draft" is....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:57, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude Would you object to just merging the first and second paragraphs? Obviously would still move it to the end of course, but it seems a better fit that way rather than an oddly short first paragraph. Kline • talk • contribs 21:38, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

  Sounds like a plan! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:43, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

  Updated, check it out. Kline • talk • contribs 01:05, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

• My only other comment is that maybe "The NHL entry draft is held each off-season" should be expanded to mention the specific month when it takes place, as I for one don't have the faintest idea when in the year the NHL off-season falls -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:27, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

  Added. Kline • talk • contribs 00:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:15, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

List of constituencies of the Kerala Legislative Assembly

Nominator(s): -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:01, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

The 10th in the Indian constituency series. I've improved the lead, included some history, updated the table, and brought the table accessibility to FL-standards. Similar, recent FL: Goa. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:01, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

ES

• "it sits for a term of five years unless it is dissolved early"→"the assembly sits for a term of five years, unless dissolved early" shorter and repetition of "it" kinda hinders flow. Initially, I was confused as to what "it" referred to because lots of new things are introduced before this part
• "|1977 election]] it"→|1977 election]], it" introductory dependent clause
• "who each directly elect a representative." uncited
• "Changes in the constituencies of the Kerala Legislative Assembly over time" the "over time" is redundant. See Principle of Some Astonishment (albeit the entire thing is quite lengthy, the "stating the obvious" section is most relevant here)
• map for reservations is consistent with table for reservations
• the map creates a big gap from the beginning of the section to the beginning of the table on my screen. I don't see a fix here but keeping that as a note in case someone else more capable than me can suggest something.

I do think the former constituencies should be merged with this list, but I do know that there usually aren't sources for these (like in the bihar one). Could you investigate to see if there are? If there aren't then I would reccomend that you redirect the former list into the history section of this list, tagging it as {{Category:Redirects with history|R with history}}. I know that other lists don't have this but it I think it is sensible to include historic information. Government archives may help you find sources. Also nice to see content on Kerala. User:Easternsahara 07:07, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

List of Billboard Adult Contemporary number ones of 2002

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:06, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Here's the 42nd list in this series. Do you love Celine Dion? Then you would have (apparently) loved listening to AC radio in 2002...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:06, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98 (12/22/25)

• "Celine Dion, one of the most successful pop/AC acts of all time..." That is going to need a source or else it reads as an opinion.
• The prose seems to skip over all of October through December.

No issues with the table. User:ChrisTheDude: let me know when you've had a chance to examine my (very few) comments. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:35, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

@Bgsu98: - done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:47, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

• Looks good. Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:43, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

• User:ChrisTheDude: I have the following up for Featured status if you'd like to take a look:

• Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Norwegian Figure Skating Championships/archive1
• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2025 U.S. Figure Skating Championships/archive1

Thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:02, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• The Enrique image needs alt-text.
• I didn't see any problems with the prose. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:24, 20 December 2025 (UTC)
  • @MPGuy2824: - missing ALT added -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:26, 20 December 2025 (UTC)
• Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:42, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

List of accolades received by In Bruges

Nominator(s): Cavan121012 (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

In Bruges is a 2008 black comedy crime film written and directed by Martin McDonagh in his feature-length directorial debut. The film follows Ray (Colin Farrell) and Ken (Brendan Gleeson), two Irish hitmen in hiding in Bruges, Belgium, awaiting orders from their mob boss Harry (Ralph Fiennes). I am nominating this for featured list because I have put in a lot of effort recently to improve the quality. I have added all missing awards and the list is comprehensive, every award/nomination is referenced and I believe it meets all of the criteria. This is my first attempt at promoting a featured list, I have based it off other recently promoted film accolades lists. Any comments or suggestions welcome, and thanks in advance. Cavan121012 (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• "Universal Pictures gave it a full release in Ireland on 7 March 2008, before opening on 18 April 2008 in the United Kingdom" => "Universal Pictures gave it a full release in Ireland on 7 March 2008, before it opened on 18 April 2008 in the United Kingdom"
• "against a production budget $15 million" => "against a production budget of $15 million"
• Notes a and b are not sentences so should not have full stops
• That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: I have made the suggested changes. Thanks very much for your comments. Cavan121012 (talk) 11:11, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:14, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

List of World Heritage Sites in Africa

Nominator(s): User:Easternsahara_{review this} 01:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

I started working on this list in October in my sandbox after the Arab list passed, to which this is formatted similarly. This is a restoration of the first featured list on world heritage sites (i think), which was the first one covering a continent, not just a country; that's pretty cool.
I will work on the Latin American list, then the Asian one, and then the European one. After that, I will reformat Lists of World Heritage Sites to have more information and nominate that for FL as well.
Pinging users who may be interested in reviewing this @Tone: @MPGuy2824: @SafariScribe: @Vanderwaalforces:. (sorry for pinging you if you don't want to review this) User:Easternsahara_{review this} 01:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• There is one cite error that you need to fix (134:comorros)
• In the table, make all the number cells right-aligned since they have a varying number of digits
• See if left-aligning the State column looks better. All the flags would be lined up.
• Angola has 4 tentative sites
• Burundi: only 9 of the 10 tentative sites are mentioned. Also the ref for "The royal residence of Burundi" is wrong.
• DRC: Only 4 of the tentative sites are mentioned.
• Ethiopia and Gabon have 6 tentative sites each, not 7.
• You might as well put Guinea-Bissau's site as a bullet point for consistency
• Kenya's tentative list is supposed to have 21 entries.
• Madagascar: 7 tentative, only 3 mentioned
• Malawai has 7 tentative
• Mali has 4 main sites
• The Mauritius ref goes to the Algeria page
• Nigeria: Only 2 of 14 tentative sites mentioned
• Somalia's tentative sites aren't listed at all
• Togo has 4 tentative sites
• Tanzania and Uganda aren't sorted alphabetically.
• Uganda isn't mentioned in the table. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:38, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Shwabb1

• Missing section about Somalia
• Malawi's tentative list was updated/reorganized recently. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 11:00, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

@Shwabb1: thanks for the review. I added the Somali and Malawian sites. User:Easternsahara 17:16, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I'll have more free time soon, so changing this from drive-by comments to full review, which I will do over the next few days. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 21:56, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

• List of World Heritage Sites in Arab States has this section in the lead: "The implementation of the World Heritage Convention, the addition or removal of properties from the World Heritage List, and the allocation of funds, among other responsibilities, are managed by the World Heritage Committee. There are twenty-one state members on the committee. Although a term is a maximum of six years, most state parties choose to relinquish their responsibilities after four years so other countries can have the opportunity to be a member of the committee."
  Is there a reason why it is not included in this list? Regardless, I think it makes sense for the two lists to use a consistent structure, so either include this here as well, or remove from the other list if you consider this unimportant.
• Something's wrong with the Guinea mixed sites cell in the table
• For Benin, remove period after W-Arly-Pendjari Complex
• Is there a specific order for the sites in each list? Skimming through parts of the article, it seems you're trying to sort them chronologically (according to time of inscription or addition to the tentative list), in which case at least Benin's list is incorrect. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:25, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

  Added the blurb from Arab States to the lead, fixed guinea's sites and fixed the chronological ordering User:Easternsahara 16:46, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

  Looks good. I'll finish the review some time this or next week. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 17:52, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

VWF

• Source review – pending
• Good job as usual with the sources, Easternsahara.
• Please run the dmy script on the article to fix the inconsistencies.

@Vanderwaalforces: What is the dmy script? Could you link it so I can use it on this page, thanks. User:Easternsahara 17:16, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

@Easternsahara MOSNUMscript. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:37, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Older nominations

Norwegian Figure Skating Championships

Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:56, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Another list of national figure skating champions for your consideration. This one should be easier than Hungarian Figure Skating Championships, which was just promoted, because none of the sources are locked behind a paywall. They are, however, in Norwegian for the most part. While I don’t speak Norwegian, I found these sources easier to navigate because it turns out Norwegian (along with Swedish and Danish) have a lot of similarities to German (I am a German teacher). And while Norway has historically been a winter sports powerhouse, you can see from the tables that competitive figure skating has not been as big in Norway as it has been elsewhere. Special thank you to User:Migrant for scanning pages from the Norwegian Skating Association’s handbook for me as well as other assistance with Norwegian. Please let me know if you have any concerns or suggestions, and thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:56, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Note: Neither Old News nor the National Library of Norway will cooperate with Internet Archive. 😒 Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:03, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

• Thanks for the recognition. This weekend I won't be able to help out, since I will be attending 2025–26 ISU Speed Skating World Cup – World Cup 4 at Hamar, which is my focus-sport on wikipedia and that is mostly on my home-langauge Norwegian wikipedia. Best regards Migrant (talk – contribs) 15:51, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

  Kos deg! Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:08, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• There are few cells like Men's singles - 1897, where Johan Lefstad seems to have won gold but not have enough points to be the champion. The background color there is the same as for "No other competitors". I think it should be different. You do have a footnote added for each of these situations, otherwise a symbol would also be needed for them.
• I couldn't find any problems with prose or accessibility. (please  mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:08, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

• User:MPGuy2824: That's a good suggestion! Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:41, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

• Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:47, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

List of Olympic medalists for Singapore

Nominator(s): 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:48, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because this list has good prose, is comprehensive, and meets all requirements for accessibility and FL criteria. This is my third FL nomination and all comments will be appreciated. Regards, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:48, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

@Easternsahara and ChrisTheDude: updates? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 10:58, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

sorry I did not see this, but I had already supported User:Easternsahara 01:50, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Image review

• File:Flag of Singapore.svg - PD
• File:SingaporeWomensTableTennisTeam-2008SummerOlympics-20080825-02.jpg - CC BY 2.0
• Pictograms are all PD, alt text passes Pass image review

User:Easternsahara_{review this} 22:22, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

@Easternsahara: Shouldn't the pictograms have alt text as well? A user highlighted this a while ago. Icepinner 07:20, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

You are correct, Nuggeteer, could you please add this to the article? it should just be alt= and then the sport that they are playing. You may also wish to do this with your previous nominations User:Easternsahara_{review this} 16:37, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

@Easternsahara: added alts for all sport pictograms, not the medals since they use templates ({{gold01}} and {{bronze medal}}, {{silver medal}}, and {{gold medal}}). 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:11, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Icepinner

Resolved

Exciting to see a Singapore list in FLC! I may conduct a full review in due time since I am a bit busy with IRL stuff, but for now, I note that [2] has a publication date whilst the rest of the Olympic sources don't. Template:Cite web says "if [the publication date is] unknown, use access-date instead". Icepinner 07:08, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Also, per MOS:ORDER, we need an ENGVAR template for this article. Add Template:Use British English, as Singapore was a former British colony, and British English is still widely used here. Icepinner 07:20, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

@Icepinner: "[2] has a publication date whilst the rest of the Olympic sources don't" I do not see any issue with this, as I used both publication date (if there is) and access date. I have also added the British ENGVAR template, but I used American English during the creation of this article, and it might raise some issues. Thank you for offering to review this article! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 09:52, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for adding the British ENGVAR template, TheNuggeteer. Regarding the publication date, I may have misinterpreted it when I read this FLC? Dunno, thought that consistent ref formatting is an unspoken rule of the FLC criteria? Anyways, that really isn't a big issue for me. I've some time to kill, and I have conducted a prose review since the article is pretty short. Feel free to disagree with the below if there are any issues. Icepinner 14:53, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Full-review

• Singapore debuted in the Olympics as a British colony in 1948 when a sole representative, Lloyd Valberg I think we can link "British colony" to Colony of Singapore. We also have an article on Lloyd Valberg. Icepinner 14:53, 9 December 2025 (UTC)
• Joseph Schooling won a gold medal when he succeeded in the Men's 100 meter butterfly. This also caused him to beat Michael Phelps' Olympic record in the event I am not sure if I like the wording here; the source states that "he clocked an Olympic record time of 50.39 seconds to beat swimming legend Michael Phelps to gold", but the article implies that Schooling winning a gold medal was the motivation to beat Philips (maybe I'm tired? Who knows). Icepinner 14:53, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Not a lot of issues I can find that impede the article from FL status. I'll take another look once the above issues (including the pictogram concerns) have been addressed. Icepinner 14:53, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

@Icepinner: I have fixed both. Also, I assume you mean that it is required to have a publication date for all sources. Regarding that, the Olympedia sources do not provide publication dates; hence, I cannot include them. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 22:29, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, TheNuggeteer. Yes, but I was referring to how you can use the date of access as the source date per Template:Cite web (would this be the same as the publication date, though?). Icepinner 02:20, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

@Icepinner: I just place the date I accessed the source in access date and, if there is, add a publication date. I see nothing wrong with this, and I have used this system in my previous featured list. Regards, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:10, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Fair point. Given that all queries have been resolved, I am supporting this nomination. Icepinner 10:58, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• Unless Singapore has no plans to ever compete at the Olympics again, then "Overall, Singapore won a gold medal, two silver medals, and three bronze medals, gaining a total of six medals." should be "Overall, Singapore has won a gold medal, two silver medals, and three bronze medals, gaining a total of six medals." -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:28, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: fixed. Thank you for the comment! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 22:29, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

More comments

• "The delegation won its first medal in the 1960 Summer Olympics " => "The delegation won its first medal at the 1960 Summer Olympics "

• Fixed

• "Overall, Singapore has won a gold medal, two silver medals, and three bronze medals, gaining a total of six medals." - are those last six words really needed? I would imagine that most readers can calculate 1+2+3.......

• Removed

• Link Singapore, Olympics, all the individual Olympics, Tan Howe Liang, etc in body as well as lead

• I portray this as unnecessary overlinking per WP:LINKONCE: you should only link at most once in the first occurrence. Since the prose is short here, this list should especially follow this rule.

• Further up that page it specifically says "But as a rule of thumb, link only the first occurrence of a term in both the lead and body of the article" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:35, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Linked. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:00, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

• " joined the high jump competition" => " competed in the high jump". "Joined the competition" makes it sound like he was just wandering past and thought "that looks fun, I'll join in" ;-)

• Fixed

• "Singapore has joined every Olympics edition" => "Singapore has taken part in every Olympics edition"

• Fixed

• "except in the 1980 Summer Olympics" => "except the 1980 Summer Olympics"

• Fixed

• "joining a boycott" => "when the country was one of many to boycott the event"

• Fixed

• Only two sentences in the history section have refs. Are those two refs citing everything in the paragraph?

• Yes, they cite everything in the paragraph.

• Medalist tables should sort based on surname, not forename

• This is especially confusing. Singapore has numerous naming traditions and most of the athletes utilize Chinese naming traditions, like Li Jiawei: Li is the family name. Some also have normal naming traditions (Joseph Schooling), causing the names to be unconsistent. Hence, I would suggest leaving it as it is.

• In that case, Li Jiawei should sort under L but Joseph Schooling under S. Joseph Schooling sorting under J is definitely not correct -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:36, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Please clarify what you mean by sorting: should I use {{sortname}}? Should I put "Schooling" first? or should I sort the team medalists by surname? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 22:58, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

use {{sortname}} -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

• In the multiple medalists table, two different types of dash are used

• Fixed

-- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:31, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: replied to all. Regards, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:24, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: replied to your remaining comments. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:00, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

actuall7

• Perhaps link Athletics at the 1948 Summer Olympics – Men's high jump, Table tennis at the 2012 Summer Olympics – Women's team, and Swimming at the 2016 Summer Olympics – Men's 100 metre butterfly?

• Added

• The next medal Singapore gained from the Olympics was given in the 2008 Summer Olympics -> Could be trimmed.

• Trimmed

• Jonathan Tan's name is misspelt; there is an extra "h".

• Fixed

• In the "Medal tally by individual", use an Oxford comma for the trio.

• Fixed

• Is there a reason why Tan Howe Liang is mentioned as Tiger Tan in the "Medal tally by individual"?

• Changed

• Does "Still an active competitor" mean active in the Olympics or still active playing the sport? I find the wording confusing, as Feng stated her retirement from the Olympics after the 2020 Olympics. If this is just the standard wording used, then I guess I can't argue that.

• If the person is still an active athlete.

@TheNuggeteer: Minor comments from me. – actuall7 (talk | contrib) 01:47, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

@Actuall7: fixed. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:58, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Will give my support. – actuall7 (talk | contrib) 02:10, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

List of Crash Bandicoot video games

Nominator(s): Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 03:49, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

After 18 years (10 not counting that hiatus) of working on all notable entries in the Crash Bandicoot video game series, it's time to cap things off with the comprehensive list of such. The lead is engaging as a summary of the series, just about every entry covered by reliable sources has been accounted for, all information comes with adequate citations and is laid out in a series of clean and navigable tables. If anything's amiss, please let me know! Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 03:49, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• All the tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead. (please  mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:26, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824: Fixed. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 12:12, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

  Per MOS:DTAB, you also need !scope="row". This should probably go on the listings under the game column User:Easternsahara_{review this} 01:35, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

  @Easternsahara: That only applies to data tables, of which there is none in this list. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:54, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

  I think it is a data table because a data table is anything a layout table isn't. I understand that it doesn't seem like there are many numbers or classifications on it but I'd still think it is. For example, if you look at the World Heritage Site lists that have been promoted to FL, you can see that they don't have much 'data' as in numbers but they still have scope rows per MOS:DTAB: for example, List of World Heritage Sites in Venezuela. You could probably find other examples if you scroll through the FLC nominations right now, and open up their pages.

  Also separate concern but if you look at List of genocides (sorry for the grim example, first one I could find), then you can see that the table has layered columns like this list and, accordingly, it has layered !scope="col"s for them. I recommend adding something like that to this list as well. For this list, it it could have "game" and under that "release date". On the right of those could be "release date by system" and under that could be "notes". Alternatively, you can also just change the table to give everything a column of its own. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 02:10, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

  @Easternsahara: Judging from your divergent area of expertise, I can only assume you're not quite familiar with the specific standard for featured lists based on video games, so to demonstrate how exactly they're laid out, which does not involve !scope="row", I'll point you to the three most recent promotions, the last happening to be one I worked on: List of Mario role-playing games, List of SaGa video games, List of video games featuring the Hulk Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 02:46, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

  Easternsahara, !scope="row" is syntax for the wikiengine to ensure that the cell is marked as a header (th instead of td), and it has the row scope in the html. Looking at the raw html for these tables, it has both. The templates that are used to generate the tables already has that logic built into it. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:33, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

• The table captions were in the wrong place, but I fixed that. Keep that in mind for your next video game list nom.

  @MPGuy2824: That caption move wound up breaking the tables, so I had to revert. Sorry. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC) Just consulted the SaGa video game list to figure out what went wrong and managed to re-fix it. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:30, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

• Support on accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:34, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• "The Crash Bandicoot series sold over 40 million copies worldwide across all titles by 2007" => "The Crash Bandicoot series had sold over 40 million copies worldwide across all titles by 2007"
• Why is "Crash of the Titans" (handheld version) listed twice? The platforms are different, but further up you have a single entry for the console version, which was apparently released for four different platforms.....

  @ChrisTheDude: The Nintendo DS and Game Boy Advance versions are different games. Unfortunately, the GBA version did not receive enough coverage to qualify for an individual page, so this isn't immediately obvious. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 10:39, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

• "Canceled near its completion to avoid competition with Mario Kart DS." and "Canceled due to low sales of Crash Bandicoot 4: It's About Time and a shift in focus toward live-service multiplayer games." are not sentences so should not have full stops
• That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: Points 1 and 3 addressed Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 10:39, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:41, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Source review by Cukie Gherkin

I will be conducting a source review soon - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 10:05, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Sowwy, forgot about this with the holidays, will resume now. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:06, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Checking citation info

• IGN links in general should be fixed to link to the live pages: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]
• [10] This site's citation links to an archive instead of the live site in the |url field (replace with [11]
• [12] Live version for citation 10
• Live versions for citation 13: [13]
• [14] This archive should be removed, as it's an archive of an archive

  @Cukie Gherkin: All fixed Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 12:15, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Checking reliability

• [15] I'm not familiar with this site; do you have any idea of its reliability?

  @Cukie Gherkin: It was an affiliate in the Imagine Media network (front page for reference), so I would certainly consider it reliable. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 12:15, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

List of octodontids

Nominator(s): PresN 03:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey y'all, mammal list #66 in our perpetual series and rodent list #11: Octodontidae. This is our 7th and final list covering the Caviomorpha parvorder, aka "things shaped kinda like guinea pigs", with the degus and rock rats, which look like half-rat, half-guinea pigs with tails. They're down at the bottom of South America, mostly up in the mountains and highlands and generally with relatively small ranges, so you almost certainly have never heard of them. There's 14 species, but the 3 that are trapped on an island or pretty restricted to wetlands are critically endangered, while the rest seem to just hang out in or near central Chile eating plants and not bothering anyone. This list was started by Reconrabbit, who has also made several of the maps. As always, the list reflects the scientific consensus as well as the results of prior FLCs. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 03:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98 (12/1/25)

No issues at all with the prose. Just two suggestions:

• Recommend wikilinking dung, as that (believe it or not) may not a term familiar to a lot of people.
• The map showing Mocha Island, Chile doesn't really show us where the island is located. Since Chile is very long, we have no idea where along the coast the island is located.
  • How's this? File:Octodon pacificus distribution zoomed.svg -- Reconrabbit 14:38, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

User:PresN: I'll come back later and do your source review for you. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:22, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

@Bgsu98: Linked, and I think Reconrabbit's new map fixes that issue. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 16:37, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, that map is much better. Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:43, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Comments from Reconrabbit

Since I worked on this pretty heavily in its early stages I don't know how impartial I can be on a review but can at least vouch for the range maps I created being accurate. If there are any needed changes (as above) let me know. -- Reconrabbit 16:06, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

@Reconrabbit: Ah, I'm so sorry, I forgot this was the one that you had put together last year, I meant to put that in the nomination statement. Yes, you did a bunch of work on this list, especially making those maps! --PresN 16:37, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

• Support - nothing to quibble about for me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:58, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Image review

• File:Degu eating a piece of dried banana.jpg CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Aconaemys fuscus.jpg PD the source for this is dead, could it be archived or could a new link be found?
• File:Aconaemys fuscus map.jpg PD source?
• File:Aconaemys sagei map.jpg PD source?
• File:Octodon degus -Heidelberg Zoo, Germany-8a.jpg CC BY-SA 2.0
• File:Octodon degus range.svg CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Octodon lunatus range.svg CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Octodon pacificus distribution zoomed.svg CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Octodontomys gliroides 238516748 CC BY 4.0
• File:Octodontomys gliroides range.svg CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Cururo en el Parque natural Gómez Carreño.jpg CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Tympanoctomys barrerae.jpg CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Tympanoctomys barrerae range.png PD (I didn't spot check its sources, but it cites them, so I think its good)

I think the maps from uk.wp could be higher resolution and zoomed in. If you can find replacements that do this, then I'd recommend to use those. Maps don't have alts, thats okay range is described in words. Usually, the recommendation would be to say "see range text" but that comes before the actual map, so I'd say its alr for them to not have alts. Just fix the 2 maps without sources and I'll pass. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 16:49, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

@Easternsahara: Fixed the dead source, and removed the two maps from uk.wiki as they don't cite the source and are slightly off from the IUCN maps so I can't assume that was it. --PresN 20:08, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

pass image review User:Easternsahara_{review this} 20:34, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

List of Greek deities

Nominator(s): Michael Aurel (talk) 05:04, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

This page is an attempt at a comprehensive and structured enumeration of the Greek gods, an endeavour which probably requires a fair bit more ambition than common sense. Deities have been grouped in a manner which is in line with authoritative sources, while hopefully still being fairly intuitive to the uninitiated reader. This section of the talk page explains the reasoning behind choices made during the writing of the article (in particular, see the points towards the end, which were made in anticipation of queries about links, dates, and the like). Also, it's worth noting the existence of List of Mesopotamian deities, the only comparable featured list I'm aware of, and List of Hurrian deities and List of Ugaritic deities, two other well-written articles of a similar nature. – Michael Aurel (talk) 05:04, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead. (please  mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:46, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks, fixed. – Michael Aurel (talk) 07:13, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

• Support on accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:29, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Shwabb1

I've experienced the frustration of getting a large list through the FL nomination process so I'll help along by leaving a review (only partial for now, will expand later).

Yes, I imagine the combination of length and considerable textual content here might scare a few reviewers off. Thankyou for getting the ball rolling! – Michael Aurel (talk) 21:03, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

• Article seems to be using British English, in which case Template:Use British English at the top wouldn't hurt

  Sure, done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

• Maybe link festivals in "Greek cult, or religious practice, consisted of activities such as sacrifices, prayers, libations, festivals, and the building of temples."

  Done, sort of: I've linked to ancient Greek festivals, which ought to be its own article, but is currently a redirect to Athenian festivals. Beyond the paragraph at Ancient Greek religion#Festivals, though, this seems to be our only general treatment of ancient Greek festivals, so I suppose it'll suffice. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, the redirect is why I linked that article though I agree that a separate article on Ancient Greek festivals would make more sense. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:04, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

• Link trident in "or the trident of Poseidon"

  Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

• For Ares, change "In Rome, his counterpart was Mars" to "His Roman counterpart is Mars" following the structure of other descriptions

  Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

• For Artemis, can you elaborate on what you mean by "transitions"? Does this mean seasons or all sorts of transitions in general?

  The latter. Particularly important is her role in transitions between phases of life, though there are other sorts of "transitions" with which she's associated (Graf, for example, mentions that she is "a goddess of transition between the extremes of wilderness and culture"). I've added "such as coming of age" in brackets as an example of what we mean here. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:39, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

  Makes sense, and the sentence is more clear with the addition. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:04, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

• Also for Artemis, what's the reason for the addition of parentheses in "she presided over female (and male) initiation rites"? This can be interpreted as either her always presiding over female initiation rites and only sometimes male, or that it's unclear whether she was part of the male rites.

  Her association with female initiation rites was more extensive, though you're probably right that these brackets will only cause confusion. Removed. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:39, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

• In Nature deities, change "were individually worshipped only in a specific town or area" to "were individually worshipped only in specific towns or areas"

  It's a fairly minor point, but I think the original might be a touch less ambiguous. Each river god, for example, generally belonged to a single town; the latter phrasing leaves the semantic door ajar to the possibility that such gods were typically worshipped in certain groups of towns. I've swapped out "individually" for "each", which might make this phrase feel a little more natural. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:39, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

  I see, in this case that works even better. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:04, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

• For Gaia, consider capitalizing "the earth". Same for Helios ("The sun") and previously Apollo ("the sun").

  Capitalised "sun" (here and elsewhere), as well as "moon". Regarding Gaia, I'm a bit more ambivalent: she undoubtedly personified the physical body on which humans and animals lived, though I hesitate to refer to her as the goddess of "the Earth", which perhaps has more astronomical connotations. Sources don't seem particularly consistent on the matter. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:57, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

  Fair. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:04, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

• Template:Transliteration seems more fitting than Template:Lang, e.g., for Megaloi Theoi and Theoi in the Cabeiri section, as well as in other instances of Ancient Greek transliteration

  Agreed, changed throughout. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:57, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

• For Charites, missing comma after "while in the Theogony". Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 12:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

  Added. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:57, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Continuing...

• Is there a reason why there are no Ancient Greek names for the primal elements and onward?

  Only visual niceness, really. The Greek names are a vestige of the old version of this article, and I've retained them in the "Major deities" section just for a bit of pizzazz (ie., I wouldn't have much against their removal). In later sections, I think including them could cause visual clutter (consider the "Abstract personifications" section, for example). One way to address this would be placing them in a separate column, though that would probably give undue weight to fairly inessential information. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:05, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  Then I feel like the Ancient Greek names should be either everywhere or nowhere for consistency. However, I don't have a strong opinion on this and it's not a deal breaker, so I'll leave the decision to you. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  That's quite reasonable, and perfectly fine by me. If the inconsistency sticks out to you, then there's a good chance other reviewers will feel the same. Removed. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:56, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• For Maenads, maybe it would make sense to use Template:Transliteration for "thyrsi, kantharoi" while keeping the wikilinks. There may be other instances like this that I've missed.

  Done, and done in a few places elsewhere. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:19, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• Consider using Template:Interlanguage link for Silenoi (Q9348775) in whatever language you see fit, as you've done with Damia later on

  That could work. Silenoi is currently a redirect to Satyr, though, so linking there might be a simpler solution. The latter article unfortunately doesn't really delineate between the two groups of figures, though I suppose a link is more helpful than no link. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:19, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, I saw the redirect and that Satyr treats Silenoi and Satyrs as the same, which is why I suggested an ILL (then you'd have to change the article name in the template to something like "Silenoi (mythology)" to get a redlink). Or you could make a small article about Silenoi since you already have some sources. Though, if you think the redirect works well enough, that's fine by me as well. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• For Telchines, no need to capitalize "Trident"

  I think you're right. Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:19, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• For Thriae, link divination

  Done. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• "Note that abstract personifications listed in previous sections are excluded here" – is there a particular reason for this? Above, there's a lot of repeats linking to corresponding sections.

  This touches on the aspect of this article I've found the trickiest, the structure. I think one issue here is that there isn't a canonical list of abstract personifications. Some of the figures in earlier sections (such as Erebus, Hemera, and Nyx) would fit fairly uncontroversially into this category, while for others the situation is more complex. Eros and Themis can probably be considered "abstract personifications", as they personify the concepts their names describe (and Stafford, in her study on the topic, includes them in her definition of the concept). Eos perhaps also qualifies, as her name means 'dawn', though sources appear to more often describe her as the "goddess of the dawn" than the "personification of the dawn". Penelope Murray has even written a book chapter discussing the Muses in relation to the concept of personification, and while she acknowledges that they "are not, strictly speaking, personifications", she states later on the same page that "[t]he question of how the Muses relate to personification is complex".

  All of this is really just to say "it's complicated", and that, because we aren't following a particular source in this section (the way we follow Gantz in the "Early deities" section, for example), I'd hesitate to partition all of the figures in the previous sections myself. It's worth noting that this ambiguity mostly exists for more "major" deities, most of whom are listed above the "Abstract personifications" section; there isn't any disputing that minor personages such as Moros, Limos, or Kratos fall into this category. I realise this is a rather lengthy response, though I figured I'd address this point fully, as others are bound to have the same query. – Michael Aurel (talk) 09:20, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  I see, and makes sense especially considering the limited and often contradictory sources mentioning the deities. Perhaps you could condense this into a sentence or two and include it in the article to make this clear to the reader as well? Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:35, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  That isn't a bad idea, though unfortunately I don't think it's one we'll be able to source. I'm not aware of any sources which say something to the effect of there isn't a canonical list of abstract personifications, or comment on the difficulty of classifying deities into figures who are abstract personifications and figures who aren't (which is probably a problem unique to Wikipedia). If you think it might leave the reader a bit less confused, I could list a few such deities in a pair of brackets (eg. (such as Nyx, Erebus, and Hemera)), though I realise this doesn't represent much of an improvement over the current note. – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:32, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, that would be an improvement, although I agree that it doesn't address the core of the issue. Since there are no sources on this, not much can be done anyway, so I suppose most of it can be left as is then. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 17:36, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  Added. – Michael Aurel (talk) 04:56, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

  Might the Personifications article by William Gillan Waddell in the first OCD, much longer than the current online Personification, be any use? For example, "Between the objects of actual popular worship and the literary devices of a poet the line is often hard to draw. ... A single figure, such as Ate, varies from passage to passage and from poet to poet, being now a physical or psychological phenomenon, now a moral force, now full-fledged divinity with family connexions [passages cited]. Even a given poet within a single work often vacillates between the genuine personification of a vividly characterized abstraction and 'grammatical apotheosis' (the illuminating phrase is that of Bouché-Leclerq), to the despair of modern editors who would like to be consistent in the matter of capital letters." NebY (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks for that quote. As to whether it's useful here: mmm, maybe, though probably not. ;) The sentence about Ate is suggestive, though I think Waddell would probably consider both the "objects of actual popular worship" and "literary devices" to fall within the "personification" category (to whatever degree that word denotes a "category"), whereas here the dilemma is something like distinguishing between a "full-fledged divinity" who is a personification and one who isn't. Stafford 2000, p. 2 (from The desire to distinguish between such artistic personifications and real cult figures ...) articulates roughly the same idea as Waddell. – Michael Aurel (talk) 04:53, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

  No worries. I was tickled by Wadell's "despair of modern editors", as if the problem wasn't quite so unique to Wikipedia after all. NebY (talk) 11:50, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

• For Arke, change the last sentence to "In the Titanomachy, she supports the Titans, and once the Olympian gods are victorious, she is punished – imprisoned in Tartarus and stripped of her wings" or something similar. The original wording (especially towards the end) seems a bit awkward to me.

  Reworded along the lines of your suggestion: In the Titanomachy she supports the Titans, and once the Olympian gods are victorious she is imprisoned in Tartarus and stripped of her wings. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  That works too. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• For Comus, maybe condense the beginning to "According to Philostratus the Elder, ..."

  Done, though by moving him into the "Abstract personifications" section (where he probably should have been). – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

• That's it from me. This turned out to be a very well-written and interesting read. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 20:28, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

  Great, thankyou for your helpful review, Shwabb1. – Michael Aurel (talk) 09:25, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  Support. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:13, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

2021 NHL expansion draft

Nominator(s): XR228 (talk) 05:25, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because when I tried nominating this for GA, I was told that this article should be a list, so here I am. It meets everything it should. XR228 (talk) 05:25, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• The image in the infobox is missing alt-text.
• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead. This is for the Draft selections table.
• If the row header cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead of scope=row. This is for all the "protected players" tables. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:44, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824: I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 16:32, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

  • Don't use only italics to convey information (protected player). This is ignored by screen-readers. Use a symbol instead of OR in addition to the italics. Make sure to add a legend/key.
  • I think the key section of the Draft selections table needs to be reversed: LW = Left wing and so on. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:58, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

    @MPGuy2824: I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 18:24, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

• Support on accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:39, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
• P.S. Looking at the background section, a lot of the details there don't seem warranted: Introduce the Oak valley group and the team name while saying that the NHL BoG approved their addition, in a couple of sentences. Then move on to the last paragraph of that section with appropriate tweaks.

Comments

• The lead looks very short at just three sentences. There's surely more that can be said.....?
• "As general manager, Francis oversees" - the present tense here will eventually stop being accurate, so maybe change to "As general manager, Francis was given responsibility for"......?
• "who were under contract for the 2021–22 season and played in at least 27 games in the 2020–21 season" => "who were under contract for the 2021–22 season and had played in at least 27 games in the 2020–21 season"
• "The player with an NMC continuing past July 28, 2021, was deemed to have a career-threatening injury and is thus declared exempt from selection and use of a protection slot." => "The player had an NMC continuing past July 28, 2021, was deemed to have a career-threatening injury, and was thus declared exempt from selection and use of a protection slot."
• "the 2021–22 salaries of the thirty players selected (as measured in terms of what is counted against the salary cap, had" - the closing bracket is missing
• "On July 18, the protected player list, a list of players who the Kraken were not allowed to select during the draft" => "On July 18, the protected player list, a list of players whom the Kraken were not allowed to select during the draft"
• "a three-day period where the Seattle Kraken could talk to unrestricted free agents (UFAs) begun" => "a three-day period during which the Seattle Kraken could talk to unrestricted free agents (UFAs) began"
• That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:44, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 02:24, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Electoral history of Al Gore

Nominator(s): Olliefant (she/her) 07:15, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

My third Vice President Electoral History list. A personal favorite of mine, Gore has participated in 10ish elections. I would like to thank Darth Kalwejt for creating the page back in 2008. I hope to continue this series of VPEH soon. (currently between someone who would never shoot someone and then make the person they shot apologize to them and Dick Chaney) Olliefant (she/her) 07:15, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

This calls for a celebration! Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:09, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98 (12/29/25)

• There is some inconsistency on the tables with regards to the word "incumbent". Sometimes it's wikilinked; sometimes it's capitalized; etc. I recommend picking one format and sticking with it. Done
• I think "Election Day" is a proper noun and should be capitalized. Done

Lead

• "and his third defeating by Republican challenger James B. Seigneur." – Get rid of that "by". Done
• "to be his running mate in 1992 United States presidential election." – You need an article after "in". Done

1976

• "Joe L. Evins announced he would not be seeking another term" – Recommend rewording as "announced that he would not seek another term"; the progressive tense is not needed. Done
• "The primary race was close, with Gore and Tennessee House of Representatives Speaker Stanley Rogers as the front runners." – I would recommend rephrasing as "Gore and ... emerging as the front runners." Done

1978

• Recommend rewording those large numbers as 90,000 and 108,000, and so on.
  • Opted to make words for consistency

1982

• "around thirty thousand less votes" – Should be "fewer votes". Done

1984

• Democratic should be capitalized when referring to the political party. Done

1990

• "Republican Representative Don Sundquist felt that the Hawkins was a weak candidate" – You don't need that "the". Done

1988 Democratic Primary

• "followed by Jackson at 37% with Gore receiving only 10%." – You need something between "37%" and "with". Done

1992 nomination

• "Governor Bill Clinton considered around forty different politicians to be his running mate." – Recommend replacing "about" with "approximately". Not done
  • The exact number is unknown, I found varying numbers and the LA Times article cited said Clinton "had a list of about 40 possibilities" so I just went with "around fourty"
    • For some reason, I read that as “about” when you clearly used “around”. Your original sentence is fine.
• Is there a wikilink for shortlist?
  • I've added 1992 Democratic Party vice presidential candidate selection (I could've sworn I already added it)

1996

• You probably don't need two subheaders considering how small both sections are, but that's up to you.
  • I just left it for consistency,
• Who was the Secretary of HUD, Dole or Kemp?
  • Kemp, I've tweaked it a bit, but I don't know how to improve the wording without running into a MOS:SOB issue

2000 nomination

• Recommend writing out Democratic National Convention. Done
• "He formerly announced..." – I believe you mean "formally". Done

General election

• You have Dick Cheney misspelled as "Dick Chaney". Done He won't like that; his ghost might shoot you in the face while quail hunting and call it an accident...
  He didn't :(
• "Gore initially gave a concession speech; however he retracted it after a recount was ordered.[1] However, the Supreme Court's 5–4 decision in Bush v. Gore" Too many howevers in close proximity. Done
• "Some Democrats attributed Gore's loss to the presence of third party candidate Ralph Nader of the Green Party causing a "spoiler effect" detracting from Gore's vote count in Florida and New Hampshire." – There's something wonky here; something between "spoiler effect" and "detracting". Done

User:Olliefant: Please let me know when you've had a chance to examine these comments! Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:23, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

@Bgsu98: Thank you for the review, I hope I addressed all of your concerns. Olliefant (she/her) 01:50, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

User:Olliefant: Looks good! Support. I will do your source review later today. I think I did the source review for Dan Quayle too, but if not, I'll do that one too. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:03, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Image review (11/30/25)

All of the images have appropriate licenses and captions. The maps do not have any alt-text. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:06, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Source review (11/30/25)

This table checks 15 passages from throughout the article (19.7% of 76 total passages). These passages contain 20 inline citations (17.9% of 112 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:38, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Reference #	Letter	Source	Archive	Status	Notes
Nine different candidates sought the Democratic nomination.
4	a	newspapers.com			This article says nothing about nine candidates seeking the Democratic nomination. Approved
5		newspapers.com			The article describes Gore's competition in the primary as "crowded", but did not cite numbers.
McGlamery did not actively campaign and only ran to prevent Gore from winning unopposed. On Election Day, Gore won in a landslide, receiving 94 percent of the vote.
7	b	Guthrie, Benjamin J. (April 15, 1977). Statistics of the Presidential and Congressional election of…			Unable to access as no link provided.
9		newspapers.com			This source verifies the first statement ("McGlamery did not..."). I recommend moving this citation to directly after that statement, as it does not verify that second statement ("On Election Day...").
He was challenged in the general election by Republican James B. Seigneur. Seigneur ran as he disliked the fact that Gore won unopposed in 1978; he criticized Gore's voting record, labeling it as "disgraceful".
14		newspapers.com			This does support these statements. However, this is clearly a paid political advertisement as stated at the bottom of the page. Is this really the best source available?
A debate between Ashe and Gore was held on October 8, 1984.
25		c-span.org
Gore received almost 480 thousand votes with 54 votes cast for write-in candidates.
28	a	newspapers.com			"480 thousand" looks weird.
Republican Representative Don Sundquist felt that Hawkins was a weak candidate and that Republicans would likely have a better chance of taking the seat in the 1996 election.
33		newspapers.com			I do not see any mention of Hawkins being a weak candidate. If I have missed it, please let me know.
After being elected Vice President in the 1992 presidential election, Gore resigned from his Senate seat on January 2, 1993. Harlan Mathews was appointed to replace him by Governor Ned McWherter.
37		deseret.com			This is going to sound pedantic, but this article describes what would likely happen in the future. The article was written in December 29, 1992; it can't verify events that happened on January 2, 1993. Approved
He hoped to make up for his loss on Super Tuesday.
40	b	cnn.com	web.archive.org
Following his victory in the 1992 Democratic Party presidential primaries, Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton considered around forty different politicians to be his running mate. His shortlist consisted of Gore, Senators Bob Graham of Florida, Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, and Harris Wofford of Pennsylvania, as well as Representative Lee Hamilton of Indiana's 4th congressional district.
52	a	latimes.com			None of those names are cited in this source.
53	a	nytimes.com			This source does cites those names. In fact, this source cites everything in the above statement; you don't need source no. 52 here. Approved
Clinton announced his running mate at the Arkansas Governor's Mansion; during his speech, he emphasized Gore's work in protecting the environment and foreign policy.
53	b	nytimes.com
The Clinton-Gore ticket was the youngest presidential ticket ever elected to the presidency.
53	c	nytimes.com
Following the 1996 Democratic National Convention, many felt Gore was likely to run for president in 2000.
63		newspapers.com
64		newspapers.com
Following Super Tuesday, Bradley conceded the primary and congratulated Gore on his victory.
70		"Super Tuesday, March 7, 2000". archive.nytimes.com. Retrieved November 9, 2025.	archive.nytimes.com		I would change the source to The New York Times in the citation. Approved
On August 17, the two received the Democratic Party's nomination at the 2000 Democratic National Convention.
74		Berke, Richard L. (August 16, 2000). "The Overview: Lieberman Sets Stage for Gore as Democrats Seal…	archive.nytimes.com
His loss has also been attributed to the potentially misleading design of the butterfly ballots used in Palm Beach County, Florida, which heavily leans toward the Democrats, causing Gore voters to accidentally vote for Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan.
87		nytimes.com
88		cnn.com			I question whether this source is necessary, but that's up to you. Approved

User:Olliefant: There are several issues that require attention as shown on the above chart. Please let me know when you've had a chance to address them! Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:50, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Issue 1. I replaced ref 4 but left ref 5 Approved

Issue 2. No link exists for ref 7, you can download it here

• Recommend adding this link to the citation.

• Not done, I'm citing the PDF file not the House page, It would be like linking to an Amazon listing for a book.

• Okay, that's fine. Approved

Issue 3. Not from what I can tell

• Say what?

What I meant to say was, from what I can tell this is the best source available. The election didn't get much coverage.

• Okay, since what's being verified is what the candidate thought of Gore, it should be acceptable. Approved

Issue 6. The article is on two different pages, the link is to B11 while the fact in question is on B13

• See the following to link regarding how to format two pages for the same article: Wikipedia:Newspapers.com#Citations across multiple pages/clippings. Also, I re-read the article on p. B13, and Sundquist does not mention Hawkins, nor does he say that Republicans would have a better chance of winning a seat in 1996. He simply notes that Gore's seat would likely be vacated if he chooses to run for president. If you want to use this source, I recommend a slight rewrite to better reflect what the source actually says.

• Fixed the citation formatting. However, B13 says: "... the weakness of the Tennessee GOP, as evidenced by their failure to put up strong candidates against Gov. Ned McWherter and Sen. Albert Gore Jr." I did tweak the wording slightly as he says that there was a "very good chance to topple Sasser" Approved

Issue 7. reworded and added a new citation Approved

Issue 9. Moved the LA Times sources to before the names. Approved

Issue 13. Done Approved

Issue 15. I like citing multiple sources Approved

@Bgsu98: Done Olliefant (she/her) 17:46, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

User:Olliefant: There are still a few unresolved issues. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:43, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

@Bgsu98: responded Olliefant (she/her) 06:28, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Source review passed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:02, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

List of Billboard number-one country songs of 2025

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:33, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

As my current nom already has three supports I figure I am OK to start another one, so here is this year's list of U.S. country number ones. All 81 previous lists are already FLs and I hope this one will be able to join that list. I realise there are still four charts to go this year, but you know you can count on me to update the article :-) Some of the references are not archived but that's because the IABot is having issues again. Hopefully I will be able to archive the rest at some point..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:33, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• In the table, the scopes for the "Hot Country Songs", and "Country Airplay" should be "colgroup". This probably needs to be fixed for the previous years as well.
• The table caption should probably be "Chart histories" given that there are two charts.
• "second artist to top the chart as both a solo artist and as a member of a duo or group." A footnote saying that Tyler Hubbard was the first seems warranted.
• "Shaboozey's song held the top spot for the first six weeks of the year, taking its total run at number one to 33 weeks," comparable values should either all be in figures or all in words. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:33, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824: - done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:47, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

• Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:05, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98 (11/25/25)

• This is probably a matter of personal preference, but I would remove the "the"s from phrases such as "the rapper BigXthaPlug", "the country singer Bailey Zimmerman", and "the pop singer Tate McRae".
  • I have been told in the past that the "the" needs to be included because otherwise it is a false title, which should be avoided in high-quality prose.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:20, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

  Even that article is conflicted on whether it's proper or not, but like I said, it's up to you. 😃 Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:34, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

• Other than that, the prose is good and I see no issues with the table. Since my only comment is merely a suggestion, I will go ahead and support right now.
• On an unrelated note, I have submitted a number of photos to Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates if you'd be willing to drop by. I have never submitted anything there until now. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:31, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
  • I've never reviewed anything there so am not really sure what the criteria are, but will take a look.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:57, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Octave

Source review: reviewed Special:Permalink/1324068923

• All sources are generally reliable, no problems here
• Politely suggest that, in an ideal world, references should have a standardised casing, but it's no biggie ;)
• I believe the standard name format for ref 1 is "McKinley, James C., Jr." in most referencing systems
  • Fixed! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
• Inconsistent archiving is mentioned in the nom statement; AGFing that this will be done
• Ref 6, should be single quotes inside double quotes
  • Fixed! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
• Spotchecks turned up no issues

Ping me when done; great work. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 14:22, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

@UpTheOctave!: - done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

That was quick!! Happy to pass this source review. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 14:26, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Olliefant

• Ref 5 appears to be syndicated content from "The Grio" and should be marked as being "The Grio" and "via AOL"
• Ref 6 is titled "Chappell Roan's 'The Giver'..." with apostrophe, however, the article cited is titled "Chappell Roan’s “The Giver”" with quotation marks. Is there a reason for this?
• Linking is consistent
• Dates are consistent
• Spot checked the non subscription sources.
• Unrelated, I'd clarify the year of Hubbard's achievement to help give a scale of how rare it is for someone to do.

That's what I found ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 02:05, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

• @Olliefant: - thanks for that review, all addressed I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:00, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

  Done Olliefant (she/her) 17:46, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

• @Olliefant: - can I confirm that that's a "support"? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:46, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

  Yeah that was a whoopsie on my part Olliefant (she/her) 22:00, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

List of World Heritage Sites in Libya

Nominator(s): Tone 08:22, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Libya has five WHS and three tentative sites. Standard style. I figured I will wait a bit with longer nominations still, this one is compact and should be easy to read. Tone 08:22, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• The alt-text for the locator image needs to be fixed.
• Alt-text needs to be added for the last image (the cave). -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:39, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

  Fixed, thanks! Tone 09:00, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

• Continuing...
• LPQY seems to be name of the Phoenician settlement that became Leptis Magna according to the source.
• "It was the birthplace of the Septimius Severus"
• wikilink Arab invasion in the Leptis manga description.
• "with three orders of columns" By order, I don't think you mean Classical order, since they all look the same to me. If you meant storey, then change "orders" to "levels".
• "Monuments in the city include the Greek temples of the 7th and 6th centuries BCE".
• That all I got. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:28, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Easternsahara

Could you nominate Jordan's list next? I am trying to get a Featured topic on the Arab States. Either way, I will put you as conominator because you did the majority of the work

• File:Leptis Magna Theatre.jpg PD
• File:Archaeological Site of Sabratha-108976.jpg CC BY-SA 3.0 igo
• File:Temple of Zeus - Cyrene.jpg CC BY 2.0
• File:Tadrart Acacus 1.jpg PD
• File:Old Ghadames (5282815851).jpg CC BY 2.0
• File:Girza,Libia.jpg PD
• File:Ptolemais (5283376622).jpg CC BY 2.0

File:Haua Fteah cave (half cropped).jpg CC BY 3.0

• "Ghadames was removed from this list " could be misinterperted as it was delisted as a whs
• "instability due to "→"instability caused by" stronger, more varied
• "post and"→"post, and"
• "and later Roman"→"and, later, Roman" later is interrupting, can be confused later Romans in time (both instances)
• "the Greek temples of the 7th and 6th centuries"→"6th− and 7th–century Greek temples" concise, chronological
• link Temple of Zeus to Temple of Zeus, Cyrene, move citations to preceding sentence
• "into very distinct" remove very
• "changes of"→"changes in"
• "the way of life of the locals"→"local way of life" ('the' not included for other items in list)
• "styles that reflect"→"styles. They reflect" (big sentence flow, maybe run-on)
• "of savanna"→"of the savanna" I usually hear "the savanna", 'a' might be acceptable here
• delete "finally on"
• "depict large"→"depict the large"
• "It has been occupied since at least the late 1st millennium BCE and was serving"→"Being occupied since at least the late 1st millenium BCE, it served" for flow, was serving is less encyclopedic and strange in this context.
• "its unique architecture"→"its own unique architectural style"
• "feature are"→"feature is" subject-verb agreement
• "houses where the"→"houses. The"
• Please clarify what ground floor vs. first floor is, as these terms are used interchangeably in certain english-speaking regions.
• "by Arab"→"from Arab"
• "Listed as endangered in 2016 due to the conflict in the country at that time, wildfires and torrential rain, it was removed from the list in danger in 2025 due"→It was listed as endangered in 2016, due to the civil conflict, wildfires and torrential rain, later being removed in 2025, due
• "list in danger" link to List of World Heritage in Danger and rephrase to "list of World Heritage in Danger"
• "c. 200 CE"→"around 200 CE" circa is usually only used in infoboxes, english is preferable
• "well preserved"→"well–preserved" merriam webster
• "and numerous monuments"→"and numerous monuments remaining"
• link Roman engineering to Ancient Roman technology
• "14 m (46 ft) deep" this should be 14 metre-deep, compound adjective
• "tools of from"→"tools from"
• beginning of farming link to Neolithic Revolution
• humid periods link to African humid period

Image review pass, might be inactive sorry if my reply is late

• Thanks for the comments, I agree with all. Any chance you help me with editing the article like the previous time (busy IRL :/) I will nominate Jordan next, deal! --Tone 09:41, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Support on prose User:Easternsahara_{review this} 00:40, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Michael Aurel

• Some of the sentences in the lead's first paragraph have quite a few parentheses. If possible, I'd recommend trying to move some of this information into the article's main text or otherwise performing some reworking here.
• consists of monuments – Perhaps link monument?
  • Monument is a very basic concept, it is expected that someone knows what that it is and we do not link obvious things
    • I think you could argue it's a term that is "particularly relevant to the context in the article", which is a caveat in WP:OL (cf. Cultural heritage, for instance), but I'll leave this one to your discretion. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• Natural features (consisting ... are defined as natural heritage. – I'd suggest reworking this sentence so that it begins in "Natural heritage includes ..." (or similar) for parallelism and so that the reader understands what we're listing from the outset.
  • Personally, I disagree, the good thing about parentheses is that the reader can skip over them and they list things very well.
    • The suggestion wasn't related to the use of parentheses, but the use of the passive voice. The phrasing at List of World Heritage Sites in Hungary, for example, is better in my view. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:42, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
• Libya accepted the convention on 13 October 1978 – I would either move this sentence to before the definitions of natural and cultural heritage or I would restate the convention's full name, as "the convention" is here referring to something mentioned a few sentences back.
  • The reader must know what the convention that Libya signed entails before this sentence has any meaning to them. Also, since we're on a list about World Heritage Sites, it is very obvious that this is the World Heritage Convention.
• a further three on the tentative list – Hmm, is "the tentative list" an official title? If so, I would think it should be capitalised.
  • It is not.
    • Hmm, looking at UNESCO's page on the matter, they seem to treat it as though it's a title, or at least they consistently capitalise both words of the phrase ("Tentative Lists"). – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
      • This is the standard style we use over all of these lists and it has so far been fine. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
        • Ah I see, good to know that this is part of a series. I would still change it, though this is hardly a big deal. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:42, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
• All five sites are listed due to their cultural significance. – Hasn't this more or less already been said (or at least implied) above?
  • No, there are three types of World Heritage Sites, natural sites, cultural sites, and mixed sites. This is explained in the first paragraph.
    • I see what's meant now. This hasn't really been explained, though: we state that World Heritage Sites are "of importance to cultural or natural heritage", and we define those two terms. I think the reader could be forgiven for interpreting the sentence as a generic statement that "The sites are culturally significant", without piecing together that "cultural significance" here refers to specific criteria for a site's inclusion on grounds of cultural heritage. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
      • I think this is pretty clear from the paragraph. Also, this is the standard style we've been using for these lists.
        • Looking again at List of World Heritage Sites in Hungary, maybe go for something like "All five are listed as cultural sites"? – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:41, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
• In 2025, the List of World Heritage in Danger – This was linked in the previous sentence. I'd suggest either including the full name there or otherwise removing one of the links.
  • Done
    • Ghadames was no longer endangered, – I'd suggest "Ghadames was no longer classified as endangered" (or similar) – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:19, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
      • Improved. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• was founded as a Phoenician settlement LPQ – What does "LPQ" mean here?
  • Unsure, pinging User:Tone
    • LPQ is the name in Phoenician, LPQ (Punic: 𐤋𐤐𐤒) (probably better to just write LPQ not to further confuse the reader why the letters are small?) --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

  That makes sense. You could write "known in Punic as LPQ" in brackets, though I'd probably just remove it here, as I'm not it's crucial information for our purposes. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:19, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

• and came under the Romans in 46 BCE. – "came under Roman control", perhaps?
  • Changed control to rule, but done
• birthplace of the Septimius Severus. – omit "the"
  • Done
• I'd include some dates for Septimius Severus.
• After becoming the Emperor – link Roman emperor, remove "the", and remove capitalisation
  • Linked roman emperor, kept "the" per WP:FALSETITLE Sure its not a part of MOS, but it improves clarity which the MOS encourages
    • For a phrase to be a false title, it needs to come before the person's name: "convicted bomber" isn't a false title unless it's part of "convicted bomber Timothy McVeigh". On the use of "emperor" specifically, compare Roman emperor: "When a given Roman is described as becoming emperor in English, ...". – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• he rebuilt and enlarged the city and made it one of the most – Avoid the repetition of "and". Perhaps use a comma after "city" and then start from there with "transforming" or "turning" (or similar).
  • Don
• of the Roman world. – link Roman Empire
  • Done
• It was pillaged in the 4th century, – By whom?
• was pillaged in ... reconquered by ... and was finally abandoned following – no "was" for parallelism
  • Done
    • One additional point: and abandoned following the Arab invasion. – I'd add a link here and some dates, as we do below. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:19, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• Founded as ... and then part of – This doesn't work grammatically.
  • Changed
    • This is an improvement. I'll put another beat on my drum about including dates, though, and once they're included it might be better to split the sentence. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:19, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• Sabratha got absorbed – "was" is preferable in formal writing.
  • done
• absorbed in the Roman province of Africa in 46 BCE. – "absorbed into"
  • done
• It was prospering in the 2nd and 3rd centuries – "It prospered"
  • done
• the 2nd and 3rd centuries when numerous monuments – "during which"
  • done
• including a theatre with three orders of columns – By "order", are we referring to the subject of this article?
  • Yes, linked now. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• Its fortunes turned in the 4th century with the decline in trade. – I'd excise the expression "fortunes turned", and explain where or with whom trade declined.
  • Rewrote. The trade declined in general in the region, this was the period when the Roman Empire was already crumbling. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
    • That's better. I'd try to avoid repeating "decline", though. Maybe "reduction" or "attenuation"? I'd also go for "the decline in trade in the region". – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:58, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
• the Byzantines until – "Byzantines, before"
  • done
• after the Arab invasions between the 7th and 11th centuries. – I'm not sure the use of two temporal indicators ("after", "between") works so well here. Maybe write "of the 7th and ..."?
• It was a major city of the Hellenistic and, later, Roman world. – I'd try to include a bit more detail here. "world" should also be plural.
• the Jewish revolt in 116 – "of"
  • done
• It's worth noting that the last date mentioned before 116 is 631 BCE. Is there any reason to not write this as "116 CE" (and to perhaps do so across the page), to avoid ambiguity?
  • done
    • Not compulsory, but any reason to not do this across the page, since we oscillate between BCE and CE dates a handful of times? – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:19, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• with the massive 365 earthquake – "the" seems to imply we're using a proper name or that the reader should already be familiar with this event.
  • done, unpiped link to be more descriptive
• the city include 6th− and 7th–century – use hyphens
• 6th− and 7th–century Greek temples, – link Ancient Greek temple
  • done
    • The link should be around just "Greek temples". – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:19, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
      • Fixed. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• The rock paintings and engravings in the Acacus Mountains – Worth noting that the entries up until now haven't relinked the site's name in the "Description" column.
  • Link removed, good point. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• were created over thousands of years, from 12,000 BCE to 100 CE. – "over thousands of years" is probably redundant, given we've supplied dates which convey the same thing with more precision.
  • removed
• They reflect the changes – By "they", do you mean the phases?
  • This is how I understand it, yes. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

  Makes sense. I'd go for "These phases reflect", to make clear we aren't referring to the "motifs and artistic styles". – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:21, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

• during and after the African humid period – Per MOS:NOFORCELINK, I would give some indication of when this was.
  • Added, makes sense. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• Being occupied since at least the late 1st millenium BCE, – "Being" can be omitted.
  • done
• The town has developed its own unique architectural style, adjusted to the harsh desert climate. – What sort of time period are we talking about here? "has" makes it sound as though we might be talking about architecture of recent times.
  • removed has
• next floor is for families, – "is living space", perhaps?
  • Agreed. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
    • Fixed the parallelism here. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:41, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
• has the nickname "the Pearl of the Desert" from Arab sources. – Which sources? From when?
  • This is directly from the UNESCO source, that should do. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
    • Mm, similarly to below, I think I was expecting the source to have more detail. I suppose this is fine. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:41, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
• on the List of World Heritage in Danger, in 2016 – The comma can be omitted.
  • done
• due to the civil conflict, – Which civil conflict?
  • Libyan civil war (2014–2020), as explained in the intro. Linked just in case. --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• List of World Heritage in Danger, – I'd try to rework things so we don't need to repeat the full title.
• Tentative list – Per above, I wonder if the full term should be capitalised? (This applies below as well.)
  • no
• In addition to sites inscribed on the World Heritage List, – "inscribed" implies physical etching of some nature; I'm not sure it's the right word here.
  • From merriam webster, "to enter on a list : enroll"
    • I see, Oxford Languages marks this as an archaic usage, though the OED apparently doesn't agree (and we'd be better off following the latter). Happy to retract this. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• list of tentative sites that they may consider for nomination. – The use of "they" makes it sound a bit as though Libya itself is the one considering them for nomination.
• Libya maintains three properties – "has three sites", perhaps?
  • has kinda implies that these are permanent, but they are removed if they fail, if the state party wants to withdraw them, or if they are inscribed. maintain is better here
    • One can say "I have your keys", for example, without implying that the possession is permanent. To me, the word "maintains" here implies this sort of maintenance. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
      • Has is also fine ;) --Tone 09:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• The remains of the settlement are well–preserved, – hyphen
  • done
• It illustrates the adaptation – "it" doesn't have a clear antecedent here.
  • Added Ghirza. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• with aspects such as water management. – "aspects" of what?
  • Rewrote. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• The findings in the two extensive necropolises demonstrate a dynamic interchange between the Romans and the local populations. – If possible, I'd try to be a bit more specific. What was being interchanged between the two groups?
  • Added cultural. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• It was one of the five important cities that formed the Pentapolis of Cyrenaica. – I would omit "important", as otherwise it could sound as though there were other, unimportant cities that were part of the Pentapolis.
  • done
• during the Hellenistic and later Roman periods – A bit of a nitpick, but "later" could make it sound as though we're talking about "later Roman periods" as opposed to some earlier Roman periods.
  • encased in commas to prevent confusion
• Actually, to go one step further, I would be explicit about the time periods we're referencing here, as some readers won't know the dates of the Hellenistic period, for example.
  • I think this is too far for the particular list, there is a link for those who want to explore further. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• periods and in the 4th century surpassed Cyrene that was damaged by earthquakes. – I'd suggest some rewriting here. In what regard did it surpass Cyrene?
  • In regional importance. But there is another word importance in the next sentence so that would be repeating. Open to suggestions, though. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

  Hm, seems to be another case of the source being a bit vague. I suppose this is fine. Slightly rephrased the "that" part, which didn't quite work. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:50, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

• The remains of the city illustrate the cohabitation of different faiths and cultures. – "document", or "reveal", perhaps? The word "illustrate" initially led me think we might be leading into a broader point.
  • I like "document". --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• Monuments from different time periods have been preserved, including a unique type of a mausoleum. – To what period or culture did this mausoleum belong? I'd cut the first part of the sentence (and include a little more detail), or try to rework it so it's saying something more concrete.
  • Improved. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
    • Much better. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:16, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
• the Middle Paleolithic, stone blades from the Upper Paleolithic, – Similar to some suggestions above, it might be a good idea to give the reader a more precise idea of when these periods were.
  • I'd say the links work better here not to be too lengthy. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
• includes traces of ... stone flake tools from ... stone blades from ... the beginning of farming – The last item in this list doesn't cohere with the others.
  • Improved. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

  That's better. I'd try to reorient the last point so that it refers to concrete finds, to match the other items ("traces", "stone flake tools", "stone blades"). Maybe something like "evidence of the transition to farming, 10,000–7000 years ago"? – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:46, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

• 10,000-7000 years ago – endash
  • done
• including the African humid periods ("green Sahara") – Hmm, where is this quote coming from?
  • This is from the source. The point is that at that time Sahara was not a desert so people could cross it easier. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
    • Fair enough. I think I was expecting for the source to be quoting someone or something in particular, but it apparently doesn't give anything beyond what we have here. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:16, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
• It also provides a record of ... which allowed people to cross what is today a desert. – It sounds a bit as though the records were what allowed people to do the crossing.
  • I think now I made it better. --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)
    • That's better. I've rephrased it ever so slightly. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:16, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

All in all, it's a pleasant and interesting read. The only concerns are some fairly minor points of grammar and clarity. I'll let you get a handle on these prose suggestions, and then I'll do a few spot checks just to make sure everything's in order in that regard. – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:25, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

@Tone: my first ping of you didn't work, I tried addressing what I could. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 02:50, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, again a busy period. I will go through in the following days. Thank you for your assistance, greatly appreciated :) Tone 13:19, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

@Michael Aurel:, @Easternsahara:, I think I have addressed the rest of the comments. Sorry it took a while. Please check. Excellent in-depth review! --Tone 10:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm glad you found it helpful. I've struck or supplied follow-up points for all of the suggestions. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:54, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

List of 2025 Indian Premier League personnel changes

Nominator(s): Vestrian24Bio 03:17, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

I am back after 4/5 months with a new FLC (with plenty of more lists for a few consecutive months), here is the list of auction and personnel changes from the 2025 Indian Premier League, the 18th edition of the Indian Premier League (IPL), a professional Twenty20 (T20) cricket league held in India, organized by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). Vestrian24Bio 03:17, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• "It is held annually since the first edition in 2008" => "It has been held annually since the first edition in 2008"
• "₹120 crore (US$14 million), highest in the history of IPL" => "₹120 crore (US$14 million), the highest in the history of IPL"
• "surpassing ₹26.75 crore (US$3.2 million) paid" => "surpassing the ₹26.75 crore (US$3.2 million) paid"
• "Vaibhav Sooryavanshi became the youngest player sold in the IPL history" => "Vaibhav Sooryavanshi became the youngest player sold in IPL history"
• "notably West Indies tour of Ireland, West Indies tour of England and World Test Championship final" => "notably the West Indies' tour of Ireland, the West Indies' tour of England and the World Test Championship final"
• "The six players could consist of a maximum of five capped players" - link capped
• "Franchises who did not retain the maximum number of players, were allowed" - no reason for that comma
• "Any player willing to play in the IPL were required to register for the auction" => "Any player willing to play in the IPL was required to register for the auction"
• "Any auctioned player withdrawing before the season without legitimate reason or injury, would be banned" - no reason for that comma
• "Any Indian capped player who wasn't named" => "Any Indian capped player who had not been named"
• "Each playing member (including the impact player) " - this is the first mention of an "impact player". Can you explain it somehow?
• Name columns in the Support staff changes support based on forename eg Adam Griffith sorts under A. They should sort based on surname
• Same for the withdrawn players table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: All done. Vestrian24Bio 10:38, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:45, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Geographical indications in Ukraine

Nominator(s): Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 15:40, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Unlike my previous nominations, I made this list entirely from scratch, but it turned out quite well (much shorter than List of Ukrainian placenames affected by derussification or List of Intangible Cultural Heritage elements in Ukraine, so don't hesitate to review). Also, to my knowlege, this is the first list of geographical indications / protected products to be nominated. I believe it is well-structured and properly formatted, and thus ready to be nominated. As always, improvements are welcome. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 15:40, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• Using the word "dupes" feels a bit weird to me. See if imitation or replica conveys enough of the same meaning. Keep the wikilink though.

• Changed to "imitation goods", tell me if that works.

• protection of geographical indications is was established

• Done

• "other products, including handicrafts, may receive the status as well" to "other products, including handicrafts, have received the status as well"

• Done

• Can "Frumushika" be wikilinked somewhere?

• I have interlanguage links to Frumushika River in two descriptions in the table. Do you also want me to link it in the lead?

  Yes, please. -MPGuy2824 (talk)

  Done

• "Area of origin is located within"

• Done

• wikilink "rosé"

• Done

• " with no more than 20% mountain cow's or goat's milk added.": a bit of repetition. Maybe change it to something like "with the rest being cow or goat milk." Similar issue for "Hutsul cow bryndza"

• Done

• Consider having a separate symbol and color for elements that are also on the "Intangible Cultural Heritage of Ukraine" list

• I've considered that before but ultimately decided not to do it. If I remember correctly, my reasoning was that this wouldn't cover many items (only three), and if I also have a separate color for the UNESCO list specifically, that would further divide that into two and one. The National Register of Intangible Cultural Heritage doesn't get updated very often (usually once in a few months), and of 117 items currently inscribed, only 3 are also registered as GIs, so I wouldn't expect the overlap to widen significantly as both registers expand. I mentioned this information in the descriptions to show that these items are protected not only as products on the market, but also as traditions. While I believe that this information is worth mentioning, I don't think it's important enough to highlight it with a separate symbol and color. If the overlap was bigger, though, I would consider this important enough. I'm not strongly committed to keeping it as is though, so if you think it still makes sense to mark the ICH elements, I can do that.

• since the table is sortable, you'll have to wikilink things multiple times if they appear for different elements, since you aren't sure which of the row will appear on top.

• Added links. Tell me if more are needed.

• I'll continue this in a day or two. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:36, 19 November 2025 (UTC)
• Continuing ...
• Replace autochthonous with indigenous OR native.

• Done

• I think "titrated acidity" can be shortened to just acidity

• Done, but should I keep the wikilink?

  Keep the link. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:41, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

• The ref pdfs are images, which means that I cannot copy the text to google translate and check, but there are quite a few uses of "unique" and "distinctive" used throughout the table that would be considered PUFFERY IMO. If the refs do use similar words, then they might be ok.

• Yes, the sources often use words "характерний" and "особливий" (unique/distinctive), "неповторність" (uniqueness), etc. I think this is justified in this case because the entire point of GI labels is to protect products that have special characteristics.

  Makes sense. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:41, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

• Wikilink Bessarabia.

• Done

• "it disappeared in most of the region" to "it disappeared from most of the region"

• Done

• I'm not sure what "sunlight more scattered and intense" means in this context, but to me those two adjectives are near-antonyms.

• That's what the sources say... I understand the scattering part, as the light scatters once it is reflected by the water. I'm not so sure about the intensity, but, as I understand, the light can be spread out (scattered) but still bright (intense). I can't comment on the physics behind this, especially considering the different definitions of light intensity.

• No issues that I could see with table accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:32, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824 Thanks for the review. I have replied to all your comments. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 11:29, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

  According to [16] the direct sunlight is scattered, while the reflected sunlight (from water surfaces) is more intense than normal. Only incorporate that if you can find a good way to do it.

  Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:39, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks for the support.

  At least in the original wording, direct sunlight is not mentioned, and it may be interpreted that both "reflected" and "scattered" refer to the same sunlight, although you may be right that they do not. But I agree that this is confusing, so I removed the mention of scattered sunlight. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:57, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• I think the list would benefit by having images illustrate each example where possible.

• I've tried that in the old versions of the draft but unfortunately there were no images for the majority of the products, so I opted to use Template:Multiple image instead. Also, there were some images of dubious copyright (like the only image of Tavria brandy), as well as some that are hard to categorize (this is obviously a wine from Shabo, but unclear whether it falls under AO Chabag or GI Acha-Abag).

• For example, this image is of melitopol cherries on uk.wp, this cheese, etc.

• Bryndza can refer to a number of cheeses, and what is shown on the second image is indeed some sort of bryndza, but I can't confirm that that is Hutsul bryndza (and even if it were, it's still unclear whether that's the sheep's milk or cow's milk kind). However, I'm leaning towards it not being Hutsul bryndza because, as far as I can tell, the protected kind is crumbled and sold in jars.

• is there relevant information about GIs in the russian occupied territories? you kind of touch on this in footnote d, but I would like some information to be integrated into the body of the article

• The most important information regarding GIs in Russian-occupied territories is that many of them (at least Crimean wines and Melitopol cherries, according to the sources) have been appropriated and are sold by Russia despite their Ukrainian GI labels. At the moment, I think the footnote explains everything well, but if you think I can condense the info and add a brief mention in the main text, where would it fit best? Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:43, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, I forgot about this. I think a mention at the end of the last paragraph of the lead would be good. The last two sentences would be good, though some context should be added.

Also, some comments about WP:SYNTH in the footnote: ref 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29 don't mention geographical indications, (i used ctrl f). Thus, I would recommend that you remove the footnote (since you would have to remove these refs and integrate the relevant info into the lead). Obviously, this is still very important so I would recommend linking Ukrainian culture during the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the see also. Also per WP:RFE/RL, radio free europe is "additional considerations apply", so I would add attribution to it or replace it with something else.

I also understand that there aren't many images on this, so that issue is resolved. User:Easternsahara 18:15, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I don't see how refs 25–29 are WP:SYNTH. They are only there to confirm the occupation and annexation of these regions by Russia, as well as the global (non-)recognition of it, serving as the background to the next statement about what is happening to the GIs in these areas. This is not an instance of "A^[1] and B,^[2] therefore, C" but rather "A^[1] and B^[2]". I have seen (and made) similar footnotes in other lists and articles without issue. As I don't see the reason to remove the background information given by these sources, I think it shouldn't be a problem to leave the footnote in either. However, I've added a shortened version of this to the lead as you proposed, though omitting info about the EU ban as it seems like extra information that doesn't quite fit into the lead; tell me if that works.

As I understand, the problem with RFE/RL is potential bias. While I agree that the source in this case provides biased reactions to the fact, I think it should not be a problem to use it only to confirm the statement (appropriation of GI Melitopol cherries by Russia), though to be safe I replaced it with a more neutral source – WP:YAHOONEWS (citing both Ukrainska Pravda and TASS).

I've added Ukrainian culture during the Russian invasion of Ukraine to the See also section as you suggested as well. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 20:04, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, that addresses most of my concerns. I think the russian invasion part can stay in the footnote, it explains why something is included even though it is not de facto under the control of the Ukranian government.

But could you add the bit about the EU ban to the lead? It is one sentence and is WP:DUE because there are 2 references for 1 sentence. Then, could you remove the last and second-last sentences of the footnote? It is content duplication. Right now, there is content duplication in the article because the part in the lead is repeated in the footnote. To combat this, you could remove it from the lead, but this takes important information about geographical indications in Ukraine away from the lead and puts it into an optional footnote. However, if you remove it from the footnote, then it is a formal fallacy that the EU banned the import: it doesn't have context necessary for logical (and textual) flow. So you must include all the information in the lead and remove it from the footnote to prevent content duplication and ensure context is present for the claims.

I'll support if you do that, or explain why you don't want to. Thanks for your work on this list. User:Easternsahara 17:21, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

That's fine by me. Moved the last two sentences (with minor adjustments) to lead, and also moved the efn as Russian-occupied territories are now mentioned there first. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 21:55, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Support looked over the rest of the text and its good. I just noticed one thing with the link: Cabernet links to a disambiguation page. Although this is probably intentional (you specify disambiguation), I was wondering if you could point it to a more specific location? User:Easternsahara 23:43, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

As written in the invisible comment, the source doesn't specify the type(s) of Cabernet used. I also tried to figure this out in other sources but unfortunately couldn't find anything. Thanks for the support. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:11, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

List of British monarchs

Nominator(s): JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 00:10, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

My second FLC and this is one I've been working on for quite a while now. I am hoping that this will complete a featured topic of all the British monarchs, so it is quite a cool final piece of the puzzle I am putting in. I've tried to do all of the required accessibility measures already but please let me know if I've missed anything. Thanks, JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 00:10, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Doesn't this page violate Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility/Data_tables_tutorial#Avoiding_column_headers_in_the_middle_of_the_table? I'm also asking this to learn what is and isn't allowed :) Dajasj (talk) 14:14, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

It does; the table either needs to be split into multiple tables (1 per house), the house made into a column, or the house removed. Additionally, while the table coding has rowscopes, they're not actually marked as header cells- change | scope="row" to ! scope="row". --PresN 16:01, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

I also question the need for several of these columns to be sortable. The dates appear to sort by day (ie. the first digit the cell), which is of zero use. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:13, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure any of the columns need to be sortable – what order except chronological would you want. List of British monarchy records is the article for anything except chronological order. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 21:06, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• There's a reference at the end of the lead to the Untied Kingdom [sic] -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:07, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

  done JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 22:48, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

Comments from DrKay

• Oppose. The edit-war over the timeline demonstrates that the article is not stable, failing criterion 6. DrKay (talk) 22:17, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

  @DrKay If people who have not at all been involved with writing the article want to come by and revert to the old timeline without explanation, then I can't stop them. The two most recent edit summaries have been "let's bring the old timeline chart back" and "old timeline is better. If you want to change it, then I recommend we discuss about it in the talk page." I asked for semi-protection at WP:RPP/I due to what I considered persistent vandalism but the request was declined. Is it fair on me, having put hours into writing the article, that its FLC does not pass because people drive-by revert my work without explanation? FLC is about suggesting improvements, and there is literally nothing I can do about it, especially as these editors have not even started a talk page discussion on the matter. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 22:52, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

  @DrKay I would consider the article stable now; I applied for semi-protection a little while ago as well but it was declined. No proper challenge to the new timeline chart has been established on the talk page. Would you consider changing your vote to neutral? JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 15:39, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

  One of the images is nominated for deletion (Commons:Deletion requests/File:His Majesty King Edward VIII in his Coronation Robes.jpg) and another was deleted previously (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Queen Elizabeth II Coronation Portrait Herbert James Gunn.jpg) and so is in danger of re-deletion. The royal cyphers column appears to be decorative and is not something usually found in lists of monarchs. One of the cyphers is not even of a British monarch. (It is of a Hanoverian elector.) The arms column is repetitive: one file is shown twice, two files are shown three times and one file is repeated five times. I therefore still have concerns over 'professional standard', scope, structure, visual appeal, style and image use. DrKay (talk) 21:56, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

  Sorry for not replying; I have been busy irl and did not see.

  • I have removed the cyphers
  • I have removed the house headers per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility/Data_tables_tutorial#Avoiding_column_headers_in_the_middle_of_the_table, which has then meant I can combine the arms as well
  • In my opinion the constant changing of the images and timeline warrants semi-protection but that has been denied. I'm waiting for the current deletion discussion to end and if it is deleted we will revert to the image that used to be there.

  JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 12:18, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

  I have changed the image of Edward VIII back to the definitely-pd-one, but I will not keep doing so if someone else reverts it. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 12:25, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

  Thank you for making these changes. I have removed some text that was either wrong, misleading or irrelevant, as well as two unreliable sources. I would now like to wait for a few days to see whether these changes stick. DrKay (talk) 14:11, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Comments from UpTheOctave

• Oppose on WP:FL?#6 (It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars). I agree with DrKay: it does not matter if the current version is objectively better, we cannot promote a list if it is not stable. From WP:EW: An editor who repeatedly restores their preferred version is edit warring, regardless of whether those edits are justifiable. As such, I don't think you were reverting vandalism, so believe it is not covered under WP:3RRNO. Furthermore, although you say "these editors have not even started a talk page discussion on the matter", we can assume that 2601:40A:8400:1820:0:0:0:0/64 is the same person, in which case they did try and start a WP:BRD cycle on the talk page over a week ago. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 14:44, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

  I have initiated a discussion on the talk page and am happy to escalate this to dispute resolution or a request for comment as appropriate. Do you think it's okay if the FLC is continued as the normal length of an FLC (at least a month for a big article) is likely longer than the resolution process for the timeline (I'm not asking you to change your !vote)? Can I also just clarify if you are saying whether 2601:40A:8400:1820:0:0:0:0/64 is the same person as ~2025-32665-37 or Richie1509? JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 17:50, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

  Thank you for reaching out on the talk page: I have replied there. Honestly? It's really up to the delegates whether it's appropriate to continue the FLC at this point. In my eye, the crux of the matter is whether an article is stable or not. Until this dispute is resolved, I still believe it fails #6. As for the IP, I was meaning that Special:Diff/1320219858 and Special:Diff/1319912398 are clearly by the same individual. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 18:00, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

  @UpTheOctave! I would consider the article stable now; I applied for semi-protection a little while ago as well but it was declined. No proper challenge to the new timeline chart has been established on the talk page. Would you consider changing your vote to neutral? JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 15:39, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

  I disagree that no proper challenge to the new timeline chart has been established on the talk page. After all, several editors raised mobile accessibility issues introduced with your changes, but I digress: the issues raised seem resolved now, so I've struck my !vote. Best, UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 18:51, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Grand Prix of Figure Skating Final

Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:39, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

ISU Grand Prix of Figure Skating was just promoted to Featured List today, so now I will be submitting the individual Grand Prix events. Grand Prix de France (figure skating) has already been promoted. Here is the Grand Prix Final. All of the results have been verified and sourced, the tables should be properly formatted, and the sources should be properly formatted. I look forward to your constructive feedback or suggestions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:39, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• Stellar work as ever. The only thing I would suggest is to merge the two paragraphs about COVID together, as the first is only two sentences and doesn't really need to stand alone. Oh, and I think "that is, in a cluster made up exclusively of individuals who have been thoroughly tested and unlikely to spread infection" should just be "that is, a cluster made up exclusively of individuals who have been thoroughly tested and unlikely to spread infection"
• That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

•  Done Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:11, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:15, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

  User:ChrisTheDude: Thank you! I also have this article at FAC if you are so inclined. It's like pulling teeth to get any attention there. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:53, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Accessibility review

• Only one problem that I could see: In the "Most gold medals by skater" tables, the scope for the header cells which span multiple rows should be "rowgroup". e.g. 4, 8 and 10 in the women's singles table. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:54, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

User:MPGuy2824: Fixed, thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:29, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:20, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

List of constituencies of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly

Nominator(s): -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:23, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

The 9th in the Indian constituency series. I've improved the lead, including some history, and brought the table accessibility to FL-standards. Similar, recent FL: Rajasthan. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:23, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

Drive-by comment - Modern featured lists do not start sections with "The following is a list of the", as it is tautological. Consider something like: There are x constituencies of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly...." Mattximus (talk) 15:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

I didn't think it was a violation of MOS:THISISALIST since it wasn't in the lead, but I can see how it is redundant. I've removed it completely and moved the ref to the table caption. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:32, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Easternsahara

• File:Jharkhand Legislative Assembly.jpg - CC0 Needs alt which says see caption and i am pretty sure 300px is supposed to go in session_res =
• File:IN-JH.svg - CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Wahlkreise zur Vidhan Sabha von Jharkhand.svg - CC BY-SA 3.0

Otherwise the images look good, I may do other reviews on this article later -- Easternsahara

Fixed. I prefer to let the infobox template choose the image size, so I've only added alt text. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Pass image review User:Easternsahara_{review and this} 03:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Comments

• "Its seat is at Ranchi, the capital of the state and it sits" => "Its seat is at Ranchi, the capital of the state, and it sits"
• "81 single-seat constituencies, who each directly elect a representative" => "81 single-seat constituencies, each of which directly elects a representative"
• "Jharkhand was formed in 2000, when the state of Bihar was split, after the passage of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000." => "Jharkhand was formed in 2000 when the state of Bihar was split after the passage of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000."
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:32, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: Fixed all. Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:46, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:47, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Source review (12/28/25)

This table checks 2 passages from throughout the article (25.0% of 8 total passages). These passages contain 2 inline citations (22.2% of 9 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:19, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Reference #	Letter	Source	Archive	Status	Notes
The Jharkhand Legislative Assembly is the unicameral legislature of the state of Jharkhand in Eastern India. Its seat is at Ranchi, the capital of the state, and it sits for a term of five years unless it is dissolved early.
1	a	legislative.gov.in	web.archive.org		This source only verifies the following portion of this statement: "it sits for a term of five years unless it is dissolved early". The first part of the statement is unsourced, as is the rest of the first paragraph.
resulting in the President of India passing an order to say that the delimitation would not apply in the state of Jharkhand.
5		joais.in			I do not see where p. 6–7 verify the statement that the President of India passed an order.

User:MPGuy2824: Neither of the sources that I checked verify the statements to which they are attached. Please take a look at these and let me know if you have any questions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:26, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

@Bgsu98

1. For passage 2, ref 5 had the wrong page numbers. The quote is on pages 26 and 27 (not 6 and 7) going by the page numbers mentioned in the pdf. Fixed now.
2. One sometimes glosses over stuff that is obvious to a local (WP:SKYISBLUE), which is why it is good to get reviewers from across the world. I've added a few more refs for the first paragraph.

Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:09, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Source review, Take 2 (12/29/25)

This table checks 3 passages from throughout the article (21.4% of 14 total passages). These passages contain 3 inline citations (20.0% of 15 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:46, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Reference #	Letter	Source	Archive	Status	Notes
the capital of the state,
3		ranchi.nic.in
Jharkhand is India's fourteenth largest state by population
5		censusindia.gov.in	web.archive.org		Website is not loading.
No text found: citation may be in an infobox or table
12	b	upload.indiacode.nic.in	web.archive.org

User:MPGuy2824: Source no. 5 is not loading. Please double-check the URL and let me know. The sources you added to the lead paragraph are all good choices! Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:57, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@Bgsu98 For ref 5 I've marked the url as dead which switches the first link in the ref to the archived version. I've also added another ref for the sentence. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:41, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

User:MPGuy2824: I recommend adding archives for all sources. Source review passed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:36, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Done, except for one url which the Internet Archive cannot access (probably geo-fenced). -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I run into that all the time, too. Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:02, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Timeline of the first Trump presidency (2017 Q1)

Nominator(s): Newbzy (talk) 08:24, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm nominating this article as it has now undergone a major overhaul by me.

I went through this article and extensively copyedited it, fixing spelling, grammar, punctuation and tone. The next biggest thing I focussed on was stopping names and job titles from being needlessly repeated, for example changing 'President Trump' to simply 'Trump' once the title was introduced (same for Mike Pence). For other people given a job title, I've made it so that their full name is introduced first, then after that their last name is only used. MOS:JOBTITLES was observed, and I've decapitalised titles where necessary.

For Wikilinking, I've ensured that the first instance of something is the only time it is linked, and any subsequent mentions of it are not. In terms of information, every dot point is sourced, with many being supported by multiple citations. There are only two days (Sunday, March 12 and Saturday, March 25) that do not have any events listed. This page is relatively stable; it hasn't been through any recent major edits before mine, though it did go through a couple of name changes earlier in the year.

I'm hoping this can pass the featured list criteria following my edits. Thank you in advance to those who choose to review this! Newbzy (talk) 08:24, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Olliefant

• Lead is way to short

 Fixed: it's been expanded.

• Everything after the lead sentence could be moved to "See also"

 Done.

• The "Economy and employment" image is missing a caption, a source, and alt text

 Comment: I ended up removing this image after I merged the 'economy and employment' section into the lead.

• Expand the "Public opinion" section

 Done.

• "[45th] [president of the United States]" and "[48th] [vice president]" are both MOS:SEAOFBLUE violations

 Fixed.

• Clarify that Trump and Pence took different oaths of office

 Done.

• Also Pence should be before Trump as the Veep is sworn in before the President

 Fixed.

• Under "Tuesday, February 14", "[Governor of New Jersey] [Chris Christie]" is a SEAOFBLUE violation, there is likely more like this on the page.

 Fixed, along with other linked 'Governor of [state] [person]' instances.

• Under "Friday, February 24", why is the NYT before the others? Also why aren't CNN and BBC italicized?

 Partly done: I've made it an alphabetical list. The BBC and CNN's names aren't italicised because the titles of the articles for them do not use italics.

• Under "Week 8" disambiguate "Democratic"

 Done.

• Did nothing happen on "Sunday, March 12"?

 Added: I also found something to add for Saturday, March 25.

• Under "Sunday, March 26", I'd link "American Israel Public Affairs Committee" instead of "(AIPAC)"

 Done.

• Missing any content on the First presidential transition of Donald Trump

 Added: the lead now has a dedicated paragraph.

That's what I found, ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 06:37, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

@Olliefant: completed. I've noted the changes I've made under each dot point (sorry to edit your post). Newbzy (talk) 04:14, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Support Olliefant (she/her) 04:22, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

The lead does not fulfill its purpose of providing an overview of the article (it's literally just one sentence, which almost certainly violates WP:THISISALIST, and then a bunch of stuff which should be at the bottom under "see also"). But then you have an actual "overview" section to start off the body, which isn't an overview, because it only covers two very specific points......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:56, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: please see the changes I've made to the lead. It now has a paragraph about Trump's 2017 transition, two paragraphs about the content of the list itself, and a final paragraph merging the 'overview' section's content into one and elaborating on the public opinion of Trump during the quarter. Newbzy (talk) 05:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

I'll also add a drive-by comment here: what are the selection criteria for the list? Given how much coverage the American presidency will always receive, we probably need something to weed out the trivial stories from each day. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:04, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

That's a good point, and it's probably a matter that would require consensus, as opposed to just me picking and choosing. I will say, though, that none of the listed events seem that trivial, especially as Trump's term and its actions were so controversial. Newbzy (talk) 09:05, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

My thoughts: an event should only be included here if (a) it is notable enough for its own article or (b) it received retroactive coverage, not just coverage at the time (or, if it's an event that wasn't public, not just when the details were made public). So for instance, the inauguration and the executive orders from January 20 would be good, but the changes to FHA premiums would not. But I wouldn't try to enforce that unless other reviewers agreed to similar criteria. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:05, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Octave

I'll conduct the source review for this behemoth of an article. Given the sheer size of the section (well over 400 references!), I'll break this review into three sections: reliability, consistency/formatting, and spotchecks. Once each section is done, we will move on to the next, before a final check. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 14:58, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

@Newbzy, just pinging in case you didn't see this. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 11:40, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Gosh, I do apologise, I wasn't monitoring this page! I'll start work on my sandbox of this article the first chance I get. Newbzy (talk) 02:35, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Reviewed Special:Permalink/1321625081

Reliability

• What makes Ballotpedia a reliable source per WP:BALLOTPEDIA?

 Fixed: I replaced Source 4 with a The New York Times citation.

• What makes ref 27 (Google Docs) a reliable source?

 Fixed: Turns out this source wasn't even accessible. I found a USA Today citation to replace it and updated the information.

• What makes Business Insider a reliable source per WP:BI?

 Fixed: I either replaced the citations with more reliable source(s), or else removed them because a successive footnote was adequate. The new citations came from The Washington Post, CNBC, The Guardian, CNN and Reuters.

• What makes ref 51 (a Forbes contributor) a reliable source per WP:FORBESCON?

 Fixed: I replaced it with a The Indian Express citation.

• What makes this article from the Times of India a reliable source per WP:TIMESOFINDIA?

 Fixed: I replaced Source 58 with a CNN citation.

• What makes Fox News a reliable source for American politics per WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS?

 Fixed: Citations removed or replaced with more reliable source(s). New cites came from ABC News, The Guardian, The New York Times, NPR, CNN, C-SPAN and Politico.

• What makes the Washington Times a reliable source for American politics per WP:WASHINGTONTIMES?

 Fixed: I replaced Source 126 with an ABC News citation and Source 312 with a CBS News citation.

• What makes the Boston Herald a reliable source for American politics?

 Fixed: I replaced Source 386 with a USA Today citation.

@UpTheOctave!: The problem cites have been corrected. Please see my annotations under each point you have raised.

Happy with above; couple extras:

• What makes WP:HUFFPOST a reliable source for American politics?
• As above, what makes Fox Business a reliable source for American politics?

 Completed: Citations replaced with sources by The Guardian and NPR.

Consistency

• Inconsistent citation style: you have a mix of CS1 and CS2 citations, which should be standardised

 Done: As I understand it, a CS2 citation uses the {{citation}} template, whereas citations using all the other templates {{cite web}}, {{cite news}} etc. are CS1s. There were two citations using {{citation}}, which I changed to use {{cite web}}.

• Inconsistent use of archive links

 Done (thank goodness).

• Politely suggest using a consistent casing for reference titles

 Question: there was this one citation whose title used all caps, I changed it to use title case as it was so distracting. Do you mean I should change the sources' titles to all use sentence case or to all use title case, though?

• Inconsistent linking of publisher/work

 In progress: this is what I'll be fixing next.

• Inconsistent use of the url access parameter. Please include for all paywalled or subscription-walled sources

 Done: did my best with this.

• Inconsistent use of ISSNs for periodicals

 Question: would there be some tool I could use to add this information? I don't even know how to manually find ISSNs.

Satisfied with above. I've identified some larger issues with formatting consistency above; will move on to individual comments on sources once these are completed. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 19:16, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

@UpTheOctave!: I'm finally back. All those archive links! I'm not quite done yet, but I'd like some additional guidance before I continue please. I've put a couple questions under the issues raised. Newbzy (talk) 19:45, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Re titling, it is technically required by the criteria that sources should consistently use either title or sentence case only. It's really no big deal, though, and I would never oppose over this issue only. ISSNs can be found at the ISSN portal <https://portal.issn.org/>. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 15:25, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Ken Carson discography

Nominator(s): Chchcheckit (talk) 12:40, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because... 1. to finish work on a Ken Carson studio albums good topic, and 2. I think I've got everything down? Not sure if I need to include his production work (honestly I don't know where information on that is rn) or would have to put that in a separate page.

Either way. Ty.// Chchcheckit (talk) 12:40, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

fuck i forgot about this uhhh ill get to this soon i think // Chchcheckit (talk) 21:27, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
  •  Done // Chchcheckit (talk) 11:55, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
• The scope for the "Peak chart positions" in all the tables should be "colgroup" since it spans multiple header cells.
  •  Done // Chchcheckit (talk) 11:55, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
• A lead image would be nice. (please  mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:03, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824 done all but lead image, which I don't have; would his signature work instead? // Chchcheckit (talk) 11:56, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

  Lead image: Never mind, don't add his signature.

  I see that you noticed (and corrected) the missing table captions.

  Support on table accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:13, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Staraction

• In 2019, he signed to Playboi Carti's record label Opium and the following year released two EPs, Boy Barbie and Teen X, the latter which spawned his first hit single "Yale". This feels a little bit runny to me. Consider instead: In 2019, he signed to Playboi Carti's record label, Opium. The following year, he released two EPs, Boy Barbie and Teen X. The latter spawned his first hit single, "Yale".
  •  Done // Chchcheckit (talk) 19:31, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
• Following the release of the Teen X: Relapsed EP earlier that year, This doesn't make sense timeline-wise for me. The previous sentence refers to him releasing two EPs in 2020, neither of which are Teen X: Relapsed. Maybe add some more clarification here? I'm assuming you mean 2021, based on what's said later, but reading it is a little confusing.
  •  Fixed // Chchcheckit (talk) 19:31, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
• I understand there are not many free images of Carson to work with. Perhaps add an image of one of the artists he worked with under "Guest appearances", such as Young Thug?

Thanks for your work! Providing a courtesy ping for @Chchcheckit. (please ping on reply) Staraction (talk | contribs) 18:41, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

A quick skim reveals some similar articles that include production work. See Nas discography for an example. I've noticed some articles split discography and production into two different articles as well; see Kanye West discography. I think the article title may need to change if you intend to split these into two pages. At the very least, I think you should track down an RS that describes some of his production work. Staraction (talk | contribs) 18:52, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

@Staraction Tried finding what I could; only three songs, so I've left a small "production credits" header and left it at that with the relevant things. // Chchcheckit (talk) 12:52, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

in other words  Done // Chchcheckit (talk) 12:52, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Staraction ping // Chchcheckit (talk) 12:04, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay. This looks good. I trust you've looked for an image. Support Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:05, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Re-pinging @Chchcheckit since it doesn't look like the original ping actually went through. Best, Staraction (talk | contribs) 19:01, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I will address this tomorrow, as I am pretty tired rn. I did tweak the lead in refeence to bullet point 1 and 2. // Chchcheckit (talk) 19:09, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Also yes I did get the ping I didn't plan to respond until I attempted to solve the production discography query // Chchcheckit (talk) 19:10, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Source review

• Refs 13, 14, and 17 seem to have website formatted wrong
• Linking is inconsistent, for example "HotNewHipHop" is linked in ref 43 but not 41
• Dates are not consistent, some use slash dates some use MDY
• I think things like refs 3 and 4 should be EFNs and the sources they cite should be individual entries under references and not just grouped under the one
• Can the Youtube sources be replaced/dropped?
• Lots of the sources have MOS:DASH errors
• Why is "Our Generation Music" a reliable source?
• Why is "uDiscover Music" a reliable source?
  • I might bring this source up at WP:ALBUMS/RS (I need to do several) // Chchcheckit (talk) 12:24, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
• Why is "Resolve Media Group" a reliable source?
  • appears to be the directors talent agencies or something: I’m only using it for that credit. // Chchcheckit (talk) 12:24, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
• Not mandated but I'd run IAbot

Thats what I found ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 10:20, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Comments from TheDoctorWho

• The article needs a short description
  •  Done // Chchcheckit (talk) 21:28, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
• Probably needs {{Use American English}} added
  •  Done // Chchcheckit (talk) 21:28, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
• Ditto for {{Use MDY dates}}
  •  Done // Chchcheckit (talk) 21:28, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
• For the sale and certifications columns in the tables in which no data is available, I suggest adding {{N/a}}
  •  Not done I’ve not seen this occur in other FA discographies, is usually left as blank space?? // Chchcheckit (talk) 12:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
• Do we have exact dates for when Lost Files and Lost Files 4 were released?
  • im going to check again, honestly the most confusing part of article // Chchcheckit (talk) 21:32, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
• Of note, many of those EPs and Mixtapes (particularly Lost Files 2-4) are listed as having been released on streaming, yet I didn't see them on Spotify, SoundCloud, or Tidal. Is there any information regarding this. Were they released and then "unreleased" for a particular reason. Did they never exist on streaming?
  • frustratingly found nothing // Chchcheckit (talk) 21:32, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
• Similarly, I'd add {{N/a}} for the non-certified singles and other charted and certified songs
  •  Not done see above // Chchcheckit (talk) 12:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

  Hey Chchcheckit, you should probably ping the reviewer if you want a reply as most reviewers do not watchlist review pages. Also, I agree with TheDoctorWho that the N/A would add clarity. User:Easternsahara 17:57, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

  I haven't pinged as I've not answered/considered everything yet. This is taking a while. // Chchcheckit (talk) 20:04, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Think that's all I have! TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:44, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Nominations for removal

Ancillary TV season block nominations

The following nominations do not require comments, but are included for bookkeeping purposes. The discussion of each TV season list takes place at the respective "season 1" nomination below.

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver season 2

The discussion for this nomination is happening here. Do not leave comments on this page User:Easternsahara 00:27, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver season 3

The discussion for this nomination is happening here. Do not leave comments on this page User:Easternsahara 00:27, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Highlander: The Series season 2

The discussion for this nomination is happening here. Do not leave comments on this page. User:Easternsahara 00:21, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Lost season 2

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television

The discussion for this nomination is happening here. Do not leave comments on this page. JHD0919 (talk) 14:28, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Lost season 3

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television

The discussion for this nomination is happening here. Do not leave comments on this page. JHD0919 (talk) 14:29, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Lost season 4

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television

The discussion for this nomination is happening here. Do not leave comments on this page. JHD0919 (talk) 14:29, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Veronica Mars season 2

The discussion for this nomination is happening here. Do not leave comments on this page. User:Easternsahara 01:50, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Veronica Mars season 3

The discussion for this nomination is happening here. Do not leave comments on this page. User:Easternsahara 01:50, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Quantico season 2

The discussion for this nomination is happening here. Do not leave comments on this page. User:Easternsahara 01:46, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver season 1

Notified: MyCatIsAChonk, WikiProject Television

Recently these featured lists on seasons have been delisted, see the recent FLRC log. This was because of a consensus at the FLC talk page. This was also brought to MOS:TV's talk page (I am not able to find a link to that). Both these discussions stated that season lists should not be lists if they are properly developed. If they are not properly developed, then they can not be featured. After this is delisted, all season articles will have been delisted from FL status. User:Easternsahara 00:27, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist per consensus. JHD0919 (talk) 00:36, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist per consensus, but well-written and could go to GAN. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:00, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  Related FLRCs: season 2, season 3. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:01, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist. Seasons are not lists. Gonnym (talk) 09:01, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Highlander: The Series season 1

Notified: WikiProject Television

Consensus that season articles can not be FLs. User:Easternsahara 00:21, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist per consensus. JHD0919 (talk) 00:36, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist per consensus; could also use better reception sections in particular. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:59, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  Related FLRC: season 2. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:02, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist. Seasons are not lists. Gonnym (talk) 09:01, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Veronica Mars season 1

Notified: WikiProject Television

Consensus that season articles can not be FLs. User:Easternsahara 01:50, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist per consensus. JHD0919 (talk) 22:45, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist per consensus; could also use some improvements (e.g., better production information). RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:57, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  Related FLRCs: season 2, season 3. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:03, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist. Seasons are not lists. Gonnym (talk) 09:01, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Quantico season 1

Notified: WikiProject Television

Consensus that season lists can't be FLs. User:Easternsahara 01:45, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist per consensus. JHD0919 (talk) 22:44, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist per consensus, but well-written and could go to GAN. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:56, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

  Related FLRC: season 2. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:03, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist. Seasons are not lists. Gonnym (talk) 09:02, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Glee season 1

Notified: User talk:CycloneGU, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television

Consensus has been established that TV season articles are not lists, and thus should go through GAN/FAC instead (see the recent FLRC log.) JHD0919 (talk) 12:10, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist consensus User:Easternsahara 16:49, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist per consensus, but reasonably well-written and could probably go to GAN. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:46, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist. Seasons aren't lists. Gonnym (talk) 15:49, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist per project consensus. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:41, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Prison Break season 2

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television

Consensus has been established that TV season articles are not lists, and thus should go through GAN/FAC instead (see the recent FLRC log). JHD0919 (talk) 12:01, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist consensus User:Easternsahara 16:49, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist per consensus, but reasonably well-written and could probably go to GAN. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:47, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist. Seasons aren't lists. Gonnym (talk) 15:49, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist per project consensus. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:42, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Lost season 1

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television

Season articles are not lists. You know the drill by now. Also covers seasons 2-4. JHD0919 (talk) 14:27, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist, both because season articles should go through GAN/FAC and because the articles have quality issues (the lack of production sections is a major issue – I know for a fact there is plenty of coverage about Lost's production). Links to other FLRCs: season 2, season 3, season 4. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:47, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist consensus User:Easternsahara 16:48, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist. Seasons aren't lists. Gonnym (talk) 15:50, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delist per project consensus. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:42, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Moons of Saturn

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy/Solar System task force

Per the determination at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Moons of Neptune/archive1 that these articles about moons do not qualify as lists. It is a decent article, but should go through GA or FA instead. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:55, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

I think a larger discussion with more visibility to Wikiproject Astronomy, perhaps a request for consensus may be warranted. However, I have consulted people on the discord, and they don't seem to regard these types of articles as lists, which is understandable. In terms of content, there is only so much that a page can include without becoming an article. So, I would delist as the list isn't the main focus of this page. Also, I don't think it would be warranted to split the actual list of moons out, per WP:NOPAGE. User:Easternsahara_{review this} 01:21, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Moons of Uranus

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy/Solar System task force

Per the determination at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Moons of Neptune/archive1 that these articles about moons do not qualify as lists. It is a decent article, but should go through GA or FA instead. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:57, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Delist per my my comment User:Easternsahara_{review this} 01:23, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

List of World Heritage Sites in Spain

Notified: User talk:Tone, User talk:Easternsahara, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World Heritage Sites

The article is currently in a very disorganized state, with serious mismatches between the table headers and their corresponding content. In the first half of the list, the "Year listed" and "UNESCO data" columns appear to have been swapped, while in the latter part, the "Year listed" column instead displays locations. This seems to be an error caused by an incomplete update to the table format.

In the Tentative list section, only the names of the sites are provided. While that might have been acceptable when the list was promoted in 2010, current standards—following the examples of newer FLs such as List of World Heritage Sites in Italy—require this section to be presented in a proper table with additional details and descriptions.

Therefore, I believe the article no longer meets the criteria for a FL due to its insufficient content and structural issues, and its delisting should be considered. Nebulatria (talk) 20:59, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

I agree, I'll see if I can get some time to work on this list the following weekend. User:Easternsahara_{review and this} 23:18, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Delist I probably will not have enough time to work on this until February, if even then. Some of the main list's sites need expansions in their descriptions, some need trimming and the entire tentative list needs to be restructured, with 35 new paragraphs added and a table as standard with other lists. Other people are of course welcome to work on the list. While I would wait until I could work on it usually, this is a high traffic list (comparatively to other WHS lists) and we should not mislead the readers into thinking that this is a good list on Wikipedia. User:Easternsahara 07:44, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I started working on this list a while ago to bring it up with the recent FL standards, since it was promoted before I started working on these lists systematically (as well as Madagascar, Cuba, Peru, and maybe some other). It definitely need work, which will be done eventually, it is just a question whether it is better to delist and renominate when fixed or wait until it is fixed. I may assist but cannot commit to fix it fully. --Tone 13:38, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

List of Iowa tornadoes

Notified: EF5, Easternsahara, ActuallyElite, WikiProject Weather

I've nominated this list because I don't believe it was properly scrutinized during the review process and simply is not up to FL levels as of right now. See Talk:List of Iowa tornadoes for more specifics, but what's on the table as I type this are a large table cited to a user-generated source (or one that can't be proved not to be UGC, anyway), a significant lack of comprehension listing of data that does exist in reliable sources and can be put together in an afternoon, arbitrary inclusion candidates, and general weird formatting throughout, especially in image placement and citations in the lede, the sort I wouldn't expect from featured content. Departure– (talk) 23:31, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

To clarify a few points:

• By "arbitrary", I mean the line in the sand being "intense tornadoes" being the only ones included and all others being completely discarded. No reason for this is given in the article itself.
  • Typically, lists that include large amounts of tornadoes draw the line at "intense tornadoes" (F3/equivalent), such as Tornadoes in Oklahoma, but again, no reason given. The only actual line I could think of a justification for would be "significant tornadoes" (F2/equivalent), as those are what expert of tornado record-keeping Thomas P. Grazulis uses in his Significant tornadoes line of books.
  • In addition, this list is missing numerous tornadoes within the "intense" range.
• Details about my UGC concern are further detailed at Talk:List of Iowa tornadoes#Tornado Paths source, but the short version is that a source cited in a table is listed as published by ArcGIS with no credits. ArcGIS is a software at the end of the day, and while it likely was produced by a reliable source (NWS or NOAA), there's no evidence beyond anecdotal comments about the scale of the source.
  • In addition, the source is almost certainly a tertiary source to be avoided in favor of a more focused source.
• There is some weird formatting right outside the lede. The lede itself also doesn't follow MOS:LEDE, with information in the opening not present in the body (though, with a citation).
• Sourcing in general has been brought up on the talk page as being far from featured-level. One was revealed to likely be a blog.
• More details than I can provide quickly here can be found on the article's talk page at the anchor Talk:List of Iowa tornadoes#What in the heck?. Departure– (talk) 23:45, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

One more note: List of Iowa tornadoes is currently scheduled to appear as Today's featured list starting October 6. Departure– (talk) 23:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Delist per my talk page comments. As much as I hate to delist an article as recent as this, it simply isn’t up to par. ^EF⁵ 01:56, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Update - I have been adding tornadoes over the past week from the Thomas P. Grazulis source, I am still working on completing the list. I changed the intense tornadoes meaning and put it as F3+ rated tornadoes. I removed both non reliable sources that were mentioned and replaced them with reliable ones. I do still have some work to do with adding tornadoes in the tables, but it is in the right direction. ActuallyElite (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Wait ActuallyElite is actively working to address these problems so I think we should give them a chance to work on it. I admit I was somewhat careless with the source review but it had improved much since this nomination was started. Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 06:16, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98 (10/10/25)

I don't care much for some of the comments I've read surrounding this list. "How in God's name...?" Save it. I was one of the reviewers on this FLC and spent a lot of time assisting User:ActuallyElite with the style and prose, because the original text was pretty rough. I believe the quality was greatly improved. I did not do a source check. Anyone is welcome to challenge the accuracy or appropriateness of sources. Maybe dialing back the histrionics and offering reasonable suggestions for improving the article would be a positive step? Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:28, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

List of retired Pacific typhoon names

Notified: Jason Rees, WikiProject Weather

I am nominating this for featured list removal because there's several typhoons that are left unsourced, especially the 2020s typhoons. According to Wikipedia:Featured list criteria, it seems like it fails at Number 3, part b; "Statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations." Unless the issue gets fixed, these unsourced claims are seriously hurting the FA status of this article. Hoguert (talk) 00:19, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

@Hoguert: Quick note, you tagged Jason Rees and WikiProject Weather as having been notified, but I don't see that you actually did notify them; please do to increase the chance that this list gets fixed. --PresN 12:02, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I am aware of this FLC having seen it on my watchlist and will see what I can do in the coming days to bring it up to scratch.Jason Rees (talk) 16:37, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Update: I have done a lot of weeding on the List of retired Philippine typhoon names and this list today and am pleased to report that the death/damage totals from the 2020s are all sourced/referenced, while all retired names and intensity information is sourced. On the overall list in particular, the damage totals will need further work to incorporate death/damage totals from outside of the Philippines, but that's a job for another night.Jason Rees (talk) 02:14, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

I will withdraw from this after the issues are addressed, and so far, you're doing a good job fixing the problems. Hoguert (talk) 00:15, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Update - Over the last week or so, I have done more and more weeding on the Philippine list and now have all the Philippine death/damage totals from Reming (Durian) in 2006 sourced back to the NCDC. Some of these death/damage totals have already been incorporated into the overall article, while I plan on getting them into the main overall article over the next few days.Jason Rees (talk) 10:26, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

"The name Amuyao was meant to replace Malakas, but because PAGASA selected the name to replace Aghon, which was stricken off the naming list of 2024 as a local name, the name was then replaced by Amuyag." Still unsourced. Roy, Mireille, Rananim, Xangsane, Durian are unsourced. There are typhoons in the 1990s, 2000s, and Linfa in 2020 that don't have damage/death toll estimates Hoguert (talk) 11:00, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

@Hoguert: Patience is a virtue since as a part of the FLC, I am trying to ensure that all death/damage totals presented are sourced, accurate and do not include economic losses.Jason Rees (talk) 11:29, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Update: I currently feel like I have brought the majority of the death/damage totals to a point where they are sourced, verifiable and more or less correct. Over the next few days, I will be going over the naming history to ensure it is correct.Jason Rees (talk) 12:13, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I was about to pull back from my FLC until I realize there's some duplication source issues with the article, specific sources 4, 78 and 59, 60 GrenadinesDes (talk) 02:23, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

@GrenadinesDes: I have fixed the duplication issue with 69 and 60, 4 and 78 were already fixed, could you withdraw this now? User:Easternsahara_{review this} 01:09, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

@Easternsahara @Jason Rees There's still some areas of unsourced, including "At the 46th session of the Typhoon Committee, it was noted the name Vicente appears on both the tropical cyclone name lists for the Western North Pacific and Eastern North Pacific. In response to this duplication the name Lan was chosen as replacement for Vicente on the Western North Pacific name list to avoid potential confusion." paragraph and Roy's section in pre 2000s. Once those are addressed ill withdraw GrenadinesDes (talk) 05:16, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Over the last few weeks, when time has allowed, I have been doing some research through various newspaper archives to try and tell the story of typhoon naming over the WPAC better. As a result, it has emerged that the names Hazen and Pamela were also retired, but it seems to have been lost to history.Jason Rees (talk) 13:41, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

If you can't cite a source, it is better to remove it. Assuming that the names have been retired and replaced without a source backing that up is WP:OR. See the essay on NOTTRUTH User:Easternsahara 22:15, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

@Easternsahara: Yeah... I didn't assume anything about Hazen and Pamela being retired and have cited a source in the article but for clarity's sake this is the newspaper article from the Pacific Daily News that shows me that the names Hazen and Pamela were retired.Jason Rees (talk) 23:27, 20 December 2025 (UTC)