Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

Nominating featured lists in Wikipedia

This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on 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.

Purge the cache to refresh this page – Table of contents – Closing instructions

Shortcut

Featured content:

Featured list tools:

Nominations urgently needing reviews

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:

Nominations

List of British monarchs

Nominator(s): JacobTheRox(talk | contributions) 21:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This ran into some issues last time at FLC, mainly due to edit warring on the page that then ceased. However, we ran out of time and the nomination kind of fizzled into nothing. I don't think there's much to do and I'm hoping this can run fairly smoothly; we just need the momentum to get comments. This would also complete a FT of British monarchs so it would be quite the achievement! Many thanks in advance, JacobTheRox(talk | contributions) 21:03, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Swiss Figure Skating Championships

Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:19, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I finished this list over the summer at roughly the same time I finished the Norway list that was just promoted. I enjoyed researching this list, because I speak both German and French, and while most of the sources I found were in German, many were in French. None of the sources are behind a paywall, so anyone doing a source review should be able to access them. I have personally verified all of the results, the source citations should be formatted properly, as should the tables. Please let me know if you have any feedback or suggestions, and thank you so much! Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:19, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: e-newspaperarchives.ch will not allow for archiving.

Comments

  • Blimey, is that fourth photo safe for work LOL
  • He's a race car!
  • "Swiss Championships have been cancelled only one time since 1931" => "Swiss Championships have been cancelled only once since 1931"
  •  Done

@ChrisTheDude:: Thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:48, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Billboard Hot 100 number ones of 1959

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:08, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

After all those lists of number ones on Billboard's genre charts, I thought I would do some work on the big daddy of US charts, the Hot 100, starting with its first full year of existence. Feedback as ever will be gratefully received and swiftly acted upon! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:08, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (1/16/26)

Lead
  • "Not until 2019 would another Christmas song top the Hot 100,[3] albeit for much of the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s holiday-themed songs were excluded from the chart." --> I would use "although" instead of "albeit".
  • "The Fleetwoods and Frankie Avalon were the only acts to have two number ones in 1959, but neither act topped the Hot 100 again." since it is not a hypothetical
  • "The latter song won the awards for Best Country & Western Recording and Song of the Year at the same Grammy Awards ceremony (the latter presented to its writer, Jimmy Driftwood)" --> recommend somehow slightly rephrasing this as you have two uses of "latter", the latter of which should be avoided. ;)
  • "but it would similarly prove to be the only pop number one for Horton, who died in a car accident in 1960." --> recommend also rephrasing the beginning of this to remove the "would", since it is not a hypothetical. Perhaps something like, "it was Horton's only pop number one, because he died..."
Chart history
Number-one artists

@ChrisTheDude: Let me know when you've had a chance to examine my comments. Also, if you have a free minute, my FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2025 U.S. Figure Skating Championships/archive2) has passed the one month mark. I hate the FAC process compared to FLC. Any assistance you might be able to provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you so much! Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:27, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: - thanks for your review. See responses above. I'll endeavour to take a look at your FAC over the weekend -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:12, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
User:ChrisTheDude: Has the left column on these tables always been shaded in with that particular color? I don't remember that on previous lists you've submitted. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:15, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, all issues have been resolved and the tables appear to now to formatted correctly. Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:17, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Accessiblity review

  • The row-scope cells need to start with a "!". Also if they span multiple rows then the scope needs to be rowgroup. So | scope="row" bgcolor=#EDEAE0 align=center rowspan=2|8 becomes ! scope="rowgroup" style="background:#EDEAE0; text-align:center;" rowspan=2|8
  • The text at the beginning of the chart history - maybe you could incorporate that as a footnote
  • For the "Number-one artists" table, I would suggest eliminating the position column and making it look like the tables in 76th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards#Nominations and wins by network. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:29, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@MPGuy2824: - done. I am still hopeless with scopes -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:34, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Chris, since this is the first of a (long) series, it will be used as a template for the rest; so I consider it an apt time to nitpick. The "re" cells are a bit bothersome to me: Sorting on the column doesn't work like I expect and they may not always be unique within their column.
  • I think you should switch the header cell of every row to the date column like in the Adult Contemporary FLs.
  • For the "re" cells in the "No." column, I'd suggest that you change the sorting value to 20.5 (in this case) so that all weeks when that song placed at #1 will sort together.
  • Also, you can replace the "re" with "(20)" like I've seen in a few head of government lists (e.g. Austria). I don't have strong feelings about this suggestion though, so I'll leave it up to you. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:55, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@MPGuy2824: - done (hopefully correctly ) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:40, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, all good. -MPGuy2824 (talk)

2023 Men's T20 World Cup Africa regional final

Nominator(s): Vestrian24Bio 09:37, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Now that my other nom has two support votes; here's my next nom returning to the 2024 Men's T20 World Cup topic; there's more where this comes from... Vestrian24Bio 09:37, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of tallest buildings in Cedar Rapids

Nominator(s): Wobbanight (talk) 01:22, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a well put together list with a decent amount of info on the subject. Wobbanight (talk) 01:22, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (1/12/26)

Lead
  • No need to wikilink U.S. or Iowa.
  • 2nd-largest-city --> second largest city
  • Wikilink Alliant Tower in its first appearance.
  • I'm not sure "high-rises" is a hyphenated word?
  • Source needed for statement about a building boom in the 1920s.
  • "The city would experience a decline..." --> "The city experienced a decline..." as it is not hypothetical.
  • "the city would experience a second building boom..." --> "the city experienced a second building boom..." Ditto.
  • This statement also needs a source.
  • This sentence – "The city would experience a decline in the number of high-rises being built from the 1930s to the 1960s; however from the 1970s to the 1980s, the city would experience a second building boom, leading to the construction of the 285 ft (87 m) tall Alliant Tower, which surpassed the Quaker Oats Plant and became the tallest building in the city and the tallest building in Iowa outside of Des Moines." – is very long with multiple clauses. Recommend breaking it up into at least two sentences.
  • No need for the header entitled Cityscape. The photo is sufficient on its own.
Tallest buildings table
  • If the statement in the Notes field is not a full sentence, then a period is not required at the end. (Most of those are not sentences.)
  • You could wikilink City Hall.
  • No need for the section entitled Tallest under construction since the list is empty.
Timeline of tallest buildings
  • Be sure to use en-dashes (–) for the timespans.
  • Remove the Notes column if there is nothing there.
  • These will need references, even if they were referenced on the table above. I recommend a column for references: {{Abbr|Ref.|References}}

User:Wobbanight: Please let me know once you've had a chance to go through my comments, and let me know if you have any questions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:24, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with delinking Iowa, the relevant policy would be MOS:OVERLINK. The page says "major examples of the following categories should generally not be linked". However, I wouldn't consider Iowa major as it's a second level subdivision and not particularly well known outside of the US. My general rule of thumb is anything not listed at Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/4/Geography#United States is not major. Olliefant (she/her) 18:26, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Olliefant

  • Link Ceder Rapid in the lead
  • In the lead, could you state when the Alliant Tower became the tallest/how long its held the record
  • "Quaker Oats Plant" and "Iowa" are linked twice in the lead
  • Infobox says "Skyline of Cedar Rapids", list the year
  • I don't think the last line in the lead should be its own paragraph. I think it fits with the second paragraph well enough
  • Per MOS:DTAB The tables are missing row and column scopes
  • I worry "year" is a little unclear in the table, could you clarify
  • Optionally, I know the information in "Timeline of tallest buildings" is sourced elsewhere, but could it be cited here anyway?
  • Can you incorporate the see also links into the lead?
That's what I found, ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 18:38, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility

Other notes
  • Empty section should be removed or put into a hidden comment, mention there are no buildings under construction that are tall in the lead.
  • Is a separate section for the city skyline necessary? You can just add the TOC magic word before the image and it'll look good/have no whitespace.
  • The lead is very short. Looking at other featured lists of tallest buildings, they have more than two long paragraphs which detail the skyline and the early, late, and present histories of the tallest buildings.
  • Sources should have more too it, not just the link, name, and website. It needs an access date and you should add it to the IA bot archive queue for archive dates (or add them yourselves).

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 07:11, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Aurel

  • I would add "none" as the short description, per WP:SDNONE.
  • A general question: I'm not sure I understand the sourcing for the lead section. For example, if I wanted to verify that there was a decline in high-rise construction from the 1930s to the 1960s, where would I go? This is asked by criterion 3b.
  • I'd link Cedar Rapids in the first sentence.
  • Cedar Rapids is a city in the U.S. – Per MOS:OL, I would remove the link to U.S., as it's a major country.
  • The city has a population of 137,927 people – I think "people" is probably redundant here.
  • of as of January 2026, – Typo
  • making it the 2nd-largest city in Iowa. – I think the non-numeric version, "second-largest", is preferable here.
  • tallest building in Cedar Rapids is the Alliant Tower, – Link
  • As of January 2026, the tallest building in Cedar Rapids is the Alliant Tower, which stands 285 ft (87 m) tall. – I would try to vary up the wording from the previous sentence: "which is 285 ft", perhaps?
  • The history of high-rises in Cedar Rapids began in the late 1920s, when a building boom occurred, leading to the construction of the 166 ft (51 m) tall US Bank Building in 1926, which became the tallest building in the city. – I think the phrasing can be condensed and reworked a bit here. We have three phrases which situate us temporally (in the late 1920s, when a building boom occurred, in 1926), and I think "The history of high-rises in Cedar Rapids began" would work better as something like "The first high-rise in Cedar Rapids".
  • US Bank Building – We used "U.S." above, and we seem to use "US" from here onwards. I would make this consistent.
  • The US Bank Building was surpassed – I think we can use "it" here, to avoid repeating the name from the previous sentence.
  • the 190 ft (58 m) tall Quaker Oats Plant – This is a compound adjective, so dashes should be used. I think "190-ft (58-m)-tall" is correct here, though this is fairly hyphen-heavy, so you could consider using a different phrasing in this passage.
  • The city would experience – Assuming it did in fact experience this decline, I would use "experienced".
  • in the number of high-rises being built – "being built" can be "built". Alternatively, I think "the number of high-rises being built" can be cut down to "high-rise construction".
  • however from the 1970s to the 1980s, – I would tend to avoid "however" unless it's drawing out a genuine contradiction or contrast. In this case, I don't think it's needed.
  • This sentence is quite long, and I'm not the semicolon is needed. I would split it in two.
  • from the 1970s to the 1980s, – Are you sure we don't mean "during"? If we don't, then it isn't clear when this boom ended.
  • the city would experience – As above: "experienced".
  • a second building boom, leading to the construction of the – I'm not entirely sure a building boom can "lead" to the construction of a building. Would "which included" work?
  • Similar comment to above about the lack of hyphenation in "285 ft (87 m) tall" when used as a compound adjective. That said, I don't think we should be mentioning the height here or its status as the tallest building in the city, because we included these two facts earlier in the lead.
  • As we mention the date of the Alliant Tower's construction in the infobox, I would include it in the body.
  • "Alliant Tower", "Quaker Oats Plant", and "Iowa" are linked earlier the lead.
  • I appreciate that this sentence will change a bit with the removal of the information about the tower's height, but "became" can be "was".
  • tallest building in Iowa outside of Des Moines. – "of" isn't needed here.
  • 180 ft (55 m) tall – Similar comment about hyphenation.
  • CRST Center – Link CRST. This applies in several places below as well.
  • CRST Center which was built in 2016. – There should be a comma after "Center". Moreover, I think "which was" can probably be omitted.
  • In general, one-sentence paragraphs are discouraged (see MOS:PARA), so I would try to append this to the previous paragraph. Alternatively, you could add further information here, turning this into a more appropriately sized paragraph.
  • Is there any reason for the discrepancy between the title in the infobox and the page's name? The former is "Tall buildings in Cedar Rapids" (rather than "Tallest ...").
  • Each marker is given a number based on the buildings ranking in the list. – This should be "building's". Better still: I'd just write "The buildings are numbered by height".
  • The color of each marker represents the decade that the building was completed in. – I'd omit "that" and "in".
  • Buildings in Cedar Rapids that stand over 130 ft (40 m). (caption) – No full stop, per MOS:CAPFRAG.
  • Any reason to refer to it as "The Roosevelt" rather than "Hotel Roosevelt"? The page is titled Hotel Roosevelt (Cedar Rapids, Iowa).
  • Minor, but to me the section headings "Map of tallest buildings", "Tallest buildings", and "Timeline of tallest buildings" contain unneeded repetition. Perhaps go for just "Map", "List", and "Timeline"?
  • "Cedar Rapids" was linked in the previous section.
  • This list ranks buildings in Cedar Rapids that stand at least 130 ft (40 m) tall. – We should specify what it is ranking them by. Adding "by height" to the end would work.
  • In the table, I would probably remove full stops in cases where there is only a sentence fragment in the "Notes" column.
  • I would omit the link to Cedar Rapids in the row for the Alliant Tower, as it's already been linked several times above.
  • "Count" shouldn't be capitalised in "Floor count". Better still: I'd just write "Floors".
  • Would Gristmill be an appropriate link when we mention "cereal mill"?
  • Served as City Hall until a major flood in 2008. – I think "City Hall" should be preceded by "the".
  • Individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1991. – I think "individually" can be omitted here.
  • I'm not sure I understand why the "Tallest under construction" section exists, if there are no buildings under construction. If you want, you can move the current sentence there to the lead. Also, it needs a full stop.
  • Similarly, I'm not entirely sure we need a separate "Timeline of tallest buildings" section. We've already stated all of the information found here (the years each was the tallest, the height and number of floors of each) in the previous section. If you do keep this section, the dashes should be endashes ("–") rather than hyphens.

– Michael Aurel (talk) 10:41, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

This nomination reminded me of Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of tallest buildings in Phoenix/archive1, where it has been pointed out that SkyscraperPage is "not an entirely reliable source". I suggest replacing that with The Skyscraper Center or other reliable sources where possible. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 14:43, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Link Cedar Rapids in the lead
  • "of as of January 2026" - stray word in there
  • "the 2nd-largest city in Iowa" => "the second-largest city in Iowa"
  • "The city would experience a decline" => "The city experienced a decline"
  • "the city would experience a second building boom" => "the city experienced a second building boom"
  • Link Alliant Tower on the first use, not the second
  • Don't link Quaker Oats Plant twice in the lead
  • "based on the buildings ranking in the list" => "based on the building's ranking in the list"
  • "the decade that the building was completed in" => "the decade in which the building was completed"
  • "Tallest building in Cedar Rapids since 1972." - not a sentence so should not have a full stop
  • The same goes for almost all the other notes
  • Suggest you put the refs in their own column, as some rows look really weird with a ref or two in the middle of a massive cell
  • "The Roosevelt" should sort under R, not T
  • Tallest under construction section is pointless if there are none
  • Notes column in Timeline of tallest buildings is pointless as it has no content -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:30, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Some outdated phrasing throughout. "The map below shows" is tautological. As is "This list ranks buildings". A better start would be "There are x buildings taller than x. The tallest is x rising x m". Something like that.
  • "Spires and other architectural details are included in the height of a building; however, antennas are excluded." Can be included in a footnote for the column height, rather than in the heading text which should simply summarize the table.
  • Remove under construction section as there is nothing under construction.
  • Timeline subheading should have some text describing what is seen in the table.
  • All images missing alt-text which is a requirement for accessibility and featured list.
  • Link Cedar Rapids in lead. More importantly much of the lead contains information that's not in the article, and thus is uncited. Last sentence in lead doesn't need "which" and we should avoid single sentence paragraphs.
  • Overall a good start but quite a lot of work to get it up to featured list standards.

Oppose for now, but open to review. Mattximus (talk) 01:49, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

German Figure Skating Championships

Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:03, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Another list of national figure skating champions for your consideration. I am especially proud of this one because I am a German teacher, so I enjoyed going through the German sources. Also, due to Germany's, uh, complex history, there is more background information than some of my other skating articles. I have personally verified all of the results, the sources should be properly formatted, the tables should be properly formatted, and there are plenty of images. I look forward to any constructive comments or suggestions, and thank you in advance. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:03, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "the Federal Republic of Germany (German: Bundesrepublik Deutschland), also known as West Germany; and the German Democratic Republic (German: Deutsche Demokratische Republik), also known as East Germany" - semi-colon should be a comma  Done
  • "due to lockdown restrictions in place in Hamburg. The competition was held under strict COVID-19 safety protocols, with the skaters isolated from the public during competition" - link COVID and maybe lockdown if there's a specific enough link  Done
  • How come there's a ref only against the "gold" column? There is a secondary source which identifies only the gold medalists.
  • Don't think those place names in the notes should be in bold  Done
  • The records section looks a little odd (IMO) with a very wide gallery and the table crammed into a tiny space at the right. Could you re-organise the gallery or maybe have the images arranged vertically to the right of the table.....? Someone uploaded a new picture of Werner Rittberger since I did this section, so since there are now six good pictures, I stacked them down the right.
  • That's all I got - great work as ever! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:31, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:ChrisTheDude: Let me know if you need anything else! Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:10, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:ChrisTheDude: Thank you so much! I also have Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Norwegian Figure Skating Championships/archive1 if you have a free minute. 😃 Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:08, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Olliefant

  • Can the EFNs include citations?  Done
  • Why is ref 7 in the table headings and not the column? Source no. 7 is a listing of only the gold medalists, so it only confirms what is in that column.
Not seeing any major problems Olliefant (she/her) 18:45, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Olliefant: Thank you for your feedback! I have added citations to the notes. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:07, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Olliefant (she/her) 01:06, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vestrian24Bio

  •  Done
  • That is built into the language template.
    • West Germany linked twice in the 3rd paragraph of the History section.
  •  Done
    • German linked thrice in the 3rd paragraph of the History section.
  • Same as above; part of the template.
  • What is the order for Senior medalists images; it currently goes 6-6-5-7 time winners; it should be either in ascending or descending order.
  • The order is men-women-pairs-dance.
  • Ahead of the table add a note or hatnote explaining that those without flags are German.
  • I think that is unnecessary as it goes without saying that most competitors in the German Championships are German. This is also consistent with other similar articles.
  • Details about the junior women's singles being held in two groups until 2007, should be included in the History section.
  • That is not important enough for the History section, but I did add a short blurb above the table.
  • Could use the {{Ref.}} template for headers instead of {{Abbr|Ref.|References}}.
  • 17 refs need archive urls.

I will do an image review as well after this. Vestrian24Bio 04:15, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vestrian24Bio: I believe I have addressed all of your suggestions and comments. I also have Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Norwegian Figure Skating Championships/archive1 if you have a free minute and are so inclined. Thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 05:23, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
All good. Vestrian24Bio 06:54, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Image review

All images are tagged with proper copyright templates.. just one image is missing alt text. Vestrian24Bio 06:54, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vestrian24Bio: Alt-text added. Thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:11, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

All good then, Support.
If you have time take a look at my FLC nom as well. Vestrian24Bio 12:17, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oof, that's been up since November? Yeah, I'll check that out today for you. 😃 Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:20, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of international kart racing champions

Nominator(s): MB2437 03:14, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list as it documents over 700 champions in international kart racing since 2007. The lead section clearly outlines the scope and its limitations, with clear and concise explanations of each concept covered. MB2437 03:14, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

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.
  • Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. ! Year becomes !scope=col | Year. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.
  • Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | 1987 becomes !scope=row | 1987 (on its own line). If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
  • Color/bolding should not be used as the sole visual means of conveying information; use a symbol in addition.
  • Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.

(please Reply to icon mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:07, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824, I did not know about {{sronly}}, thank you for pointing this out. All headers and scopes added. The only instances of bold text that do not have symbols are in § By driver, to avoid clashes with other symbols in use. Can remove this entirely if necessary. MB2437 11:49, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the first key table there is a section about tyres that should be removed since none of those are used in the rest of the page.
  • By my point about color, I also meant tables like "Senior direct-drive classes" and others which are no-nos from the accessibility lens (See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Data tables tutorial#Color). This includes both the main (red-blue spectrum) as well as the gold-bronze spectrum.
    • The first multi-column cell "CIK-FIA senior direct-drive class timeline in kart racing" also needs to be converted to the caption of the table.
  • You can eliminate the right-side year column if a table only has a few columns. Even where you are keeping this column, the cells should not be the header cells of that row. (Remove the "!" and the scope from those cells)
  • You should seriously give thought to splitting this list. Maybe by the four classes (senior, junior, gearbox and other). Choose whichever class is the highest first and nominate that for FL. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:02, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Maldivian presidential candidates

Nominator(s): UnilandofmaTalk 17:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is another list of mine that I nomianted to be considered for FL status. This list details every person who had submiited their candidacy as the President of the Maldives from the First Republic to the Second Republic. There are some elections which I couldn't find the number of people voted on and they're marked as "Unknown". UnilandofmaTalk 17:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

TheNuggeteer

Will do a spotcheck. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 11:10, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed! UnilandofmaTalk 12:26, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer:Fixed all! Source 12 does show the candidates and their parties in the "Results" section. Political parties were introduced to the Maldives in 2005 so before that all candidates were Independent, so Didi is also an independent. UnilandofmaTalk 09:18, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Presidential elections in the Maldives have taken place in both the First and Second Republic." Kindly source this.
  • "The only contender" the source does not state this.
  • "second-most competitively contested" you could change this to "second-most contested"

I am really sorry I did not edit my review. I will continue reviewing:

  • "as of January 2026" the source is from 2013, I believe this is original research.
  • Source 12 does not show the candidates and their parties.
  • Source 13 does not mention the PPM.
  • "disappearing ink being used, this" not related to sources, but use a semicolon.
  • "Meanwhile the" also not related to sources but use a comma after meanwhile.
  • Source 17 does not mention Muizzu's political party.
  • Source 3 does not mention Didi's party.
  • Source 27 says Mohamed Waheed Hassan was independent.
  • Both sources do not cite the running mates for the two candidates in 2018.
  • Candidates 5, 6, 7, and 8's running mates in the 2023 elections are not sourced by any of the citations.

@Unilandofma: I have finished the source review. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 13:50, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheNuggeteer: I've fixed all of the references. UnilandofmaTalk 15:37, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have double checked everything you fixed and all issues are resolved. I will support this nomination. Good job! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:48, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

Mb2437

  • There has been many people who ran in the presidential elections in the Maldives since the first election in 1952. I would specify how many there have been. MB2437 13:46, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of the 1996 Pacific hurricane season

Nominator(s): FrizzBTalk 15:43, 9 January 2026 (UTC) Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 19:53, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because this list includes all formations of tropical cyclones as well as the strengthening, weakening, landfalls, extratropical transitions, and dissipations during the 1996 Pacific hurricane season FrizzBTalk 15:43, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm co-signing this, having been invited to do so by the nominator and having contributed a substantial amount to the timeline being nominated. The 1996 season was marked by a contradiction: activity was near record-low, but of the systems that did form, an unusually large portion affected land. Five of the season's nine nameable storms made landfall in Mexico, one of which, Hurricane Alma, killed 20 people. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 19:53, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this was a failure of due diligence on both our parts. File:1996 Pacific hurricane season summary.jpg is missing the entire Central Pacific, and with it the tracks of both One-C and Seventeen-W. I am going to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones for assistance in rectifying this. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 22:17, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

TheNuggeteer

I will perform a spotcheck tomorrow. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 13:53, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Source 1, when I checked, does not say the season ends in November 30 for Central Pacific.
  • "major hurricanes was half of the" -> "major hurricanes were half the average"
  • Tropical Depression Twelve-E does not seem to be in the source.
  • "which was responsible for 20 deaths" please cite this, as this is not mentioned in the timeline.
  • "which left behind damage amounting to around $800,000 (1996 USD)" same with this.
  • "Hurricane Douglas was the strongest storm of the season," same with this.
  • "Prior to 2015, two time zones were utilized in the Eastern Pacific basin: Pacific east of 140°W, and Hawaii−Aleutian from 140°W to the International Date Line" source says Hawaii is used for Central Pacific, not East. And also, the source does not mention the latitudes, it would be better to say Central or Eastern.
  • I could not access source 7 without the archive. Change it to a dead link.
  • depression, operationally designated" you could cut "operationally"
  • Source 8 says 800 miles, not 850.
  • "strengthens into an unnamed tropical storm" it is best to omit "unnamed"; if it were named, you would have just put the name already.
  • The source says Boris did not originate from a low-pressure area, but a tropical wave.
  • "making it the first major hurricane of the season" this is not mentioned in the source.
  • "making it the second and final major hurricane of the season" this is also not mentioned.
  • Genevieve did not form from an area of unsettled weather, but instead from a "tropical disturbance".

@GiftedIceCream and Dylan620: I have finished the review. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 00:52, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Grade II* listed buildings in Greater Manchester

Nominator(s): Mmberney

I am nominating this for a featured list because it documents all 241 Grade II* listed buildings in Greater Manchester using up‑to‑date information from Historic England and other reliable sources. The lead section clearly explains the significance of the Grade II* designation and situates the list within the wider context of heritage protection in England and the history of the metropolitan county. The tables for each borough are organised, consistently formatted, and accessible, with article links for every entry, specific locations, important dates, and coordinates. The list is fully referenced, stable, and benefits from high‑quality images for practically all entries (some have no images available on Commons or Geograph yet, however). It is felt it reflects thorough research and careful editorial attention.

Comments

  • "The Grade II* buildings in each borough are listed separately." - don't think that's needed, as it's self-evident from the TOC
  • "Bury has the fewest, with only 10." => "Bury has the fewest, with 10."
  • "It is uncertain which Grade II* listed structure in Greater Manchester is the oldest. However, three of the 241 buildings date from the 13th century." => "Three of the 241 buildings date from the 13th century, although it is uncertain which is the oldest".
  • Never seen that "upload photo" icon before, and (IMO) it looks a bit odd
  • Sorting on "completed" column doesn't work correctly. In the first table it sorts as follows: values from 16th century to 1928, then c.1700, then late 17th century, then pre-1470
  • Names starting with "The" should sort based on the next word
  • Names of architects should sort based on the surname, not the forename
  • That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:26, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi ChrisTheDude, thanks for the feedback. I've actioned the first three comments and amended the dates in the tables so they now sort chronologically. Regarding the "Upload Photo" icon, that was already present when I first started editing the list, and I can't see anything in the template that would remove it. I'm also unsure how to adjust the template so that names beginning with "The" sort by the next word, or so that architects sort by surname (what is the procedure when there are two or more architects?). I've tried adding 'data-sort-value=' and 'name_sort', but without success. Could this be an issue with the English Heritage listed building module itself? Appreciate any advice. Thanks. Mmberney (talk) 21:18, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • For the architect names, use the sortname template, so instead of just writing [[Edmund Sharpe]] write {{sortname|Edmund|Sharpe}}. This will display the same output but make it sort under S rather than E. For names starting with The, use the sort template, so write {{sort|Portico|[[The Portico Library and the Bank Public House]]}} -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      Those have now both been sorted (pardon the pun). Many thanks. Mmberney (talk) 10:46, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:59, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shwabb1

  • I believe "Greater Manchester" in the first sentence cannot be wikilinked per MOS:BOLDLINK. Move the link to the next instance of the phrase instead.
  • Each table needs a screen reader only caption for accessibility. In this case, that would be done by adding a "caption" parameter to each Template:English Heritage listed building header. I don't see this done in some other listed buildings FLs but I'm fairly certain that the captions are required.
  • Use Template:Circa instead of c. 
  • For Church of St Wilfrid (1200834), add a comma after "15th century". At the moment, the two datings don't seem separated, especially considering that "1873–1876 (rebuild)" takes up two lines (on my display at least). Also, here and in other similar cases, I feel like "rebuilt" may be a better word than "rebuild".
  • For Victoria University of Manchester including Christie Library, Whitworth Hall (1271428), fix disambiguation link at "Alfred Waterhouse".
  • For Southern Railway Viaduct and Colonnade (1386162), it's probably better to replace the ampersand in the type column with "and", unless that's the original official wording.
  • The last table of buildings by borough needs proper formatting for accessibility per MOS:DTAB (table caption and ! scope="col" / "row").
  • It would be useful if all sources were archived, though this is not a strict requirement as far as I know.
  • Template:GradeIListedbuilding should probably be removed as it is out of scope.
  • That's all. Interesting list and great job. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 12:45, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Shwabb1, thanks for the comments and helpful links — I'll keep those in mind for any future table creation. I've actioned everything except the archiving of sources, as it would be a particularly lengthy task. May I ask whether that can be automated by one of the myriad Wiki bots, or would it have to be done manually? Mmberney (talk) 17:15, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. Archiving the sources can be done with the Internet Archive Bot. Also, you can add the plainrowheaders class to the table of buildings by borough if you don't want every row header to be bold (I assume that's the case since you specifically made "Total" bold but not the other row headers). Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 17:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Unless I've done something incorrectly, it appears that IABot is unable to archive Historic England/NHLE links reliably. The pages are script‑generated, so the bot interprets them as fully functional and reports "nothing to fix" even when no archive URLs exist. This seems to be a known limitation and affects many UK heritage lists. Converting the citations to the newer List Entry URL format might help, but that would go against how a lot of pages (at least the ones I've seen) have been set up. Any thoughts on how best to proceed? Mmberney (talk) 18:16, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If IABot can't do the job, then you probably have to add the archive info manually, or alternatively not add it at all. As I've said, this is not as strict requirement for FL status as I understand from other reviews and nominations. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 18:46, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If you want I can archive the sources, it would not be a problem for me. And if you have free time, I'd really appreciate a review of my FLC of Geographical indications in Ukraine, which has been open for two months by now but has only received two reviews, though it's fine if you don't have time. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 19:09, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder for Comments bySupport from KJP1

Shall review/comment asap. KJP1 (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2026 (UTC) First off, congratulations on putting this together. I know the effort it takes to hunt down the sources for the last remaining redlinks for some 200+ entries, and you've done a grand job. It's a long list, and I'll need to do the comments in batches. First batch of comments/suggestions below:[reply]

Lead - Criteria 1/2
  • It's a strong lead, which articles like this often lack. I think this covers Criteria 1/2.
Comprehensive - Criterion 3
  • You've got cited entries for entry item on the list with no redlinks, giving you a complete set. The absence of notes (Annotations 3(a)) is compensated for by the completeness of the entries, enabling readers to easily access further information on each item. So, that's Criterion 3 met [but see below for a few 3(b) queries under individual entries].
Criterion 3(b) - Sourcing
A few sourcing/accuracy queries on individual entries:
  • Church of St Mary, Bolton - can we have a source for the Completed date. I can't see "pre-1470" used in the NHLE record, although the church article does give this. You might also want to follow the approach at Church of St Wilfred, Manchester, where you give the original dates and the dates of the Victorian reconstruction.
  • Amended "pre 1470" to state "15th century, 1884–85 (rebuilt)" and added a citation.
  • Links added (Hill's article didn't include the link to Woodhouse, so have edited that as well (I need to stop getting so easily distracted!)
  • 15 Firwood Fold, Bolton - this is 16th century in origin, with 19th century remodelling.
  • Amended.
  • Heaton Park Colonnade, Manchester - you need this bluelink, not the Bishop of Llandaff.
  • Amended. May have been a case of a typo coupled with the coincidence of it also having an article :)
  • Mrs Gaskell's House, Manchester - I think we need a cite for Richard Lane as probable architect, as NHLE doesn't give it. The Independent cite in the main article does.
  • Suggested citation added.
  • 103 Princess Street, Mechanics Institute, Manchester - you can bluelink John Edgar Gregan.
  • Former Queen Elizabeth Old Grammar School and schoolmaster's house Rochdale - while the house is Victorian, the school is 1586, which probably means you need to rejig its placing in the Rochdale list.
  • Amended.
  • Holdsworth School and wall, Stockport; Church of St ELizabeth, rectory and walls - I wonder if we could have a little grouping here, subject to the dates permitting. Can we group the school and its wall next to each other (same dates); and the church, its rectory, and the rectory wall (same dates), and why is the church wall nearly a decade later? But it could still follow the others.
  • Moved the school's wall entry so that it follows the school and added "sort_date =" to all the 1874 entries. As for the rectory and its walls, the NHLE entry for the rectory gives the date as "1874", and the entry for the wall to the west describes it as "contemporary with the Rectory", so both can probably be treated as the same date? The entry for the wall to the west and south of the church states "Contemporary with the church", and the church's NHLE listing gives the date as "1882–3, by Alfred Waterhouse". The church's article notes that "Local mill-owner Sir William Houldsworth commissioned Alfred Waterhouse in the 1870s", so it is likely that the rectory and its associated wall were completed before the church itself?

[Batch 1 as far as Tameside]

  • Dunham Massey sawmill - two things here. The 1616 date should probably be caveated, as the NHLE record does. "Possibly 1616, certainly 17th century", or some such. And the bluelink to Dunham Massey isn't the strongest. The sawmill only gets one mention - I guess you added it? - and the heading was inaccurate. I've tweaked this to make it more accurate. Could you also do the link directly to the relevant section, i.e. [[Dunham Massey#Grades II* and II listed buildings|Dunham Massey sawmill]]?
  • Date amended to "1616 (possible), 17th century", and the link tweaked for the time being. A small number of entries still don't have their own articles— for example, Foxdenton Hall— so I'll no doubt get around to creating dedicated pages for those soon.
  • Church of St Martin, Trafford - If you want the architect's full name it's William Hayward Brakspear, [1]. Sorry, this has now sent me back up the list. I was looking for other instances where we've got the architect's initials but no bluelink to help readers wanting clarification. The only four I can spot are Brakspear again, two up at St Mary the Virgin; W. Haley for the entry immediately above that one, Church of St Margaret, Altrincham - which is problematic, as it could be William Hayley, [2], or his son William Henry Hayley, [3], so is probably best left; T. de Courcy Meade for the Victoria Baths, Manchester, he's Thomas, [4] (incidentally, you've a double space after the T. here); and W. T. Foxlee (another double space after the T.) for the Deansgate Goods Station, Manchester. This last one's a puzzle. Do you know where it comes from? It's not in NHLE, as far as I can see, or in the main article. Foxlee doesn't appear in the Manchester Architects database, and nor does he get a mention in Brodie's RIBA Directory of British Architects. Where he does appear is in Clare Hartwell's Manchester Pevsner City Guide. But here, he's described as "consulting engineer" and credit for the design is given to "A. Ross", architect to the Great Northern Railway. He's not in Brodie or the Manchester database either, but I'm quite sure it's this guy Alexander Ross (engineer). He's probably not appearing as his profession was engineer, rather than architect. Sorry, this all became rather a rabbit hole but I think my suggestion is - use the full name where available / credit the Deansgate Goods station to Ross and Foxlee, cited to Hartwell, 2002, p=210.
  • Full names and citation added as suggested; doublespacing fixed (didn't realise   next to a "|" would create such an issue).
  • Barton Bridge, Trafford - firmly stuck in my names wormhole, Leader Williams is Sir Edward Leader Williams to you! But you could skip the "Sir" as you've not so dignified Barry, or Lutyens.
  • Have been wondering whether there's a preferred approach to adding bestowed titles to links, given the articles themselves typically use only the person's given name (the exception here being Sir John Fowler, 1st Baronet). Do you think Barry, Lutyens, etc. should also have 'Sir' added?
Personally I wouldn't. Debates about honorifics are a huge time-sink on Wikipedia, some seeing them as absolutely essential, others as a ridiculous Anglo-centric affectation. But I think the general consensus is they aren't part of the name, e.g. Edwin Lutyens. If people want to know his many honours, they can pick them up from the infobox/opening sentence of the lead in the main article. KJP1 (talk) 15:29, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

[Batch 2 as far as Wigan]

  • Bispham Hall, Wigan - not quite sure what's happened, here, in the main article, or on Commons, but I will bet my lunch that this image is not a large Elizabethan hall house. It looks like the 19th century brick factory it is. They share part of their names, and it's in the Bispham Hall Cat on Commons, but they ain't the same building, [5]. Unfortunately, that creates another blank in the image column, as neither Commons nor Geograph have anything.
  • Haigh Hall, Wigan - For Architect, NHLE says "For and possibly by 24th Earl of Crawford and Balcarres". Richard Pollard, in the revised Pevsner Lancashire: Liverpool and the South West, goes further, "built by the 7th Earl of Balcarres, almost certainly to his own designs". (Pollard|Pevsner|2006|p=183) I think he warrants a mention.
You'll be pleased to know that concludes the 3(b) quibbles! KJP1 (talk) 15:57, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Structure - Criterion 4
  • List ordering - I know there's been debate about this and I think your approach, by age, makes sense.
  • Type - I would personally go for a bit more standardisation. As a reader, I use Type to group, e.g. "show me all the Grade II* listed chapels". This is hindered if there's too much specialisation. So, if we take "Church/Chapel" - we have: "Church" / "Parish church" / "Anglican church" / "Roman Catholic church" / "Congregational chapel" / "Methodist chapel" / "Presbyterian chapel" / "Unitarian chapel". I would just have all of these as "Church" or "Chapel".
The same issue appears with "House", where we've got: "House" / "Farmhouse" (although I think I'd leave that one as a useful distinction) / "Open hall house" / "Jettied house" / "Cruck house" / "Box-framed house" / "Timber-framed house" / "Hunting lodge" / "Country house" / "Manor house" / "Town house" / "Villa". I would again simplify, perhaps to "House" and "Farmhouse". Lastly, you could probably do something with the factories, mills, where we've got: "Fireproof factory" / "Cotton mill" / "Textile mill" / "Textile warehouse" / "Warehouse" / "Carding mill" / "Spinning mill" / and one, "Leigh Mill, Wigan" as a "Boiler house" which I'm not sure is accurate. It's a cotton mill, with boiler house attached.
If you do keep the "Farmhouse" distinction, then "Dearden Fold Farmhouse, Bury" should be listed as such. Conversely, Hyde Hall, Tameside looks a bit grand for a farmhouse. Was it one? The NHLE entry says it was at the time of listing, but I think it had higher status when built. And the article says its now a derelict wreck!
  • Very good points about the types - I've standardised as suggested, so reduced the various sub-types to "Church", "Chapel", or "House" and amended to "Farmhouse" in a few cases. As for the more industrial buildings, "Textile mill" and "Warehouse" seem to be the most appropriate options throughout.
My other thought about type is do you use the function for which they were built, or the present function. We currently have a bit of a mix. So, as examples:
  • Church of St George, Bolton - this is listed as a craft centre, but the article says it has not been used as such for 20 years, and the latest possibility is reversion to a church.
  • Hey House, Bury is not now a hunting lodge;
  • Former Refuge Assurance building, Manchester - this is now a hotel;
  • Tootal, Broadhurst and Lee building, Manchester - this is offices, including those of the Manchester mayor;
  • Lancaster House, Manchester - is now apartments but wasn't built as such. Ditto Asia and India Houses on the same street;
  • Wythenshawe Bus Station, Manchester is now a storage warehouse;
Personally, I think I would use their original functions, for simplicity and because attempting present function will require constant updating, but I can see the counter argument. But presently we have a mixture, which I think needs to be resolved.
  • Yes agreed, original function would be the most straightforward and avoids having to keep the list updated following change of use, so have amended where necessary. Many thanks for the comments so far; hopefully I haven't overlooked any of them.
Style: Visual appeal Criterion 5(a)
  • Looks good and no red-linking. MoS not my forte, but think it works.
Style: Media files Criterion 5(b)
  • Church of St Lawrence, Tameside - [6] possible alternative image that shows the little turret?
  • Hyde Hall, Tameside - [7] clearer image of the building, although the red van makes it less "pretty"?
  • Have changed both. The one for the church looks better; as for the hall, although the van being in the shot isn't ideal, it's still a clearer view of the building than the previous image.

Style: Accessibility Criterion 5(c)

  • Here you might need advice from the FL coordinators. I'm not certain if alt text for images is now an absolute requirement. It is also quite a skill (which I lack) to write suitable alt text for buildings. It can become very repetitive; "a church with tower / a two-storey house". And how do you succinctly describe, say, the Manchester Cenotaph image, without writing the essay that Harry has done in the Design section of the main article? That said, the accessibility issue is completely valid and understandable, I'm just not sure it's applicable here. I am sure that writing useful alt text for every one of the 240-odd images used would be no small task. I would suggest asking the question of the coordinators; I've raised queries with User:PresN before now - usually technical, as that's an even lesser strength than MoS understanding - and they've always been extremely helpful.
Alt text is required, yes; if you don't have it, screen reader software tries to use the filename as the alt text, which is bad/useless. It does not have to be an essay, and in fact should not be at all- many people mistakenly think that alt text needs to describe what the subject looks like, when in fact it needs to describe what the subject is. Note that the very first example near the top of WP:ALTTEXT is just "Painting of Napoleon Bonaparte", with no attempt to describe the painting. Additionally, the alt text doesn't exist in a vacuum, but goes along with the context the image is in, such as captions or what row it's in- you don't need to re-specify what building you're talking about or where it is, the whole rest of the row already does that. All that is to say, the alt text for, say, 3 and 4 Walsh Fold, can be as short as "gray stone farmhouse" or "stone farmhouse". The Manchester Cenotaph can just be "gray stone monument". I know that it's still a lot with 240 rows, and yes it's repetitive, but it's not as undoable as is first appears; I just did the same thing on my current overlong list (lot of "brown rat", lol). --PresN 19:23, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
PresN - comprehensive and very helpful, as ever. Many thanks. I’ll let the nominator respond as to how they would like to proceed, but if I can help with the workload, I’m very happy to pick up writing half of them, on the lines you suggest. Given that it’s Lancashire, there is going to be a lot of “gray stone”! But as it’s an FL requirement, I’m sure it will be met. KJP1 (talk) 21:01, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks both, I'd actually made a start on the alt text for the Bolton to Manchester images, but it seems I've lost my work due to an edit conflict and my clumsy fingers — my own fault for not adding "under construction" to the top of the article. I'll restart tomorrow, but yes, as KJP1 mentions, we do have a lot of grey stone and red brick buildings here! Mmberney (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry! Hope the edit conflict wasn’t me experimenting! If you want me to start from Wigan upwards, just shout. Very happy to do that. KJP1 (talk) 22:12, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, KJP1. All entries that have an image now include suggested alt text. If you wouldn't mind, I'd appreciate you looking them over to check that they're comprehensive enough without being too descriptive, as PresN advised. For some of them, there wasn't a lot to describe! Many thanks.
Great work, and very quick. I've looked at a sample across the boroughs and they certainly seem to meet the brief. KJP1 (talk) 07:38, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Stability: Criterion 6

  • It's stable.
  • Sincerely, thank you for such a thorough review, KJP1 — it just goes to show how easy it is to develop a bit of cognitive bias when you've spent a long time working on something. Do let me know if you happen to spot anything else that needs fixing. Best regards.
Equally sincerely, my absolute pleasure. I'd always wanted to see the Manchester Grade II*s complete and with a star and you've done a great job. Have a look at the last few comments, get some guidance on alt text, and then I'll be very pleased to add my endorsement. KJP1 (talk) 16:46, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

All of the issues I flagged have been promptly addressed. I think it is a comprehensive and interesting list that meets the FL criteria, and am pleased to Support its promotion. KJP1 (talk) 07:38, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Seattle Sounders (1994–2008) seasons

Nominator(s): SounderBruce 05:15, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To complete a hat-trick of Sounders season FLs, I present the middle era between the original 1974–1983 stint and current Sounders. The 1994 to 2008 era was spent in the lower divisions, which had shifting rules and formats, and just passable sourcing. This list is formatted similarly to the 1974–1983 list and blends elements from soccer lists as well as American sports season lists due to the nature of American soccer at the time, which was a bit more exotic. SounderBruce 05:15, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - I couldn't find anything to pick up on, awesome work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:38, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Formatting on the table seems good. Couldn't find any prose mistakes. The image (File:View from the Space Needle 0152 (cropped).jpg) is correctly licensed and appropriate.
I checked a random set of citations (5, 14, 20, 39, 41) and they all seem to check out. Citations are consistently formatted. Support on all regards. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 02:33, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vestrian24Bio

Vestrian24Bio 04:23, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is no guideline that requires repeated links in citations, and I prefer to not have a sea of blue; the relevant articles are linked on their first use. I have tried to run IABot, but it seems to be struggling, so I will try to do so when it's under less of a load. SounderBruce 06:12, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find any other problems, so Support. Vestrian24Bio 12:28, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Chaplain Corps Medal of Honor recipients

Nominator(s): ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 17:42, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this as my first featured list because:

  • I believe this list to meet the criteria, namely: having good prose, a complete and engaging lead, comprehensive and well-sourced coverage, and good structure and style.
  • It seems that it is more appropriate to nominate it for Featured List than Good Article.

Thank you. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 17:42, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "As of February 2025, there have been 3,536 Medals of Honor awarded" - Feb 25 was nearly a year ago, do we have any more up to date numbers?
  • "among the recipients are nine chaplains of the Army and Navy Chaplain Corps." - if these are separate, should the Navy one not also be mentioned at the start along with the Army one?
  • "All five chaplains awarded the honor since the Civil War have been Catholic priests;" - this sentence seems to end with a semi-colon
  • In some cases in the table, the battle is linked in both the place of action column and the notes but in others it is only linked in the former. Apply linking consistently
  • The notes against Haney and Whitehead do not need full stops per MOS:CAPFRAG
  • No need for the "see also" as it was already covered in the lead
  • That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Updated to May 2025. No Medals of Honor have been awarded since then that I can tell.
    • The initial sentence is more about establishing the chaplain corps in general than the specific branch corps; I'm open to reworking it, thought.
    • I am guilty of loving semi-colons. Changed.
    • Changed.
    • Fixed.
    • Removed.
    • Thank you! ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 18:29, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:11, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cowboygilbert

Not a review but I have been teaching people that {{Legend table}} exists for a more eye-appealing option for using a key on articles. It's not required but it does help it being its own spot instead of it just being a template and plain text. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:05, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]


Review

Image Review
  • All images are public domain.
  • All images need alt text.
Table Review
  • Please use table captions.
  • Please use row scopes per MOS:HEADERS.
  • Please use column scopes per MOS:HEADERS.
  • Please add Chaplain assistants' religons.
Prose
  • "Bugler to E company of the 14th Infantry Regiment." -> "Bugler to E Company of the 14th Infantry Regiment." Company should be capitalized.
  • Why is it "Union army" but "United States Army" and "United States Navy"?
Other

Source review (HurricaneZeta)

As of this revision:

  • 1 -  Pass. My suggestion is to add the exact page number, which is 106, to make it easier to find within the book.
  • 2 -  Pass, it's an acceptable usage of a primary source.
  • 3 -  Pass
  • 4 -  Pass, confirms what is stated in the article within the first sentence and is dated to the same "as of" date in the article.
  • 5:
    • 5a -  Pass, as it clearly states that 9 chaplains have been awarded it and lists them. However, I'd like to see something more leaning towards or emphasizing the fact that these are the only chaplains to be awarded this, since it isn't immediately clear when I'm reading it. Feel free to ignore this though, this is really just a nitpick.
    • 5b - This doesn't actually explicitly say "Salem Church". However source 15 does, and it can be replaced here with that.
    • 5c -  Pass
    • 5d -  Pass. However, the sentence right before the ref is missing a period at the end.
    • 5e -  Pass
    • 5f -  Pass. Same thing as 5d, it's missing a period at the end.
  • 6 -  Pass
  • 7:
    • 7a -  Pass
    • 7b -  Pass
    • 7c - Typo, the article says April 11, 2023, (when Obama wasn't president) when the source says April 11, 2013. The source doesn't specifically mention Obama, so the phrasing could be changed a bit to remove the mention of him.
  • 8 -  Pass
  • 9 -  Pass
  • 10 -  Pass
  • 11:
    • 11a -  Pass
    • 11b -  Pass
  • 12 -  Pass
  • 13 -  Pass
  • 14 -  Pass
  • 15 -  Pass and my suggestion to replace 5b.
  • 16 -  Pass, also works to replace 5b.
  • 17 -  Pass
  • 18 -  Pass
  • 19 -  Pass
  • 20 -  Pass
  • 21 -  Pass
  • 22 -  Pass
  • 23 -  Pass
  • 24 -  Pass
  • 25 -  Pass
  • 26 -  Pass
  • 27 -  Pass
Overall, most sources are reliable and affirm what is in the sources. The notes and the prose were engaging and an image review has been done above. I'll support when the few concerns are addressed here Darth Stabro. HurricaneZetaC 23:30, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneZeta: All suggestions taken, except: ChrisTheDude recommended to me that those sentences not have periods at the end per MOS:CAPFRAG: Most captions are not complete sentences, but merely sentence fragments, which should not end with a period or full stop, though I could see that only applying to standalone image captions and not table image captions; please advise. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 16:20, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, that's fine, I'm not too familiar with MOS:CAPTION. Support gladly! HurricaneZetaC 16:25, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Aurel

  • Military chaplaincy in the United States traces its origins back to the American Revolutionary War, being formally established on July 29, 1775, just two weeks after the formal establishment of the Continental Army. – If possible, I'd try to avoid repeating the phrase "formal/formally established/establishment".
  • July 29, 1775, just two weeks after the formal establishment of the Continental Army. – I'm not sure "just" adds anything here.
  • and is awarded to recognize American military servicemembers – The OED appears to give this as two separate words: "service members". Cf. also these Ngrams.
  • Created during the American Civil War, the Medal of Honor is the United States Armed Forces' highest military decoration – I'd consider adding some dates to "American Civil War". It's common knowledge in the US I imagine, and in most other English-speaking countries, but might not be for readers from further abroad.
  • the United States Armed Forces' highest military decoration and is awarded to recognize American military servicemembers who have distinguished themselves in combat situations by acts of valor. – I think this could be tightened just a little: how about something like "highest military decoration, awarded to service members ..."? I think "American" and "military" are already implied, and I think "recognition" is part and parcel of being an award.
  • As of May 2025, there have been 3,536 Medals of Honor awarded; – It might be possible to avoid repeating "Medals of Honor" here. Perhaps "As of May 2025, it has been awarded 3,536 times"?
  • This mightn't be an issue, but have any been awarded since May 2025? I only ask because 3536 is a fairly large number, and would seem to imply that a dozen or so are handed out each year.
  • among the recipients are nine chaplains of the Army and Navy Chaplain Corps. – Pretty minor, but I assume all members of the Army and Navy Chaplain Corps are chaplains, and there's a lot of "chaplain"ing happening here. Perhaps something like "nine recipients are members of the ...".
  • One Army chaplain assistant has also received the award. – As this sentence is fairly short, I'd try combining it with the previous one.
  • Francis B. Hall of the 16th New York Volunteer Infantry Regiment was the first chaplain to be awarded the Medal of Honor, – "to receive"?
  • for actions at the Battle of Salem Church. – I would give some dates, and perhaps a very brief explanation. I'm assuming this was part of the American Civil War?
  • Four of the chaplains served in the Union army during the American Civil War, – As this is a new paragraph, I would specify "the chaplains who received the award" (technically "the chaplains" isn't referring back to anything here).
  • during the American Civil War, – Linked above
  • one served in the US Navy during World War II, – Similarly to above, I don't think "US" needs specifying here.
  • Four of the chaplains served in the Union army during the American Civil War, one served in the US Navy during World War II, one served in the Army in the Korean War, and the remaining three served in the Vietnam War; – Other than the first one, I think we can get away with omitting all instances of "served" here.
  • three served in the Vietnam War; two for the Army, and one for the Navy. – A semicolon should be followed by a full sentence; I think a regular colon would work here. I'd also write "two in the ...", as I think that's a bit more idiomatic.
  • All five chaplains awarded the honor since the Civil War have been Catholic priests. Two, Emil Kapaun and Vincent Capodanno, are in the process of canonization as saints. – As these are two closely related and fairly short sentences, I'd try combining them.
  • One chaplain, Charles Liteky, returned his Medal of Honor eighteen years after being awarded it, – As above: "receiving it"? Better still: unless the period of eighteen years is particularly important, it might be ideal to say "returned his Medal of Honor, leaving it at the ...", as I don't think anyone's ever returned an award before receiving it.
  • the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in an enveloped addressed to Ronald Reagan. – Typo
  • Liteky is believed to be the only recipient of the award to renounce it for political reasons. – Perhaps "the only recipient to renounce the award ..."?
  • The Four Chaplains' Medal, sometimes called the "Chaplain's Medal of Honor", was created – I'd say when.
  • sometimes called the "Chaplain's Medal of Honor", – You'll have to excuse my Australian-English-speaking self if I'm wrong here, but doesn't the punctuation go inside the quotation marks in American English?
  • was created for chaplains George L. Fox, Alexander D. Goode, John P. Washington, and Clark V. Poling, – A bit picky, but "chaplain" is used three times in this sentence. I would remove it before the four names, as I think their status as chaplains is probably implied.
  • who were nominated for the Medal of Honor but ineligible as they had not made contact with the enemy. – I think "were" is probably needed before "ineligible".
  • A lavender color along with the † symbol indicates that the Medal of Honor was awarded posthumously – This seems to be a full sentence, so I'd add a full stop.
  • Hmm. What's the order of the entries in the table? It seems to be mostly chronological by date of action, but not quite.
  • What are the sources for the information in the first six columns? For example, if I want to find a source that describes Hall as Presbyterian, where would I look?
  • This one's optional, but I'd consider adding links for the entries in the "Religion" column other than Catholicism, for those of us who can't remember our Presbyterianisms from our Methodisms.
  • Carried wounded men to the rear under heavy enemy fire – As I don't think it's likely to have been his allies who were firing at him, I'd omit "enemy".
  • Refused pay during his time of service. – I think it's fine for the first part in these entries to be a sentence fragment, but I'd probably switch to full sentences after that. (This applies below as well.) Then again, I'm not a regular at FLC, so let me know if this is standard practice in this sort of article.
  • There's nothing wrong with the description of Haney, but it does feel quite short. Do you think it'd be possible to add a little more?
  • American chaplains were formally not forbidden from carrying weapons until 1989. (in the note): "not formally forbidden"?
  • Only became the regimental chaplain after his award. – I'd write "after receiving his award"
  • Carried soldiers from the front lines to safety in the rear several times throughout the Battle of Stones River – Regarding "throughout": we list the "date of action" as the 31st of December, 1862, but the article on the battle seems to suggest it went on until the 2nd of January.
  • Served aboard the USS Franklin (CV-13) when attacked by Japanese aircraft. – I'd write "when it was attacked by"
  • As someone without any knowledge of ships or guns, "flooded the magazine" confused me at first. (It sounded as though we were about to say he "flooded the magazine with stories of his heroism" or something of the sort!) I'd link Magazine (artillery), and possibly include a brief explanation of what this is.
  • The Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA – Comma after "USA"
  • Pope Francis declared him "Venerable" in 2025. – Maybe "gave him the title ..."?
  • Served with the Marine Corps. – As I don't think it's been mentioned above, you could link United States Marine Corps.
  • attempting to minister to a corpsman approximately 15 yards from an enemy machine gun. – I'd include some form of conversion here.
  • during the Battle of Dak To, ministering to soldiers and rescuing soldiers – I'd omit the first "soldiers"
  • Awarded the Medal of Honor for rescuing 23 wounded men without protective gear during an ambush in 1967. – As I think all of the cells in this column are describing the actions that led to them receiving the award, I'd remove "Awarded the Medal of Honor for".
  • Renounced his Medal of Honor in 1986 as an act of protest against American foreign policy – In the lead, we mention Reagan. Unless there's a reason not to, I'd do so here as well and perhaps give a bit of explanation of what in particular he was protesting.
  • Bugler to E Company of the 14th Infantry Regiment. – What does "E" mean here? Is it the name of a particular company?
  • Provided music for religious services in the unit, and became – I'd remove the comma here.
  • Scaled a wall along the eastern side of Peking to lay down suppressing fire on the enemy above. – Hmm. I'm having trouble picturing this: he scaled a wall to "lay down" fire on an enemy who was above him?
  • Became an official chaplain assistant in the year they were introduced. – Maybe "in the year the position was introduced"?
  • On my screen, the first table is being pushed down a bit by the sidebar, which creates a gap between the "Chaplains" section heading and the table. There might not be anything you can do about that, though.
  • The section heading is repeated at the top of each of the tables. I think the table captions can be hidden using "|+ {{sronly|caption_text}}".

This was a pleasant read, and most of these are fairly minor prose points. Looking forward to your responses. – Michael Aurel (talk) 07:29, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of vice presidents of the Maldives

Nominator(s): UnilandofmaTalk 19:22, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. UnilandofmaTalk 19:22, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

@Easternsahara: I've added your comments into the article. I also changed it from "Vice President of the Maldives" to "vice president of the Maldives" since I think it follows MOS:CAPS. UnilandofmaTalk 06:32, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Unilandofma: It's a formal title; I believe it should be capitalized, including the title of the article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:38, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed it! UnilandofmaTalk 17:49, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to remember reviewing your list of presidents; I'll come back and take a closer look at this one tomorrow! Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:08, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you have! UnilandofmaTalk 07:07, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgsu98: It looks like you might have forgotten about this. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:51, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Scroll on down just a bit. 😉 Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:53, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Passing image review. Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 14:01, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (1/2/26)

Lead
  • Is the Vice President elected on the same ticket with the President, or is he elected separately?
  • "The office of the Vice President has been pivotal in maintaining governmental continuity..." The office doesn't step in; the Vice President does. Recommend removing "The office of" from the beginning of the sentence.
  • "If the office of the President becomes vacant due to death, resignation, or removal from office, the vice president will succeed to the presidency." Either both "president" and "vice president" need to the be capitalized or both lower-case. I recommend both capitalized. Also, change "will succeed" to "succeeds" as it is describing a hypothetical.
  • Again, instances of "vice president" and "president" being lower-cased when they should be capitalized.
  • "Cabinet" should be capitalized.
  • I'm going to guess "First Republic" should also be capitalized, and I'd also bet there is a target wikilink (somewhere in History of the Maldives?)
  • 6 should be spelled out.
  • "...that made the country a republic again" sounds awkward. Recommend slightly rephrasing (perhaps something like "restored the Maldives as a Republic).
  • I would bet any [insert Maldive currency here] that "Republic" should be capitalized in all instances here.
  • Second Republic
  • "2008 Constitution" should be capitalized per the wiki article.
  • "Mohamed Waheed assumed office of president" Recommend slightly rephrasing, "assumed the presidency".
  • While "incumbent" might technically be correct, it sounds awkward, and I would recommend simply using "current" instead.
Notes
  • Note B needs a period.

User:Unilandofma: A very interesting article, especially since I didn't know much about the Maldives prior to examing this one and the list of presidents. Please let me know when you've had a chance to examine my notes above, and let me know if you have any questions. I will return later to do your source review unless someone else beats me to it. I have also made some very minor copy edits while reviewing; I hope you don't mind! Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:39, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bgsu98, I've added your comments into the article. UnilandofmaTalk 06:14, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It looks good! Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:32, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review

TheNuggeteer

Will perform a source review sometime later. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 02:25, 5 January 2026 (UTC) Spotcheck and source review[reply]

  • "The Vice President has been pivotal in maintaining governmental continuity" the source does not say the vice president was "pivotal", only lists the duties of the vice president. This is an assumption and should be removed.
  • This has not been done.
  • "If the office of the President becomes vacant due to death, resignation, or removal from office, the Vice President succeeds to the presidency" isn't this redundant with " stepping in during presidential absence or incapacity"? I believe they should be merged. The source also does not mention "death, resignation, or removal from office", this should be omitted.
  • Please provide a page number for source 3, probably page 39-40.
  • Worldstatesmen.org is a deprecated source per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Self-published peerage websites
  • I am unsure of the reliability of sudd.ch.
  • "and appointed Mohamed Waheed Deen as his Vice President" I do not see this in the source.
  • "in accordance with the constitution" I believe this was assumed and needs to be omitted since it is not explicitly in the source.
  • "office by a no-confidence vote from the People's Majlis" it is not explicitly stated as a no-confidence vote. Maybe you could change this to "unopposed".
  • "from the People's Majlis" I do not see "People's Maijis" in the sources, it is only included in "all chambers of parliament".
  • This has not been addressed.
  • Please add another source, presumably from the end of Abdulla Jihad's term, to confirm that Jihab made it to the end (with a source).
  • Source 18 looks like an unreliable, user made source. Can you explain why this is reliable?
  • Source 19 does not say his party, the date he took office and left office.
  • 17 November 2018 is supposed to be 16.
  • Source 28 does not state Abdulla Jihad's party.
  • Source 29 does not state Faisal Naseem's party, president, and birth date.
  • Source 30 does not state Hussain Mohamed Latheef's president, party, and birth date.

Will continue the source review sometime later. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 02:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the sentences and also source 3 already does have a page number on it. I've seen sudd.ch being used as a reference on the referendum articles so I'm pretty sure it is reliable. UnilandofmaTalk 06:05, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for not returning to this! I will continue the review. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:37, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer: I've added some references to support the points. I'd like to also point out that political parties weren't legalised in the Maldives until 2005 (see this), so I put Ibrahim Nasir's five vice presidents as Independent. I believe that source 18 is reliable as it is by a news outlet, if you don't believe it is reliable I also added another source that essentially says the same thing. I also removed the birth date for Hussain Mohamed Latheef since I couldn't find a source on it. UnilandofmaTalk 17:00, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thank you! There are only two issues unaddressed. Great job! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 04:36, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer: I've removed the first part. As for the second part, I think it's better to keep "from the People's Majlis", the parliament in question is the Majlis. "All chambers of parliament" means the Majlis as a whole so I feel as if the current wording is better kept. UnilandofmaTalk 06:22, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good job! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 08:19, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of works by Gu Yanwu

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

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)[reply]

Comments

  • "Gu Yanwu (Chinese: 顧炎武, art name Tinglin) was a Chinese scholar active during the transition from the Ming to Qing dynasty" => "Gu Yanwu (Chinese: 顧炎武, art name Tinglin) was a Chinese scholar active during the transition from the Ming dynasty to the Qing dynasty"
    • Done.-G
  • Also, can you give some indication of when that was, as presently there's nothing in the lead to indicate whether he lived 200 or 2000 years ago
    • Done.-G
  • "published them for the first time in the collect Tinglin yishu" => "published them for the first time in the collection Tinglin yishu"
    • Done.-G
  • "a unit roughly equivalent to chapters" => "a unit roughly equivalent to a chapter"
  • Descriptions which consist only of one sentence fragment (e.g. "A collection of Gu's essays and writings, including his political treatises written after the fall of Ming.") should not have a full stop
  • Done.-G
  • "the Confucian classics" - appropriate link? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:42, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added.-G
@ChrisTheDude: Thank you very much! Added. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:02, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824

Older nominations

List of World Heritage Sites in Jordan

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

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)[reply]

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?
      • I am going with the Unesco source here, but I made sure that the piped link is correct. And yes, two sites, but very close together so the markers would overlap. Maybe better a single one in this resolution.
  • "Umm Al-Jimāl is spelled "Umm el-Jimal" on the map, please fix it
    • Same here. Awkward, though.
  • "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"
    • I don't think that's what the source says.
  • "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
    • They both link to the same article. Maybe this is an overkill to link.
  • "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)[reply]

    • Done, many thanks! I addressed most of them, some are stylistic choices, in some cases I wrote comments. --Tone 15:03, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • Since ES cannot comment here, I'll check if you've implemented their comments and add some of my own, while trying to avoid things that Chris has already mentioned below.
      • The first sentence of the lead is quite odd to read. I think you should just copy the sentence used in Libya.
      • "Al-Khazneh, or the treasury, is pictured." to "Al-Khazneh (the treasury) is pictured."
      • wikilink "migratory bird" once.
      • "Due to water extraction, the surface water hasd essentially"
      • (please Reply to icon mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:59, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review (HurricaneZeta)

As of this revision:

  • 1 -  Pass
  • 2 -  Pass
  • 3:
    • 3a -  Pass
    • 3b - This source can be removed since 3c supports the entire paragraph, making this redundant.
    • 3c - The Tentative List in the source says that there are 15 on the list, not 14. This needs to be updated. Whoops, I was looking at the archive cited in the ref, the more recent capture shows 14. I suggest updating the archive to the most recent capture to avoid confusion.  Pass
    • 3d - Same as above.  Pass
  • 4 -  Pass
  • 5 -  Pass
  • 6 -  Pass
  • 7 -  Pass
  • 8 -  Pass
  • 9 -  Pass
  • 10 -  Pass
  • 11 -  Pass
  • 12 -  Pass
  • 13 -  Pass
  • 14 -  Pass
  • 15 -  Pass. Minor grammar correction, in in 1115, to strengthen the comma is not needed.
  • 16 -  Pass
  • 17 -  Pass
  • 18 -  Pass. most ambitious is in the source, but I think it could be replaced with something more neutral here.
  • 19 -  Pass
  • 20 -  Pass
  • 21 - Swap this around with 22, then  Pass, but is it really needed to say it provides no information?
  • 22 - Swap this around with 21, then  Pass
  • 23 -  Pass
  • 24 -  Pass
  • 25 -  Pass
  • 26 -  Pass
  • 27 -  Pass

Image review (HurricaneZeta)

FoP rules are pretty much irrelevant since these were created so long ago and are in the public domain.
  • 1 -  Pass. Derivative work of a free file that is considered valued on Commons.
  • 2 -  Pass
  • 3 -  Pass. Licensed for CC BY-SA 2.0 on Flickr.
  • 4 -  Pass
  • 5 -  Pass
  • 6 -  Pass
  • 7 -  Pass
  • 8 -  Pass
  • 9 -  Pass
  • 10 -  Pass really like this one
  • 11 -  Pass
  • 12 -  Pass
  • 13 -  Pass
  • 14 -  Pass
  • 15 -  Pass
  • 16 -  Pass also like this one
  • 17 -  Pass
  • 18 -  Pass
  • 19 -  Pass nice!

Image review is all good, just the minor stuff in the source review. Support since the concerns are pretty minor, but pinging Tone. HurricaneZetaC 02:01, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneZeta: Done, thanks! Is there an easy way to update the archive without doing it manually by deleting the archived version and running the script again? But even then sometimes not up-to-date version may get archived, I think.
Tone 08:35, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Tone I think you can just manually replace the archive-url= parameter with [8] and change the archive-date= to 17 December 2025 and access-date= to today. HurricaneZetaC 16:17, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "The remains of a water management system that enabled life in a desert setting, have been preserved as well" - no reason for a comma in the middle of that sentence
  • "The desert castle of Quseir Amra was built in the early 8th century, and had served both as a fortress" => "The desert castle of Quseir Amra was built in the early 8th century and served both as a fortress"
  • "secular scenes inspired by the Byzantine art," => "secular scenes inspired by Byzantine art,"
  • "A nearby Tell Al-Kharrar" - this reads like we are expected to know what a Tell Al-Kharrar is, but personally I have no idea. Is there an appropriate link?
  • "The city Abila was a member" => "The city of Abila was a member"
  • "Gadara was one of the leading members of Decapolis" - in the previous entry it was the Decapolis
  • "Jerash was a member of Decapolis" - same here
  • That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Batwoman episodes

Nominator(s): Olliefant (she/her) 03:43, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I made this page a while back, I got it to what I think is FL quality recently. It was pretty fun to write. Olliefant (she/her) 03:43, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't checked, but please make sure that:
  • All links are correct
    • Arrowverse links instead of general DC links
    • |website= are linked (if not linked) and links lead to the correct link (sometimes they use an incorrect spelling link)
  • Citations are all using a template
  • Writers and directors are linked once per season
  • Verify anything that should be in italics (IGN is often missed) should be in italics
  • Use User:Alex 21/Episode list to standardize and reformat spacing
  • I'd personally also use ProveIt to standardize citations to keep later diff changes minimal
  • Use a script like User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates to verify all dates use mdy (based on the template used on the page). The page says it was last update on June 2023
  • Verify that you have one template per line (the above mdy template is on the same line as another one)
  • Use a script like User:GorillaWarfare/script/curlies to verify that only straight quotes are used (I can see some are currently curly)
  • The last paragraph of the lead should also mention how many episodes per season. So "season n ran from x to y and had z episodes" (in better phrasing ofc).
--Gonnym (talk) 17:15, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: all done Olliefant (she/her) 06:47, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delegate note: not transcluded to WP:FLC until January 5. --PresN 12:50, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I totally forgot Olliefant (she/her) 16:41, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Crystal Drawers

Hello! Always a pleasure! I'll leave comments here later in the day, but one thing I noticed while going through the sources is that some have Cite Error issues (particularly 21, 42, and 61). Not a big deal, it just looks like a cite name was defined multiple times, but this should be addressed. Crystal Drawers 🍌 (wanna talk?) 12:00, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the ref issues and I look forward to your comments Olliefant (she/her) 01:47, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A third season was ordered in February. Season three ran from October 13 through March 2, 2022." — This is very similar to the previous part about season two; to avoid repetition, I'd combine them into something like "A third season was ordered in February, which ran from October 13 through March 2, 2022." Crystal Drawers 🍌 (wanna talk?) 02:08, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, very nice work, just a few minor changes needed. Crystal Drawers 🍌 (wanna talk?) 02:08, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Crystal Drawers: done Olliefant (she/her) 16:29, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Crystal Drawers 🍌 (wanna talk?) 17:36, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Cavan121012

Looks to be a very solid list. Some very minor suggestions:

  • The Nicole Kang article has recently been created so she can be linked in the lead.
  • The character of Renee Montoya can also be linked.

That's all from me -- Cavan121012 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cavan121012: done Olliefant (she/her) 01:18, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Also if you had a chance to take a look at my nomination it would be greatly appreciated -- Cavan121012 (talk) 08:49, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Vestrian24Bio

That's all I got. Vestrian24Bio 04:30, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of bathyergids

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
@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)[reply]

Image review below. Potential problems marked in bold:

  • File:Georychus capensis 2023.jpg: CC BY SA 4.0, own work from regular Commons contributor.
  • File:Bathyergus suillus Flipphi 1.jpg: CC BY SA 4.0, own work from regular Commons contributor. Interestingly enough there are other high quality photos of this species on iNaturalist, including even a CC-BY SA video.
  • File:Bathyergus janetta - Smit.jpg: listed as public domain, but no date is given in the description. Also needs a US public domain template
  • File:Cryptomys hottentotus Whatmore 1.jpg: iNaturalist import, CC0
  • File:Fukomys anselli.jpg: Public domain, own work from regular Commons contributor
  • File:Fukomys damarensis 175806182.jpg: iNaturalist import, CC BY
  • File:Holotype Fukomys hanangensis Faulkes 2017.jpg: The PeerJ site states that "public user content licensed CC BY 4.0", but does that apply to this article?
  • File:Fukomys darlingi Rudloff.jpg: CC BY SA 4.0 confirmed by VRT ticket.
  • File:Cryptomys mechowi Plzen zoo 02.2011.jpg: CC BY SA 3.0, own work from regular Commons contributor
  • File:Georychus capensis Rebelo 2.jpg: iNaturalist import, CC BY SA
  • File:Silvery mole-rat.png: "Creative Commons license" that the article this was taken from is unspecific but presumably extends to the figures.

That's all. -- Reconrabbit 17:57, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Reconrabbit: Thanks for the image review! Date and template added to the first image; Everything published on PeerJ is CC-BY 4.0 unless specified, which this is not: [9]. --PresN 01:46, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I've struck those concerns. This image review is passed. Regarding the subspecies it makes sense to omit them altogether given the confusion in current times. Coming back to the start - is it worthwhile to make note of the other species with a less-than-LC IUCN assessment, and also the potential species status of C. nimrodi? Or are those more suited for the main Bathyergidae article? Those are the only potential additions I would make. -- Reconrabbit 14:43, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review (1/4/26)

Spot-check of sources:

  • No. 5 – ✅
  • No. 8 – ✅ This source calls this species an African mole-rat; same scientific name; Wikipedia article uses both names
  • No. 14 – This source calls this species a Zambian mole rat; same scientific name; Wikipedia article shows no use of "Zambian mole rat"
  • No. 15 – ✅
  • No. 18 – ✅
  • No. 20 – ✅
  • No. 23 – ✅
  • No. 27 – ✅

User:PresN: Just the one discrepancy as to the name of the Ansell's mole-rat. If both names are commonly used, then "Zambian mole rat" should, at the very least, be listed at the Ansell's mole-rat wikipage. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:09, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: Added Zambian mole rat as an alternate common name to the article and linked omnivore. --PresN 01:48, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support & Source review passed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:52, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Chinua Achebe bibliography

Nominator(s): Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:59, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:59, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

TheNuggeteer

  • Why is this list format different from other featured bibliographies (like most here)? I believe it should be a table.
    It is not a must to have them as table since they are going to be short. In fact, I chose this format and it is acceptable here.
  • In my opinion, instead of having an entire section for just one work, you can list it in a Miscellaneous section.
    I am afraid it will "sort of" confuse readers since it's listed singly in the lede, hence having it under a certain section, lets say "Non fiction", then the lede needs to be rewritten, and it won't follow the source (which didn't say nonfiction).
  • Another suggestion, but I think, instead of listing the sources grouped up, you should place them after the specific works instead.
    That's a great suggestion but I prefer the former since it wouldn't waste anyone's time. It'sore convenient for me.SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 09:02, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The one I suggested does not waste anyone's time since you can easily check and access the source at the end of the specific book instead of grouping them. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 10:25, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Prose review
  • "One of the major influence" -> "One of the major influences"
  • "and has been used in school curricula" what are you referring to? His debut novel, or his works entirely?
  • If it is his debut novel: "The novel has been used in school curricula"
  • If it is his works: "His works have been used in school curricula"
  • "been regarded as" -> "been regarded as the"
    done all
Source review
  • "Achebe's works have been extensively studied by academics and scholars, and won him several awards. His legacy is celebrated annually during the Chinua Achebe Literary Festival." This is neither neutral nor cited, please cite this and try to make this sentence less biased.
  • White 2017 is okay, but there are some issues:
  • "Nigerian author Chinua Achebe (1930–2013) wrote fiction, nonfiction, short stories, essays and poems" is not said in the source
  • The source does not say Things Fall Apart was published in 1958.
  • Fredrick 2013 is okay.
  • Parkes 2009 is okay.
  • Showalter 2009 is okay.
  • I sadly can't access the rest of the books, but I will accept them in good faith.

Due to many issues and some that are hard to tackle, I will oppose this for now. If you fix or reply to these issues, I might shift to support this for promotion. Regards, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 03:27, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheNuggeteer I have removed the uncited paragraphs as well as removed "published in 1958. If the sources are okay, I think I have answered all your comments then. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 09:03, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have one current problem. Thank you for resolving all! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 10:27, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know you as a troublesome person, @TheNuggeteer. You know that's way "sort of" stressful for me now. No problem, I will do as you said. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 16:11, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
done. SafariScribeEdits! Talk! 17:49, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm really sorry if you see me as troublesome. I will support this nomination now. Sorry if I was stressing you. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:14, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Seon-ho filmography

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

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)[reply]

Comments

Accessibility review

  • Change the !scope=row to the name of the films/TV shows, not to the year. The scope of the article is to the films/TV shows not the year.
  • Add an alt to the image under § Television show
  • Not accessibility related but sources 3, 8, and 9 are duplicated. Merge them together.

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:21, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowboygilbert All done. Thanks for the feedback. Preferwiki (talk) 02:51, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824

  • Since the unreleased items are all TV series, you can consider moving the key to that section. If you want to future-proof the list then atleast move the key to below the TOC. Should be possible by using the __TOC__ keyword.
  • For most people there is no distinction between TV series and TV shows. You can merge those two sections.
  • "Can This Love Be Translated?" cell doesn't have the right scope.
  • 3-4 of the refs don't have archive links.
  • No problems detected in prose. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:19, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @MPGuy2824
    • Done moving all the key to unreleased series
    • Not Done merging TV Series and TV Shows, as per konsensus in Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea
    • Done add the right scope for Can This Love Be Translated
    • Done archiving all the links
    Preferwiki (talk) 21:52, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm guessing that there is a difference between a TV series and a TV show in Korea. What is it? This might need to be mentioned in the list to avoid surprising readers. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:23, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    TV shows is what in western television is refer to as unscripted show. Also they have different term in korean called 예능 (Ye-neung), short for 예술오락 (yesul-orak) (art-entertainment). In South Korean Award show they also always in different category *they even have separate award show for this). Can't we left it as per consensus? What do you think @MPGuy2824 Preferwiki (talk) 06:08, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not insisting that you merge the two sections. All I'm saying is that you should mention something about it in the lead section. You can incorporate it into the current prose somehow. e.g. "Seon-ho has appeared in 1 film, x tv show (unscripted entertainment), y tv series (scripted entertainment), z radio, ....." If there is a wikilink to explain the difference, then all the better. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:54, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the feedback @MPGuy2824. I have made some changes as per your suggestion. Preferwiki (talk) 11:35, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The parts in the brackets were the main points of my suggestion, but you left those out. I've added a footnote with your explanation. If you can find a good citation for that, it would be great. -MPGuy2824 (talk)
  • Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:03, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2017 NHL expansion draft

Nominator(s): The Kip (contribs) 07:33, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude Sorry for the delay - all taken care of. The Kip (contribs) 07:37, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:12, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review

  • Section links aren't allowed in section headers per MOS:NOSECTIONLINKS
  • Why does 2017 NHL expansion draft#Trades not have any columns? To the average reader (like myself), this makes no sense.
  • In the same section, colors need a key or need to be removed if they do not convey information.
  • Scopes are needed in the Draft results section for both the columns and rows. Put the row scopes on the players name, not the number.
  • For the keys, if you want that is (I won't hold it against you), you could create a key table that some articles use.
  • Image accessibility is good.

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:28, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowboygilbert My bad, somehow got tripped up and thought your comments were the user below. Everything on the list has been taken care of. The Kip (contribs) 05:06, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98

There is also a situation with the table under Trades. You cannot use <br> to simulate another row within the same cell. For example, you have Buffalo Sabres concession and 6th-round pick in 2017 (#161 overall) within the same cell with a pseudo line dividing them. That whole table is very difficult to follow. Perhaps you should have three columns ("Other team", Concession, and Vegas selection) plus the column for References. This is just a rough mock-up:

"Other team" Concession Vegas selection Ref.
Buffalo Sabres 6th-round pick in 2017 (#161 overall) William Carrier [Insert reference here]

Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:17, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98 The table format is pulled from the trade tables we use at transaction pages (ex. 2025–26 NHL transactions#Trades) - I disagree that there's an issue with the colors (there to visually differentiate each row) or <hr> lines. Never heard of there being problems with using <br> in tables, either. I can add column headers, however, and I'll take care of the rest of the concerns as well. The Kip (contribs) 06:13, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
User:The Kip: I apologize; that was from an earlier draft of my comment. I was having trouble following this table, and the pseudo lines in each cell made it appear as if the information on the top of one cell corresponded to the information in the top half of the adjacent cell. There is nothing wrong with using <br> as long as it's not used to simulate artificial rows across cells. I still maintain that the current layout is poor and I still encourage you to reformat it. For example, there is no reason to have "Vegas selection" repeated over and over. As for the use of gray, that wasn't my comment, and as long as it is not conveying information, which it's not, it shouldn't be a problem. I don't think it's necessary, but that is purely a personal opinion and not grounded in any policy. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgsu98 I've opted to reformat based on the table you suggested. Please take a look and let me know if it's up to par. Borrowed the row scopes from another of my FLs at List of Vegas Golden Knights draft picks so they still look normal rather than like headers. The Kip (contribs) 08:37, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
User:The Kip: That is such a good improvement! However, you will still need rowscopes. You can use the code ! scope="row" style="text-align:left;font-weight:normal" so the text doesn't appear in bold if that's what you want. Stylistically, it's up to you. All of the tables will need rowscopes; it looks like some of them already do. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:49, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Bgsu98 I believe it was just the concessions one lacking it, which I've taken care of - the protection lists seem to already have it. The Kip (contribs) 22:16, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I would replace the # on the one table with something like {{Abbr|No.|Number}}. If I have a chance tomorrow, I will do a full review of your article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:47, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's been done. The Kip (contribs) 04:59, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • The standard is to not have any citations in the lead. Anything stated in the lead should theoretically be restated elsewhere in the article. So you have two citations (sources no. 1 and 2) that should be brought down into the main body of the text, and if that information is not there, it should be added. I wouldn't copy word-for-word; I would slightly rephrase it.
Background
  • "The Vegas bid would make the NHL the first "Big Four" major professional sports league to place a franchise in Las Vegas, though the league previously had a limited presence in the city with annual pre-season games, beginning with an outdoor game in 1991 and the Frozen Fury series held each year since 1997." Is this sourced anywhere?
  • What is currently source no. 5 requires a subscription or an account; it should reflect that in the citation.
  • "the Golden Knights signed Canadian center Reid Duke to a three-year, entry-level contract, making him the franchise's first player." This needs a source.
Rules
  • You have some instances of numbers larger than 10 being spelled out and others where they are rendered as numbers. Whichever style you choose, they should be consistent.
Tables
  • The tables look great now and appear to be properly structured per MOS:ACCESS.
Post-draft
  • "Not all players selected by the Golden Knights in the Expansion Draft remained with the team."

User:The Kip: I swear, I've reviewed a similar article to this in the past. Did you submit another hockey draft article through FLC recently? Anyway, please let me know if you have any questions about my comments or suggestions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:24, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98 Sorry for the delay:
  • Moved the info to two different sections, along with the citations.
  • Frozen Fury and the 1991 outdoor game are sort of self-sourced to their respective articles (1991 one wasn't previously linked, I added it), but I've added a cite for them being the first major pro team in Vegas.
  • Opted to go for numbers for anything over ten.
Everything else has been taken care of. The Kip (contribs) 07:31, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:23, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MPGuy2824

  • The table in the Trades section is missing its caption.
  • The logo in the infobox is missing alt-text.
  • "third-line forward" - explain, or wikilink.
  • "departing in free agency" - explain, or wikilink.
  • I didn't see any other problems with prose or accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:43, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Buffalo Sabres draft picks

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

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)[reply]

Drive-by comment

Source review (HurricaneZeta)

As of this revision:

  • 1 -  Pass
  • 2 -  Pass
  • 3:
    • 3a -  Pass
    • 3b -  Pass
  • 4 -  Pass. However, I recommend moving this after move up to the first overall pick. since source 5 is the one that mentions From 1995 to 2012, the winner of the draft lottery was allowed to move up a maximum of four positions in the entry draft.
  • 5 -  Pass
  • 6:
    • 6a -  Pass
    • 6b -  Pass
    • 6c -  Pass, took a while but spot checks check out for the table
  • 7 -  Pass
  • 8 -  Pass but is there a better source than NYP?
  • 9 -  Pass
  • 10 -  Pass
  • 11 -  Pass, but by the way his article's titled Gilbert Perreault but it's spelled as "Perrault" throughout this article.
  • 12 -  Pass
  • 13 -  Pass
  • 14 -  Pass
  • The 2 general references are relevant to the article and complement the table.
  • There's only one image that checks out, so pass on that as well.

Support on sourcing, but the few concerns do need to be addressed Kline. HurricaneZetaC 21:05, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneZeta Done, apparently I forgot how to spell Perreault. Kline • talk • contribs 23:52, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]


List of constituencies of the Kerala Legislative Assembly

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

FL review checklist:      Prose: 0/3 done      Source: Pending      Accessibility: Done      Image: Pending

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@Easternsahara: Except for the map issue (which looks ok to me on a desktop) I have fixed the other issues that you've pointed out.
I think List of former constituencies of the Kerala Legislative Assembly is wrongly named right now: It has all the MLAs that represented those constituencies too. Ideally a former constituency list would just have the start year, end year, and district of each former constituency. There are references (all primary) in that list right now, but having looked for such stuff before, I think it will be hard to find secondary refs.
I'll need to have a think about doing a WP:BLAR on the former constituency list. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:12, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Quick accessibility review

  • The !scope=row for the Constituencies section should be on constituencies instead of the number as the scope for the article is on the constituencies and not the numbers.
  • Pseudo-header for the key should be fixed (MOS:PSEUDOHEAD). Use a template like {{Legend table}} instead.

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:34, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowboygilbert: Fixed both, thanks. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:10, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "it has had 140 single-seat constituencies,[2] who each directly elect a representative" => "it has had 140 single-seat constituencies,[2] each of which directly elects a representative"
  • That's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:25, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Done. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:37, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@ChrisTheDude: I forgot to ping in the last message. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:38, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (1/19/26)

Lead
History
  • "The new state of Kerala was formed by the merger of Travancore-Cochin state with Malabar district and Kasaragod taluk of South Canara district of the Madras Presidency." --> This sentence really doesn't make sense.
  • The column with the years is a mess. I recommend using <br> between each year.
Constituencies
  • This section is laid out weird. You have a key in the top left corner, a map in the top right corner, a table which appears under the map, but left-justified, leaving a huge whitespace in the middle. Recommend repositioning the elements or shrinking the size of the map.
  • The table is also formatted oddly. The No., Reservation, District, and Lok Sabha constituency columns are left-justified, the Electorate column is right-justified, and the Name column is centered. Recommend centering everything.

@MPGuy2824: Please let me know when you've had a chance to examine my comments and let me know if you have any questions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:51, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98:
  • I've reduced the size of the map to the default. I don't think it should be reduced further as the details are just barely discernable right now. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:28, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've been right-aligning the electorate column in these constituency lists since they may sometimes contain a varying number of digits (not in this case though) and I'd like to keep it that way. I've centered the rest of the columns.
  • Fixed the other problems that you've pointed out. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:28, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @MPGuy2824: I moved the map to the left. Let me know how it looks. There is still whitespace, but at least now the whitespace isn't centered between three elements. Maybe these elements displayed fine on some devices, but on my desktop, the map and the table did not nest together. Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:59, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the formatting of the History table is inconsistent. The Year, Explanation, and Elections columns are left-justified, the Act/Order column is centered, and the Total seats and Reserved seats columns are right-justified. Recommend left-justification for everything. Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:03, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of accolades received by In Bruges

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

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)[reply]

Comments

Olliefant

  • "[black comedy] [crime film]" is an MOS:SOB violation
  • Add citations to the EFNs
  • I spotted two doubles spaces, ("at the 81st Academy Awards" in paragraph 2, "films of 2008" in paragraph 3) weirdly these are only present in editing mode, I suspect this is a Mediawiki thing. Regardless, fix them and make sure there aren't others
  • The Hollywood Reporter article doesn't source either the "crime film" or "black comedy" labels
  • "two Irish hitmen in hiding in Bruges" -> "two Irish hitmen hiding in Bruges" this ones optional but I think it would improve the flow
That's what I found ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 16:40, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of World Heritage Sites in Africa

Nominator(s): User:Easternsaharareview this 01:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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:Easternsaharareview this 01:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
    @MPGuy2824: Easternsahara (now blocked) says on his talk page that he has addressed all of these points. --PresN 02:04, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Support on prose, table accuracy and accessibility. A few of my points from above were missed out, but I've now fixed them. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:29, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shwabb1

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

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)[reply]

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

Continuing...

  • Missing Njock Rail Tunnels in Cameroon's tentative list
  • Mixed up site (Dimba and Ngovo caves) and province (Kongo Central) for DRC's tentative list
  • Missing Mt. Elgon Ecosystem in Kenya's tentative list
  • Missing some Malagasy tentative sites
  • Missing some Nigerian tentative sites
  • For all countries without any sites on their tentative lists, change wording to "does not maintain any sites on its tentative list" for consistency
  • For Somalia, change "As of December 2025" to "As of 2025" for consistency
  • Missing Serial Granaries of the caves of Nok, Mamproug, Kouba and Bagou in Togo's tentative list
  • For Uganda, remove country name from a couple of tentative transnational sites as it is not part of the sites' names. This is (seemingly) a new requirement for such sites to distinguish the submissions from each country on UNESCO's website (as I also remember seeing this for other similar nominations, e.g., European Paper Mills).
  • Some French-language titles in sources have to be fixed
  • I've implemented all changes other than the last one, though I'll go over the sources soon and finish that up as well. I have no points that require further discussion, so I'm ready to Support. Good job. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 00:11, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
User:Shwabb1: That's very kind of you to implement those changes yourself in Easternsahara's absence. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:35, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

@Easternsahara MOSNUMscript. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:37, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since Easternsahara is no longer here, I ran the date converter for him. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:00, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@FLC director and delegates: : Easternsahara has unfortunately been indefinitely blocked (see User talk:Easternsahara). I don't know what the procedure is for pending FLCs in this circumstance. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:41, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If someone wants to adopt it they can, otherwise it usually would be closed if there's major outstanding issues. It looks like they addressed MPGuy2824's concerns but didn't actually say so, so it may be clear to go once people finish their reviews, pending any source review concerns? I'll ping them on discord to see if that's the case, if it's just going to be a case of minor tweaks and bookkeeping I'm willing to keep it open rather than let it die. --PresN 23:07, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, to make it explicit, we're handling this as a community FLC- Easternsahara says they've addressed the existing review comments, existing reviewers are being kind in fixing the issues they find themselves, and I'm willing to take on any issues reviewers raise that they don't want to/feel comfortable with doing themselves. So we'll leave this open and muddle along, as I expect it to be promoted in the end. --PresN 02:06, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of octodontids

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

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)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (12/1/25)

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

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

@Bgsu98: Linked, and I think Reconrabbit's new map fixes that issue. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 16:37, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that map is much better. Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:43, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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:Easternsaharareview this 16:49, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@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)[reply]
pass image review User:Easternsaharareview this 20:34, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Generalissima

Sources are all fairly consistently formatted; however, I feel Kelt et al 2007 could be formatted better. It's missing the editors (Kelt and Kaspin). You're citing " The Octodontidae Revisited: Una Revision De Octodontidae". This seems to check out with your tree, but this is a specific chapter in a book where each chapter is by a different set of authors. I feel you should put the name of the chapter in the field, as well as the name of the authors of that chapter ( Milton H. Gallardo, Ricardo A. Ojeda, Claudio A. González, and Carolina A. Ríos). I'll do spot checks this evening. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:06, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I put an expanded (corrected?) citation on the talk page of the list that could be used. -- Reconrabbit 14:35, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, updated the citation with your version. --PresN 14:56, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2021 NHL expansion draft

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
    @MPGuy2824: I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 16:32, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:39, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude: I have made the changes. XR228 (talk) 02:24, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Electoral history of Al Gore

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

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)[reply]

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

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?
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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Reference # Letter Source Archive Status Notes
Nine different candidates sought the Democratic nomination.
4 a newspapers.com Good This article says nothing about nine candidates seeking the Democratic nomination. Approved
5 newspapers.com Fail 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 Good 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 Good
Gore received almost 480 thousand votes with 54 votes cast for write-in candidates.
28 a newspapers.com Good "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 Fail 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 Fail 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 Good
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 Good 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 Good
The Clinton-Gore ticket was the youngest presidential ticket ever elected to the presidency.
53 c nytimes.com Good
Following the 1996 Democratic National Convention, many felt Gore was likely to run for president in 2000.
63 newspapers.com Good
64 newspapers.com Good
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 Good 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 Good
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 Good
88 cnn.com Good 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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

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

Generalissima

This all looks good to me. With the tweaks from the past review, no errors stand out to me. Support on prose. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Unilandofma

I think the short description should change to "Elections featuring the US Vice President" but I'm not completely sure so let me know if you disagree. Otherwise I see no obvious errors, so I Support. UnilandofmaTalk 16:47, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think the short description is fine as is Olliefant (she/her) 23:37, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of World Heritage Sites in Libya

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
    Fixed, thanks! Tone 09:00, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
@Tone: I'm not sure if you had a chance to look at the comments that I added later. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:50, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Huh, I must have missed it. Great catch with the columns, it seems it is indeed three levels and not all three types. LPQ->LPQY, done, Y is indeed in the source. The rest I also fixed. Thanks! Tone 13:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
Support on prose User:Easternsaharareview this 00:40, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 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?
  • the Byzantines until – "Byzantines, before"
    • done
  • 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?
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 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
  • during and after the African humid period – Per MOS:NOFORCELINK, I would give some indication of when this was.
  • 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?
  • has the nickname "the Pearl of the Desert" from Arab sources. – Which sources? From when?
  • on the List of World Heritage in Danger, in 2016 – The comma can be omitted.
    • done
  • 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.
  • Libya maintains three properties – "has three sites", perhaps?
  • The remains of the settlement are well–preserved, – hyphen
    • done
  • It illustrates the adaptation – "it" doesn't have a clear antecedent here.
  • with aspects such as water management. – "aspects" of what?
  • 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?
  • 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.
  • 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?
    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)[reply]
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 10,000-7000 years ago – endash
    • done
  • including the African humid periods ("green Sahara") – Hmm, where is this quote coming from?
  • 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.

Note: these comments have been moved to the bottom so that they can be more easily addressed. – Michael Aurel (talk) 00:46, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • 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.
  • 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)[reply]
  • was founded as a Phoenician settlement LPQ – What does "LPQ" mean here?
    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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • It was pillaged in the 4th century, – By whom?
  • was pillaged in ... reconquered by ... and was finally abandoned following – no "was" for parallelism
  • Founded as ... and then part of – This doesn't work grammatically.
  • 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.
  • 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 ..."?
  • They reflect the changes – By "they", do you mean the phases?
    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)[reply]
  • due to the civil conflict, – Which civil conflict?
  • List of World Heritage in Danger, – I'd try to rework things so we don't need to repeat the full title.
  • 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.
  • 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.
    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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@Tone: my first ping of you didn't work, I tried addressing what I could. User:Easternsaharareview this 02:50, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Hi Tone. I'm just checking you're aware that a few of the above points are outstanding. If you like, I could move the ones that aren't finished to the bottom, so they can be addressed more easily. – Michael Aurel (talk) 10:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please do, the discussion is now so long that it is hard to track what still needs to be addressed ;) Tone 21:22, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. I've moved them to the bottom. – Michael Aurel (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review (1/2/26)

I will do your source review since reviews of the prose seem to have been thorough. The source review template does not seem to like tables, so I do it manually.

  • The lead appears to (justifiably) use boilerplate wording, the same as similar lists. I love consistency among article series like this!
  • Source no. 2 – Checks out.
  • Source no. 3 – Checks out.
  • Source no. 7 – Checks out. I know there have been questions raised in the past about the almost exclusive use of UNESCO sources. Are there other historical references that could also be used as a source here, perhaps from the Leptis Magna wiki article? Just curious. This same question could apply to any of these, honestly.
  • Source no. 11 & 12 – The historical information in the prose is supported by source no. 12.
  • Source no. 15 – Checks out.
  • Source no. 18 – Checks out.

The following are comments I have as I'm examining the sources.

  • What does it mean, LPQ? (Archaeological Site of Leptis Magna)

User:Tone: Source review passed. My other comments are merely suggestions. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:25, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! We've discussed UNESCO vs. other sources at previous nominations and my opinion is that the list states why something was listed as WHS, for which all other sources than UNESCO would be derivative. I sometimes use other sources if key information is missing (some older tentative sites are missing the text, for example). As for LPQ, that is the name in the Punic language. Tone 08:56, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of 2025 Indian Premier League personnel changes

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude: All done. Vestrian24Bio 10:38, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:45, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by

  • Please remove the small font sizes on the tables, I can hardly see as is.

Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 02:02, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Cowboygilbert: is it okay now? Vestrian24Bio 09:34, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
User:Vestrian24Bio: 85% is the smallest font that should be used, so as long as you're not below that, you should be fine! Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:14, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! will address your comments below in a while. Vestrian24Bio 04:34, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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. You can convert the team names into captions
  • Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | 1987 becomes !scope=row | 1987 (on its own line). If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
  • Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.

(please Reply to icon mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:48, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824: All done. Vestrian24Bio 07:24, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Bgsu98 (1/15/26)

Lead
  • I believe you need "the" before all of these team names. "bought by the Lucknow Super Giants", "paid by the Punjab Kings", "bought by the Rajasthan Royals", etc.  Done
  • "it was announced that the franchises would be allowed to sign temporary replacement players" --> "it was announced that the franchises were allowed to sign temporary replacement players" since it is not hypothetical.  Done
  • "These temporary replacement players would not be available for retention in the 2026 auction." --> "These temporary replacement players will not be available for retention in the 2026 auction." Ditto.
    Okay, I did not realize the 2026 auction was completed. It should be were not available. Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:10, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    done. Vestrian24Bio 09:22, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Retention policy
  • I assume each franchise could retain six players from their squad? The way it's worded implies that only six players total from among the ten franchises could be retained. If so, recommend sticking the word "each"after "six players".  Done
  • There has to be some MOS:ACCESS issue with the color contrast on these tables. The blue source link is practically invisible against the colored headers. See MOS:CONTRAST.
    • I've moved the sources out of the tables now. Vestrian24Bio 07:45, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • You could put the source in a row along the bottom of the table, or in a column down the right side of the table, in order to avoid listing them all together like you did. However, that is up to you, and there is nothing wrong with the solution you came up with.
Auction
  • "Players who do not register for the mega auction would become ineligible to participate in the mini-auctions held in the subsequent years." --> "Players who did not register for the mega auction would become ineligible to participate in the mini-auctions held in the subsequent years."  Done
Staff changes
  • Why is the Position column in gray? Only one of those two items in each row (team or position) should be marked as the scope.  Done
Withdrawn players
  • "Following players were ruled out and/or unavailable..." You need "The" at the front of that sentence.  Done

User:Vestrian24Bio: Let me know when you've had a chance to examine my comments. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:47, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: I've addressed your comments now. Vestrian24Bio 07:45, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Vestrian24Bio:: I’ll go ahead and support knowing you’ll fix the one verb. My other comment is just a suggestion. 😃 Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:19, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Vestrian24Bio 09:23, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of constituencies of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly

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

FL review checklist:      Prose: 2/3 done      Source: Done      Accessibility: Pending      Image: Done

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Pass image review User:Easternsaharareview and this 03:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
    @ChrisTheDude: Fixed all. Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:46, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:47, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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 Fail 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 Fail 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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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

Done, except for one url which the Internet Archive cannot access (probably geo-fenced). -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I run into that all the time, too. Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:02, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dajasj

Thanks for the list. I have only two points. Other than this, I support the promotion!

  • I find the legend above the table and the long column name somewhat duplicate. Can we leave out "SC/ST/None" in the column name for simplicity?
  • I would prefer it if the leade starts with info directly about the constituencies, as Mattximus suggested in the driveby comment, given that it is now mostly about the Assembly which has its own page.

Good luck! Dajasj (talk) 10:44, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the first point. On the second point, I do think that a bit of an introduction to the subject is necessary (what is it, where is it), but I'd be fine with reordering the sentences of the lead a bit so that the first paragraph has more content directly about the constituencies. Any suggestions? -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:58, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Dajasj: Forgot to ping. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:59, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My suggestion would be (based on Mattximus): "There are 81 constituencies of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly, the unicameral legislature of the state of Jharkhand in Eastern India." This would keep the rest of the paragraph nearly the same, so would still give the introduction. Dajasj (talk) 11:14, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Dajasj: Done. I also had to tweak a later sentence to avoid repetition. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Great, Support Dajasj (talk) 11:50, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for removal

List of first ladies of the United States

Notified: Marbe166, Matthewedwards, WikiProject Women's History, WikiProject Presidents of the United States

Fails WP:FLCR#3 and WP:MINREF. Multiple statements with citation needed templates. cookiemonster755 (talk) 16:31, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

20–20–20 club

Notified: Bloom6132, WikiProject Baseball

Per recent changes to WP:FLCR #3c, FLs are required to have at least 8 entries. This list has 7 entries (duplicate entries in a second 20–20–20–20 table shouldn't count twice) and doesn't seem likely to expand soon. This is not a judgment against the page's quality – perhaps this should be resubmitted at GAN. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:54, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

List of Grand Rapids Griffins players

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey

The list was last updated in 2022, so all players who joined since then, as well as statistics from the last four seasons, are missing. Шахматист2025 (talk) 20:27, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delist: It really hasn't been all that significantly updated since the article creator stopped in 2016, and has a number of errors in it. While I'm not philosophically opposed to such lists for minor league teams, with the heavy turnover such teams have, it takes a great deal of effort to keep them updated, and that effort seldom is sustained for long. This probably shouldn't have been feature listed in the first place, and certainly is not worthy of the same now. Ravenswing 20:55, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @DetroitFan7 if you want to handle this. The Kip (contribs) 20:56, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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:Easternsaharareview this 01:21, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Delist per my my comment User:Easternsaharareview this 01:23, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

I agree, I'll see if I can get some time to work on this list the following weekend. User:Easternsaharareview and this 23:18, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
User:Nebulatria: What is your take on the quality of this article at this point? It has been nearly two months since you opened this FLR. Just FYI, User:Easternsahara appears to no longer be with us (not sure what happened there). Pinging User:Tone. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:54, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The three items without descriptions need some at minimum; the tentative list needs expanded into a full table to match other FLs, which is the bulk of the work remaining. --PresN 16:22, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
User:Departure–: What is your take on the quality of this article at this point? It has been three months since this FLR was proposed, which should have been more than enough time to correct any issues. Pinging User:ActuallyElite. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:50, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delegate note - ActuallyElite has been steadily overhauling this list, and is up to 1990 as of a couple days ago. I'm leaving this open until that's done, but I think we're good here once they get to today. --PresN 16:19, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FLC