Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

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

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

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

Nominations urgently needing reviews edit · history · watch · refresh The following lists were nominated almost 2 months ago and have had their review time extended because objections are still being addressed, the nomination has not received enough reviews, or insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met. If you have not yet reviewed them, please take the time to do so: List of rodents (FLC) List of Emperor's Cup finals (FLC) Juhi Chawla filmography (FLC) List of international goals scored by Dwayne De Rosario (FLC) List of pharaohs (FLC) Source reviews needed List of rodents (FLC) List of international goals scored by Dwayne De Rosario (FLC) List of paintings of George Washington (FLC) List of awards and nominations received by My Chemical Romance (FLC) List of Billboard Hot 100 number ones of 1977 (FLC) edit · history · watch · refresh The following lists were nominated for removal more than 14 days ago: List of WWE 2K Games video games (FLRC) List of tallest buildings in Bellevue, Washington (FLRC)

Nominations

List of Billboard Hot 100 number ones of 1978

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

With the 1976 list having been promoted and the 1977 list having quite a few supports, here's the 1978 list. This year, it was very much all about Barry Gibb...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

Image review

Here'll be an image review from me. Arconning (talk) 13:33, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

• File:Barry Gibb (Bee Gees) - TopPop 1973 3.png - CC BY-SA 3.0 nl
• File:Andy Gibb 1981.jpg - Public Domain, the source link seems to not work, either remove or replace link with an archive link
• File:Anne Murray (2 to 3 crop).jpg - CC BY 2.0
• File:John Travolta 1997.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Frankie Valli Liverpool 03.jpg - CC0
• All of the images seem to be under appropriate licensing, just needing the clarification on the one.
• All of the images are relevant to the article.
• All have proper captions and alt-text for accessibility.
  • Here'll by my few comments.

@Arconning: - couldn't find an archive link for the Andy Gibb image, unfortunately, so I just got rid of it...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:35, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

My Chemical Romance discography

Nominator(s): Gavetheman555 (talk), λ NegativeMP1 01:30, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Considering the List of awards and nominations received by My Chemical Romance nomination currently has three supports, id figure I would make the big shot and nominate this next. If your familiar with 2000s rock, then My Chemical Romance probably need no introduction. Over the course of their 20+ year career, they have released main four studio albums, with a planned fifth one before they broke up in 2013. Their discography is quite interesting to me; ranging from styles of post-hardcore (I Brought You My Bullets, You Brought Me Your Love) to more electronic rock and power pop gems (Danger Days: The True Lives of the Fabulous Killjoys). I spent some time doing some tweaks (with User:NegativeMP1 making additional touch-ups in September of last year) and I believe this finally meets the featured list criteria. Looking forward to everyone's comments and feedback. Gavetheman555 (talk) 01:30, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Dylan620

You've both been killing it with these MCR articles! I'll be taking a look at this in the next week or so. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 06:25, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Monuments of national significance in Zaporizhzhia Oblast

Nominator(s): Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 07:18, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

List #6 of the Ukrainian monuments of national significance series. So far, Zaporizhzhia Oblast has the least monuments (unfairly, may I add: I'd at least expect the Popov Manor House and parts of Sotsmisto on here). But I also have good news: I finally figured out how to use the in-development official map of listed monuments, so this is the first list with coordinates. If the coordinates column and the Template:GeoGroup map are OK, I will add these to the other lists (except for regions where most monuments have not been mapped yet). Other than that, the structure follows the previous FLs and I recommend checking out the Q&A. Thank you for reviewing. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 07:18, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98 (10/10/26)

• "Men's gymnasium building where one of the leaders of the 1905 Sevastopol armed uprising, P. P. Shmidt studied" --> Recommend rephrasing as "Men's gymnasium building where P. P. Shmidt, one of the leaders of the 1905 Sevastopol armed uprising, studied"
• I made some minor edits for grammar to the lead. Otherwise, it's another support for another quality list. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:48, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you for the support and corrections. I implemented your suggestion. Regarding the comma after "...are inscribed on the register by the Cabinet of Ministers", I added it earlier on request of one of the reviewers of Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Monuments of national significance in Chernivtsi Oblast/archive1. Personally, I think it reads fine both with and without the comma, so I am not sure what is the best option. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 15:56, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

List of Palestine international footballers

Nominator(s): JaneFootball (talk) 15:00, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

The team nicknamed after militants. Although it joined FIFA shortly before Y2K, Palestinian football has existed independently of Mandatory Palestinian football since the late 1950s, with participation at the Arab Games. I have been improving the article since yesterday, by improving the lead, adding images, citations, expanding the table, and making it accessible to the visually impaired. The lead is not-so-large because of the scarcity of English sources. JaneFootball (talk) 15:00, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• There's an obvious typo in "Still active for the active for the national team" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

  fixed JaneFootball (talk) 09:39, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "although matches date back to the 1953 Pan Arab Games." - I feel the fact that the team apparently played games for 45 years before joining FIFA maybe needs a little more context
• The player names in the table should sort based on surname, not forename
• "Roberto Bishara (22 caps, no goals) is one of the first Chilean-born players to represent Palestine" => "Roberto Bishara (22 caps, no goals) was one of the first Chilean-born players to represent Palestine"
• On that note....the table says he has 27 caps, not 22
• "Yashir Islame (20 caps, 7 goals) capped by Chile's under-20 side as Yashir Pinto before switching allegiance to Palestine.[" => "Yashir Islame (20 caps, 7 goals) was capped by Chile's under-20 side as Yashir Pinto before switching allegiance to Palestine.["
• "Players who are still active for the national team are players who haven't retired from international football and are, subsequently, eligible to be called up." => "Players who are still active for the national team are players who have not retired from international football and are therefore eligible to be called up."
• Some players with the section symbol do not have the background colour
• Oday Dabbagh is listed as having been first capped in 2008 but according to his own article he was born in December 1998 so that would mean he was capped when he was 9 years old
• I checked a couple of players (Saeb Jendeya and Ziyad Al-Kord) and the caps/goals numbers shown here are different to what is shown on their articles. Why is that?
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:11, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

  The only ones I haven't resolved are the sorting (I don't know how sorting works or how to change it to last name) and I'll work on ur first comment (it might be hard to find english-language media discussing this). The typos and images lacking updates for caps were pretty easy

  some points on more open-ended comments:

  1. the Oday Dabbagh was a typo 2008 instead of the correct 2018

  2. The articles are unsourced so anyone could've made up whatever they wanted. Like if I think al-Kord is a good player, maybe I can bump up his caps by 12. But I used a reliable source that is also used in similar pages, like List of France international footballers. After checking, I see that WP:FOOTBALL does not advise against it unlike other similar football databses.

  It is even listed here on an official page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Links#Multi-national JaneFootball (talk) 14:44, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

  it might be hard to find english-language media discussing this - there is no requirement for sources to be in English. WRT name sorting, you need to use a template. So, rather than typing [[Andy Burnham]], type {{sortname|Andy|Burnham}}. That will make it sort under B rather than A -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:04, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Sebastian Stan

Nominator(s): Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 16:28, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it includes every notable and/or necessary accolade received by Sebastian Stan across his career, with reliable sources and extensive research, as well as archiving every last one to the best of my human ability. I did not request a peer review this time because my last few for these lists (Yeah Yeah Yeahs awards, Sebastian Stan filmography) remained dormant, but I did refer to other awards lists when it came to formatting and usage of tables (specifically, the Amy Adams, Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper ones). Thank you! Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 16:28, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comments

• The above examples are not necessarily good ones as they were all promoted a looooong time ago (the Cooper and Lawrence ones more than a decade ago!) and consensus has changed significantly in terms of formatting. The expected format now is for all the content to be in one table, not loads and loads of separate tables, many with just one row. See, for example, List of awards and nominations received by Colin Farrell, promoted earlier this year -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:21, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

  Got it! Sometime today, I'll change it all to one table. Thank you @ChrisTheDude! Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 11:10, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

  Should be good now! Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 19:37, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Cavan121012 (source review)

I'll do a source review. It's a reasonably short list so I'll check every source.

• For the Astra Midseason Awards, reference 4 only shows the winners and not the nominees, Stan isn't mentioned. I'd either replace the reference or add an additional one.
• For the 2021 MTV Movie & TV Awards, reference 25 is a list of the nominees but not the winners so doesn't support Stan winning.

That's the sources checked, just one more comment. If an award's body doesn't have its own Wikipedia page (Columbus, Denver, Latino) then they shouldn't be included on the list.

That's all from me, a few changes and I'll be happy to support the nomination! Cavan121012 (talk) 14:51, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Got it! All concerns should be addressed. Thank you @Cavan121012! Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 19:22, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Support. Excellent work and great work on the Sebastian Stan topic as a whole. Cavan121012 (talk) 22:40, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "Stan's breakthrough role came in 2011 with his portrayal of Bucky Barnes / Winter Soldier in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) film Captain America: The First Avenger." - statement that is was his breakthrough role is unsourced
• "For his performance as the gay son of a former first lady in the comedy drama miniseries Political Animals (2012)," - statement that that is the role he played is unsourced
• "beginning with his portrayal of Tommy Lee in the biographical drama miniseries Pam & Tommy (2022)" - statement that he played that role is unsourced
• "He earned acclaim for his performances as a struggling actor with neurofibromatosis in the psychological thriller film A Different Man (2024) and Donald Trump in the biographical drama film The Apprentice (2024)" - statement that those are the roles he played are unsourced
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:23, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude Everything should be addressed now! Thank you! Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 11:43, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:44, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Image review

Here is an image review from me. Gavetheman555 (talk) 22:24, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

• File:MKr354335 Sebastian Stan (Bester Darsteller, Berlinale 2024).jpg - Own work; great use of alt text

Only one image here, and a really nice choice of one aswell! Happy to pass image review and support this nomination. I have my own FLC open at List of awards and nominations received by My Chemical Romance, you may leave comments there if you wish :) Gavetheman555 (talk) 22:24, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Thank you @Gavetheman555! Tell you what, if you post it over at my talk page I can try to look soon! Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 22:49, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

List of mammals

Nominator(s): PresN 18:10, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Hey y'all, mammal list #80 in our perpetual concluded series, the final capstone of it all: Mammalia itself! This is it, this is the end of 6.5 years of nominations and over 6,000 furry little (and not so little) species. Our family lists were list of species, our order lists were lists of genera, and this final class list is a list of the 163 mammal families on this planet (including 11 families totaling 30 species that were too small and had orders too small to get a sublist). This has been a long time coming, so we're going out strong- every family has a picture and a map (a good chunk of which I made over the last few months), so you've got lots to look at. As always, the list reflects the scientific consensus as well as the results of prior FLCs. I hope you've all enjoyed these lists over the last few years as much as I've enjoyed making them. Thanks for reviewing, both this list and the 79 prior! --PresN 18:10, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Dank

• See my previous review (the rodentia list) for what I'm not focusing on (and I should mention, I also don't pay a lot of attention to links).
• "It comprises 6,121 extant species, which are grouped into 163 families, themselves grouped into 27 orders in 3 major divisions. These orders can contain between one and thousands of species, grouped into genera and then into families.": Just a suggestion: "It comprises 6,121 extant species, which are grouped into 1,308 genera in 163 families, themselves grouped into 27 orders in 3 major divisions. These orders can contain between one and thousands of species."
• "in that genera": Maybe: "in those genera"
• Just a suggestion, since it's a matter of taste which words the lead is supposed to repeat or summarize, but: the third sentence in the Classification section feels repetitive with the lead, to me, in part because it's not very far from the lead. - Dank (push to talk) 22:05, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• "Diets: ... and small vertebrates (excluding humans)": Maybe: "Diets of non-human primates: ... and small vertebrates" - Dank (push to talk) 22:44, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. Nothing else is jumping out at me as a prose problem. There were no sortable nonnumeric columns. I sampled the table links.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, and it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find).
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements.
• 6. It is stable. - Dank (push to talk) 23:13, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

All done, with the exception of the Classification section, as I couldn't think of a way to further differentiate it from the lede wording.

Thanks, looks good, but any thoughts on "Diets: Fruit and leaves, as well as other vegetation, insects, and small vertebrates (excluding humans)"? Another fix might be "Diets (excluding humans): ...". - Dank (push to talk) 13:25, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

@Dank: Well, the Diets: is from the template, so that's difficult to change; I could make it "Diets: (Excluding humans) fruit and leaves, as well as other vegetation, insects, and small vertebrates", but I think it's better to have the parenthetical at the end. --PresN 13:55, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support, provisional on what I assume will be a clean source review. - Dank (push to talk) 14:23, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Easy review of image source links

The Internet Archive is temporarily down, so for the relatively few photos that rely on that link, I considered the number and quality and date of Wikipedia pages (in any language) that have hosted the image.

• File:Tarsipes rostratus Gould 2.jpg: the Commons page needs a page number.
• File:Geomys bursarius.jpg: page not found at source link - Dank (push to talk) 03:50, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

@Dank:Fixed the first and replaced the second with a different gopher. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 13:06, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

• Thanks, that's everything I found. Review passed, or whatever. - Dank (push to talk) 13:28, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Reconrabbit

Wow, what a milestone. Do you need more of an in-depth image review than what Dank already did?

• Why "these orders can contain" rather than just "orders contain"?
• I ran AWB on this list and removed some hanging whitespace, also replaced Animal genera table/end templates with the equivalent End template.
• There are a lot of reused links, but I struggled to find places where it would make sense to remove them - maybe the reuse of Didelphimorphia under both subheadings Infraclass Marsupialia and Didelphimorphia (and the same for Dasyuromorphia? In those cases I don't know which link is less helpful.
• Lipotidae says "Baiji pictured" but there is no picture
• Looking for consistency:
  • Cricetidae (New World rat or mouse)
  • Heteromyidae (kangaroo rat or pocket mouse)
  • Nesomyidae (African or Malagasy rat or mouse)
• compared to
  • Muridae (Old World mouse or rat)
• Probably easiest to change the last one here.
• "Plus a minute tail" - seems out of place, is it impossible to measure?

That's all from me. -- Reconrabbit (talk) 18:53, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

@Reconrabbit: Removed the "can"; dropped the Didelphimorphia link (breaks consistency which I want because people will be jumping straight to an order more than most lists, but that one is directly next to the bluelink before it in Infraclass Marsupialia); whoops, a bot removed the image, so now replaced; swapped to "rat or mouse"; changed to "0–1 cm", which is what's in that bat list. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 19:05, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Awesome!! Are there no other images that would be a suitable representative for the baiji? There's this preserved specimen: File:Specimen of a Baiji Dolphin, Museum of Hydrobiological Sciences, Wuhan Institute of Hydrobiology (1).jpg but I don't love it. There's also a stamp from Romania: File:Baiji-Lipotes-vexillifer.jpg -- Reconrabbit (talk) 19:43, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Oh nevermind, you found one. This has got my support! -- Reconrabbit (talk) 19:43, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Gerard Way discography

Nominator(s): λ NegativeMP1 21:22, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Gerard Way is most famous for being the lead singer of the rock band My Chemical Romance, which is probably one of the most famous rock bands from the 2000s. However, his solo discography—which this list is focused on—is also quite interesting (to me at least). In the brief span between My Chemical Romance's 2013 breakup and 2019 reunion, he released one full album, and a lot of singles of varying styles, ranging from Britpop and shoegaze, to his former band's rock roots, to collaborating with artists like Deadmau5. He stopped releasing solo music in 2020, not long after MCR reunited, but I still think his discography is really interesting and holds some hidden gems of sorts (even if it's nothing compared to what he made with MCR).

Anyways, this discography is extremely short. He only made one album, ten main singles, one promotional single, and appeared on a couple of other things here and there. I modeled it after many other featured discography articles, and it was pretty easy to work on all things considered. And now, I believe it meets the featured list criteria. This is also my first featured list nomination and I'm open to receiving any and all feedback. λ NegativeMP1 21:22, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• I'll do a full review soon, but one thing that jumps out is that "seventies and eighties acts such as Pulp, Blur....." reads a bit oddly given that Blur didn't release their debut album until 1991 and while it's true that Pulp were active in the 1980s, they did not experience any success until 1994..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:39, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

  You're right. And as a matter of fact I don't even see the "seventies and eighties" part at all in the source. I saw it in a source but it's not the one that verifies Blur and Pulp. I probably got something mixed up. I've axed the decades descriptor. λ NegativeMP1 07:47, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• ", initially released exclusively on a cassette given away at the 2016 New York Comic Con before receiving an extended release in 2017" => ", which was initially released exclusively on a cassette given away at the 2016 New York Comic Con before receiving an extended release in 2017"
  • Done.
• "which was also written with Toro" - you haven't specified which previously song was written with Toro. I presume it's "Into the Cave We Wander", but you only said that was recorded with Toro, which could just mean that he played on it without being involved in the writing
  • It should've been "wrote with Toro" for "Into The Cave We Wander". The source says that the two wrote and recorded the song together. So, I've addressed that.
• "My Chemical Romance later reunited in December." => "My Chemical Romance reunited in December of the same year."
  • Done.
• That's it, I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
  • @ChrisTheDude: Thank you for reviewing! I've addressed everything you wrote down. λ NegativeMP1 19:27, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:15, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

List of Florida state parks

Nominator(s): 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

This list covers all 176 units in the Florida Park Service's July 2026 jurisdiction report, the division's annual statement of what it manages. For every unit the table gives the date of the first acquisition, the county, coordinates, and the acreage under the division's jurisdiction, all taken from that report, plus a separately cited notable feature. The ten state trails and the Cross Florida Greenway have their own table, which gives each trail's length alongside the report's acreage, and a summary table breaks the system down by the report's 17 classifications. Where the report's covering memo and its unit-by-unit table disagree (the memo counts 21 historic sites, the table 20), a note explains the difference and the list follows the table. The map at the top draws the boundary of every unit from the Department of Environmental Protection's own park boundary data, so the parks show as shapes rather than point markers. An earlier nomination by a different editor was not promoted in 2013. Since then, the list has been rebuilt from the current report and every row has been re-sourced. 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Shwabb1

• Is the paragraph about the National Gold Medal Award relevant enough to be part of the lead? I don't mind it, but I wonder whether there are similar FLs that do this.
• In the infobox, the area should be "more than 819,000 acres" to be consistent with the lead
• Was there a method for determining whether a feature merits a mention in the "Notable feature" column?
• Will go over the tables later today. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:37, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you for the feedback. I addressed the following:

  Addressed the NGMA paragraph. I shortened it into a sentence and appended it the the preceding paragraph. It is noteworthy but perhaps a standalone statement about it was too much.

  The infobox has adopted the recommended wording.

  In terms of "Notable feature" (NF) decisions, I chose them based on a combination of the Unit Management Plan (UMP), the official page, and personal experience as I've visited over 50 so far. Priority was given to formal designations from third party assessors/auditors such as NNL, NRHP, and Outstanding Florida Waters.

  🌴Operator 16 (talk) 15:20, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

Continuing...

• When multiple counties are listed for one site, add commas to separate them more clearly
• For The Barnacle Historic State Park, the two phrases are separated by a period, while in the previous descriptions, this is generally done with a semicolon.
• For Big Shoals State Park, remove the stray < between the references
• For Cayo Costa State Park, is it possible to specify the exact region in "one of the best preserved archaeological sites in the region"
• For Dr. Julian G. Bruce St. George Island State Park, why is "Gulf" capitalized?
• For Dudley Farm Historic State Park, "from the mid-19th to mid-20th century" → "from the mid-19th to the mid-20th century"
• For Falling Waters State Park, add comma before "making it the tallest waterfall"
• For Fernandina Plaza Historic State Park, add comma after "At 0.80 acres (3,200 m²)"
• For Fort Cooper State Park, no need to capitalize "Listed"
• For Fort Mose Historic State Park, use Template:Lang rather than italics for the Spanish-language text (Gracia Real de Santa Teresa de Mose)
• For Judah P. Benjamin Confederate Memorial at Gamble Plantation Historic State Park, "NRHP-listed 1973" → "NRHP-listed in 1973"
• For Lake Jackson Mounds Archaeological State Park, use Template:Circa in "c. 1050–1500"
• For San Marcos de Apalache Historic State Park, "Rivers" should be outside of the link to St. Marks River and should not be capitalized. Similar situation at Three Rivers State Park and Tomoka State Park.
• For Shoal River Headwaters State Park, "opened January 23, 2026" → "opened on January 23, 2026"
• For South Fork State Park, I would not add statements such as "newly designated" as they quickly become dated, unless you intend to update this whenever you will no longer consider this designation new.
• For Waccasassa Bay Preserve State Park, what is the purpose of quotation marks around "islands"?
• For Ybor City Museum State Park, what are "casitas"? I am assuming this is the diminutive of Spanish: casa. I also can't find a mention of this word in the reference when searching with Ctrl+F.
• For Blackwater Heritage State Trail, is the ampersand part of the official name of the "Florida & Alabama Railroad" or can it be written out as "and"?
• it is supposed to serve." → it is supposed to serve". per MOS:LOGICAL
• Image review up next. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 16:59, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for going through the tables. I fixed the concerns you presented above. Following your MOS:LOGICAL fix, I looked for other instances and found that Falling Waters and Paynes Prairies had the same concerns. I went ahead and fixed those as well. I appreciate the thorough review so far! 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 15:53, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

List of extant megaherbivores

Nominator(s): Wolverine X-eye (talk) 12:06, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Extant megaherbivores are large mammalian herbivores that weigh over a ton when fully grown. These massive beasts are important to their environment, but unfortunately, just like their predecessors, they are too starting to dissappear. The reason this list only includes extant species is because over the course of evolution there has been thousands of megaherbivore species, from sauropod dinosaurs to woolly mammoths. Plus, the author who coined this term dedicated a whole book to these magnificent beasts! I believe the article meets the criteria and is indeed ready. Over to you now. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 12:06, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98 (9/29/26)

• "Mammalian mammals"? Also, sources no. 28 and 31 are showing as duplicates. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:12, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Oopsie daisy, fixed both. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 12:22, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
    • Does this list not include baleen whales? Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:28, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
      • No, baleen whales are actually carnivores that filter feed on large schools of krill, plankton and fish. They are not herbivores. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 12:33, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

        Yeah, I guess you're right. I knew they strained their food from the ocean, and I guess krill and plankton aren't exactly plants. 😉 Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:41, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

        @Bgsu98: Do you plan on doing a full review or are you only interested in leaving drive-by comments? Wolverine X-eye (talk) 07:03, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Lead

• "They have selected slow reproduction to enhance..." --> "Selected" implies a conscious decision. Recommend a different choice or word or phrase.
• "A Their large size offers protection from predators..."

List

• African bush elephant – "...of the family Elephantidae, in of which it is the largest member"
• Asian elephant – As written, the Asian elephant is the second-largest elephant native to the Indian subcontinent. Which elephant species native to the Indian subcontinent is larger?
• African forest elephant – "The African forest elephant is the smallest species of elephant and is one of two species of African elephants, the other being the African bush elephant." --> Unnecessary.
• White rhinoceros – "it has two horns; a smaller back horn and a larger front horn, which can grow up to 101 cm (40 in)." --> As written, both horns can grow up to 101cm. Is this correct?
• Indian rhinoceros – As written, the Indian rhinoceros is the second-largest rhinoceros in India; which rhinoceros in India is larger?
• Javan rhinoceros – "Only bulls have horns that grow up to 27 cm (11 in)." --> As written, only bulls have horns that grow up to 27cm, but cows have horns that don't grow up to 27cm. Do females have horns?
• I agree with PresN that this article should match Wikipedia's giraffe article with eight different species.

User:Wolverine X-eye: Despite your smart comment above, I have done a full review. Please let me know when you've had a chance to examine my comments. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:57, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

@Bgsu98: Addressed most of your comments, except your final request which I cannot complete for the following reasons:

1. PresN actually suggested that I should state which classification system I use, either the 4-species one which the giraffe article mostly follows or the single species one of the IUCN. I chose the latter, and indicated so in a note.

2. The giraffe article doesn't only list a 4-species taxonomy, but an 8- and 3-species one as well. Some of these animals are classified as species in one taxonomy system and a subspecies in another. Clearly there is controversy surrounding giraffe taxonomy, so sticking with a single species is the best option for now. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 17:45, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

On second thought, perhaps it would be wise to increase the table to include the four species. Yeah, I changed my mind. Will begin working now. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 18:11, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• You currently have the same photo for two species of giraffe, and the photo itself simply says "adult giraffes" and does not identify which species they are.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgsu98 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

@Bgsu98: OK. Completed everything. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 21:03, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• There is nothing about the first image of the giraffe to clarify what species it is. However, I will let User:PresN chime in on that. I'm guessing it's probably fine, but the source photo should have a better description than "adult giraffes". Images do have appropriate alt-text. That being said, I'm happy to support this now. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:14, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

  Updated the description on the image page; fortunately for the 4-species model, you can tell the species based on nothing but the spot pattern, but the description should be explicit (and now is). --PresN 21:39, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments from PresN

Nice! Glad we have a definition for this now, I vaguely recall the megafauna list getting deleted way back because no one could agree on the definition of such. What classification scheme does this use? I think you'll need to be specific in the list itself, because while you have giraffe as a single species, which the IUCN still follows, the ASM has it as four species, which our Giraffe article follows (mostly) while also showing an 8-species version. I'm also presuming that you also don't have the Sumatran rhinoceros because it's slightly too small, but wanted to double-check; if so, it may be worth mentioning in the lede that there are other rhino species (that and the pygmy rhino) that are in the same family as the megafauna rhinos but are too small to count.

Well, while I'm here:

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. ! Weight becomes !scope=col | Weight. 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. | [[African bush elephant]] (''Loxodonta africana'') becomes !scope=row | [[African bush elephant]] (''Loxodonta africana''). (Also, maybe consider putting a
  between the common and scientific name just to force it to always be it's 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. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 13:11, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  @PresN: How should I be specific about the classification system? Should I add a note, citation or sentence? Wolverine X-eye (talk) 16:42, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  Sentence or note; I went with a sentence in my lists ("The following classification is based on the taxonomy described by the reference work Mammal Species of the World (2005), with augmentation by generally accepted proposals made since using molecular phylogenetic analysis, as supported by both the IUCN SSC Bat Specialist Group and the American Society of Mammalogists.^[2][3][6]" in list of chiropterans, for example). --PresN 22:22, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  Okay, actioned. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 06:10, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• While it's (I guess) not technically required, it looks a bit odd not having a lead image
• "The torso is barrel-shaped, with pillar-like legs and the body is nearly hairless" - I don't think that comma is needed
• "The Javan rhinoceros, Javan rhino, Sunda rhinoceros or lesser one-horned rhinoceros, is a very rare rhinoceros species" - don't think the last comma is needed
• "Often mistakened with the southern giraffe" - I don't believe "mistaked" is a word. This should be "Often mistaken for the southern giraffe"
• "In males, a third ossicone ranging from 76 to 127 mm (3.0 to 5.0 in) long, is situated above the eyes" - last comma is not needed
• That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: Done! Wolverine X-eye (talk) 09:02, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:11, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• Would the West Indian manatee not also meet the criteria you've listed for herbivorous megafauna? Mattximus (talk) 21:36, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

  @Mattximus: No source recognizes it as a megaherbivore, and it appears that most individuals do no grow larger than 600 kg. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 05:06, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

List of World Heritage Sites in Mexico

Nominator(s): Tone 08:02, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

I was planning to nominate the Mexico list for a while. It is a rather long one, 36 WHS and 23 tentative sites. Standard style, though the map is larger because of geography and site distribution. Feel free to edit directly in the article for minor fixes, which I am sure there are several. Thanks! Tone 08:02, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comments

• I received this feedback at another FL nom: "I worry the current map setup is in violation of MOS:COLOR ("Color should not be used as the sole visual means of conveying information"). If I'm colourblind, there isn't a way to tell the difference between the red and green dots. Could the shapes be changed for two of the sets?".
• The alt for the map need to be set: Currently it is "List of World Heritage Sites in Mexico is located in Mexico".
• "There are 28 cultural, six natural, and two sites": per MOS:NUMNOTES, "Comparable values near one another should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if some of the numbers would (or could) normally be written differently". -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:24, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Municipalities of Sonora

Nominator(s): Mattximus (talk) 19:00, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

It has been a long time, but I had worked on this ages ago and realized I had not nominated it! I am nearly complete in my quest to bring all the List of Mexican State Municipalities to the same high quality standards. It has a standardized format that now includes 66 (!!) lists of municipalities all around the world. Inspired by these real encyclopedias with consistent formatting and high standard, and whichever user started this format by creating this standard on the California page. I tried to incorporate changes from previous nominations, including the latest passed Tamaulipas but I'm sure I've missed some and there can always be improvements. Thanks for your reviews! Mattximus (talk) 19:00, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

Shwabb1

• Spanish-language text in the lead ("ayuntamiento", "regidores y síndicos") needs Template:Lang - Done
• No need to link Hermosillo the second time - Done
• The captions of the first and the third pictures in the gallery are not full sentences, so you can drop the periods - Done
• In the footnote of Bácum, "31" → "1931" - Done
• Remove stray space between Mazatán and the footnote - Done
• Image licenses check out, but the second picture in the gallery (Cajeme) is rather low quality and has a black border. Is there a better picture that can be used? Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 12:10, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

• I agree completely, but I cannot find any other pictures of the city. There are a few of a specific building, but I was disappointed none other than this of the Ciudad Obregón. Mattximus (talk) 23:58, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

• Thank you very much for this review! You've caught some excellent errors in my writing. I believe I've addressed all of them. Mattximus (talk) 00:01, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

  Support on prose and pass image review. Last suggestion is to archive the refs if possible, though this is not a requirement. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 11:15, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you! Is there a bot I can run that can do this automatically? Mattximus (talk) 23:51, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

  There is InternetArchiveBot, though I've never used it. I believe you have to tick "Add archives to all non-dead references" for it to archive everything. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:59, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

  It worked! I've ran it and added archived pages, thank you! Mattximus (talk) 23:55, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Brandon Flowers discography

Nominator(s): –SassafrassAlabass (talk · contribs · finished projects) 04:20, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I have worked on it and brought it up to the requirements I believe are suitable for featured list. Seeing as Flowers' list of awards and nominations has been accepted, I figured this should come next. –SassafrassAlabass (talk · contribs · finished projects) 04:20, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• 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. ! Title becomes !scope=col | Title.
• The "Peak chart positions" cell in a few tables spans multiple columns with a colspan, so its scope should be 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. | "Superheated" becomes !scope=row | "Superheated" (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.
• Run iabot on the list.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:55, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824 Issues should be fixed, please let me know if I didn't catch any. –SassafrassAlabass (talk · contribs · finished projects) 23:34, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support on accessibility.
• P.S. Setting rowspan="1" isn't needed since that is the default. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:14, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "the band have released" - I am not American so maybe I am wrong, but this not be "the band has released" in American English.....?
• " which reached top ten on the UK singles chart " => " which reached the top ten on the UK singles chart "
• "Flowers featured on closing track "Superheated"" => "Flowers featured on the closing track "Superheated""
• The Robbie Williams album is shown as "Heavy Entertainment Show" but its actual title is "The Heavy Entertainment Show"
• Think that's all I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:47, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  I originally wrote down "have" to refer to the band as a group in a plural context, but I do agree that "has" would make more sense to American English. Everything else is also fixed. –SassafrassAlabass (talk · contribs · finished projects) 16:40, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support' -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:09, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

List of contributing properties in the Hollywood Boulevard Commercial and Entertainment District

Nominator(s): Gb321 (talk) 19:02, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it is a thorough, comprehensive, well cited, well written, well organized list that exemplifies the best of this website. Also, this list complements the Hollywood Boulevard Commercial and Entertainment District article, which is a GA. Gb321 (talk) 19:02, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Delegate note: added to WP:FLC on September 28. --PresN 11:47, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comment by Dragonhawk12

Hello! I do plan on doing a full review of the article soon (At least in November, as I'm focused on the October GA backlog drive). I had one drive-by comment though; I clicked on a couple images and from what I can tell, most (if not all) of them do not use WP:ALT text, which is required. I know there are a lot of images, but something simple like "The exterior of XXXXX Building" and a short description of what it looks like should do the trick. Dragonhawk12 (talk) (Guestbook) (Wikicats) 00:39, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

done! Gb321 (talk) 16:07, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Nice. I saw your peer review, and I think adding coordinates for each building would be nice, for completeness. Dragonhawk12 (talk) (Guestbook) (Wikicats) 17:26, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

done Gb321 (talk) 20:35, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• There's no reason for the image column to be sortable. Not really convinced on the value of the address column being sortable either..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

Grand Prix at the CD Shop Awards

Nominator(s): IanTEB (talk) 15:33, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

This list is about the signature accolade at the CD Shop Awards, voted by record store employees across Japan. I believe the table is organized in a way that complies with all accessibility critera, is easy to navigate, and presents all relevant information in an easily understandable manner. All entries are sourced to the official website of the award itself. I believe such usage of primary sources is permitted in lists like this, but I can do my best to replace these with secondary sources if needed.

This is my third time at FL so I am still quite inexperienced. Any and all comments are appreciated! IanTEB (talk) 15:33, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

• Per MOS:LINK#OTHER, the boldfaced text in the lead's first sentence should contain no links. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:40, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

  Fixed IanTEB (talk) 17:55, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "discluding live albums and compilations" => "excluding live albums and compilations". There is no such word as "discluding"
• TItles that start with the words "A" or "The" should sort based on the next word in the title
• "With The Book and The Book 2 in 2022, Yoasobi is the only artist to be nominated twice in one year." => "With The Book and The Book 2 in 2022, Yoasobi is the only act to be nominated twice in one year." (only a single performer can be an artist, not a duo)
• Think that's all I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:20, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for the comments! I believe I've caught everything. IanTEB (talk) 20:40, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Harushiga

• Since this is a specific award by the CD Shop Awards, the lead could be rewritten to clarify that and to also retain a wikilink to the main article. (e.g. The Grand Prix (Japanese: 大賞, Hepburn: Taishō) is held annually by the CD Shop Awards to honor music albums in Japan.)
• The preposition in the article title seems unnecessary. I would suggest using "CD Shop Awards" as a disambiguator (Grand Prix (CD Shop Awards)). This would align with the title formatting of other awards with the "Grand Prix" name, such as Grand Prix (Cannes Film Festival) and Grand Prix (Belgian Film Critics Association). Harushiga (talk) 02:05, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

  @Harushiga: Thanks for your insight. I've changed the lead and infobox per your suggestion, but I was advised on the Wikipedia Discord to open a page move discussion instead of boldly changing the title, since this is an open FLC. I've opened this discussion on the list's talk page, in case you are interested in commenting. IanTEB (talk) 21:31, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

  Looks good. I don't see any other issues so I'll support this. Harushiga (talk) 14:38, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Nepela Memorial

Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:53, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

The Nepela Memorial is Slovakia's flagship figure skating competition. It is named in honor of Ondrej Nepela, winner of the gold medal at the 1972 Winter Olympics and multiple-time world champion, European champion, and Czechoslovak national champion. He is one of the most celebrated athletes in Slovak history. Interestingly enough, the 2026 Nepela Memorial is taking place right now, this weekend (September 24–26) in Bratislava! Please let me know if you have any comments or suggestions, and I look forward to your constructive feedback. Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:53, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

NOTE: The 2026 competition has just ended and this article reflects those results. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:09, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

In the History section, "except for 2020 and 2021, when the competition was cancelled" – maybe better worded as "competitions were cancelled"? That would be consistent with the wording in the lead and the table. I also checked all images (no issues found) and fixed en dashes per MOS:DASHVAR. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 09:23, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• User:Shwabb1: Fixed. Thanks! Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:20, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  Support on prose and pass image review. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 10:22, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

List of Billboard Hot 100 number ones of 1977

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:42, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

The 1976 list hasn't been open for long but it already has multiple supports so hopefully it's OK to also open this one. Fun fact: 1977 saw the only number one in Hot 100 history written by Bruce Springsteen. Although he's The Boss, he's never had a number one single of his own. Feedback as ever will be gratefully received and very swiftly acted upon! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:42, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• Except for the lead image, the rest are from much after 1977 and could use a "(pictured in YEAR)" added to their captions.
• The last table is missing col scopes.
• I think you can just call them "Hall & Oates" in the lead, but leave the table entry as-is as that's how they are credited.
• I didn't see any other problems with the prose. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

• P.S. you can use {{Table alignment}} which lets you to skip mentioning the alignment for every cell. This does not work for the header cell of every row though. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:06, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
  • @MPGuy2824: - 1 and 2 addressed. Re: 3, I prefer to keep the artist names consistent between the lead and the table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:34, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
    • Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:11, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Dank

• Manfred Mann's Earth Band's "Blinded by the Light": I don't have an authority to cite for you, but I've seen a lot of grumbling about double possessives. If you agree, "... by Manfred Mann's Earth Band" is a quick fix.
  • Fixed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
• "ABBA is also one of the commercially successful acts of all time worldwide": I'm not positive whether you're saying they're a commercially successful act or one of the most commercially successful acts.
  • Fixed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
• "with "Evergreen (Love Theme from A Star Is Born)", from A Star is Born"; "with "Gonna Fly Now (Theme From Rocky)", taken from Rocky": I'm not a fan of the repetition. Is there another way?
  • I made the only fix I could think of...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
• In the table, I might have this wrong, but don't you usually sort something like "Manfred Mann's Earth Band" after Manilow?
  • Fixed -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. Nothing else is jumping out at me as a prose problem. I checked sorting on all sortable nonnumeric columns and sampled the table links.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, and it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find).
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. I don't see an image-license problem.
• 6. It is stable. - Dank (push to talk) 21:14, 27 September 2026 (UTC)
  • @Dank: - thanks for your review. Responses above -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
• Support, provisional on a clean source review (i.e., I'm expecting a clean source review, but I don't want to belabor the point). Regarding "from A Star is Born", I see that you've got constraints here that are hard to get around. I'll think about it again if it comes up in another list. - Dank (push to talk) 14:08, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Wolverine

• In 1977, it was compiled based on a combination of sales and airplay data sourced from surveys of retail outlets and playlists submitted by radio stations respectively. A comma is missing somewhere
  • I can't work out where you think a comma would be needed.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

    Before "based" and after "radio stations". It reads much more clearly. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 08:01, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

    @Wolverine X-eye:I have added one after "radio stations", but saying "In 1977, it was compiled, based on....." would make no sense -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:43, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

    Fair enough, I will now Support promotion of this article. Again, excellent work! Wolverine X-eye (talk) 09:34, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

• ABBA is also one of the most commercially successful acts of all time worldwide,[11] but the single week which the Swedish group spent atop the chart with "Dancing Queen" was its only appearance at number one in the United States.[12] ABBA is a group so change "its" to "their"
  • In American English, group names are treated as singular. See, for example, this American source, which says "A little more than 50 years ago, Led Zeppelin released its sixth album" not "A little more than 50 years ago, Led Zeppelin released their sixth album"

That's all I have, interesting stuff. I may as well give some of these hits a try to get a glimpse into what the taste was like back then. And if you have spare time, I'll appreciate a review of my nomination here. Best, Wolverine X-eye (talk) 06:49, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

@Wolverine X-eye: - see above...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Older nominations

Jane Remover discography

Nominator(s): RTSthestardust (talk) 18:33, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because of my significant expansion of Jane Remover's discography in general. I significantly extended the lead and made sure each item on their discography is cited with a reliable citation. My main motivation for this is because I'm a JR fan and that all of her album articles and single articles (excluding "Dancing with Your Eyes Closed" (future nom) and "Dreamflasher") so far are in GA-status. RTSthestardust (talk) 18:33, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824 I completed your accessibility notes. RTSthestardust (talk) 17:16, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Jane Remover contributors (@Wackistan @RedShellMomentum @Camilasdandelions @Cathodography @Locust member @Skyshifter @Tears in the club) Would you want to show support for the FL nomination? - RTSthestardust (talk) 19:15, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
  •  Done
• 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. ! Song becomes !scope=col | Song. If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead.
  •  Done
• 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. | "Census Designated" becomes !scope=row | "Census Designated" (on its own line).
  •  Done
• The previous two points are mostly for the Music videos table
  • Clear
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
  • Clear
• All images should have alt-text.
  •  Done
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:06, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "They[a] released three studio albums under their main name" => "They[a] have released three studio albums under their main name" (unless they don't plan to ever release any more)
• "From Frailty onward" - it would be better to say "since [date]", as "From Frailty onwards", with no further context, doesn't really help the reader
• "In early 2020, Remover began creating digicore music[2] and released " => "Remover began creating digicore music[2] in early 2020 and released "
• "Initially under the Dltzk name, they worked on their debut EP" - why "initially"? Was it eventually released under a different name?
• "On November 12, 2021, Remover's debut studio album Frailty" - second debut album?
• "On February 14, 2025, under the alias Venturing, they released their debut album Ghostholding" - third debut album? Regardless of name, an artist can't really have multiple debut albums, so in each case I would instead say "first album under the name [whatever]"
• "During that period, they began working on their second studio album Census Designated" - not their second album
• "In August 2025, Remover released the mixtape Indie Rock" - title should be in italics
• "before being removed quickly after its release" => "before it was removed quickly after its release"
• Frailty is listed in the "as Jane Remover" table but I am pretty sure that earlier you said it was released under the name Ditzk......?
• Think that's all I got..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:08, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude

  • Fixed 1–4, 6, 8–9
  • 5 (Teen Week is an EP, and Frailty is actually Remover's first album when considering their main work)
  • 7 (In fact it is their second studio album in their main discography. Teen Week is an EP)
  • 10 (Frailty was listed as Dltzk before and that's true, and I made sure it was released under that as Dltzk in the lead. However, it's a precedent name of Jane Remover and the album's article especially lists under Jane Remover. If it wasn't, then it's considered deadnaming.) -

  RTSthestardust (talk) 20:20, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support - apologies for forgetting to check back in sooner.......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:24, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Cathodography

• (Pardon for my possibly dismissive tone, but) I think it's indispensable to comment that this reads more of a summary of Jane Remover's whole career than what I would consider appropriate for the standards of FL discographies. The amount of album-specific detail is unusually detailed and does not seem useful for the purpose of this article. I would argue that the genre transitions may be relevant, but much of the information go considerably beyond that. The third paragraph, for example, includes They recorded the album in the span of six to seven months.[15][16] Remover intended for it to sound pixelated and noisy,[2] and its sound was inspired by video game soundtracks.[10][2] and it is a concept album that takes place over the course of one night,[24][25] based on themes of desperation, isolation, and rejection.[26] Given that Jane Remover's career spans only 6 years, the four full paragraphs of career and album history seem disproportionate for a discography article, since that is the limit for lead paragraphs. Many of the information here could simply be moved to Jane Remover, either into the lead or into the relevant sections of the main article. I would like to see this issue addressed before, maybe, I proceed with a more detailed review of the article's remaining content. Cattos^💭 00:23, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  @Cathodography Noting from you, I have improved on making the lead shorter and consistent while still showing a bit of context such as its musical style. With better organization, I moved sentences about Remover's other projects to the last paragraph, making Remover's main discography consistent. - RTSthestardust (talk) 01:15, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  Let me know if it's too much or good enough. - RTSthestardust (talk) 01:17, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks, much better :3 Cattos^💭 01:27, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

• American musician Jane Remover has released nine studio albums, one mixtape, five extended plays, thirty singles (including seven as a featured artist), six music videos, and eight remixes. Would it be better to clarify this with the additional "across their various aliases" or "under the names Jane Remover, Leroy, and Venturing"?
• Additionally, two of their extended plays and five of their singles were released as Venturing. What's the significance of specifying these figures here?
• Since 2021, all of their music as Jane Remover has been released via DeadAir Records. Teen Week is self-released (and, if you consider, Indie Rock is too self-released).
• Wouldn't No Words, Just a Picture of Me technically be their debut EP?
• The significance of the alias High Zoey isn't mentioned anywhere else.
• unlink DeadAir Records on the second occurrence (and refer to it simply as DeadAir)
• After retiring the Dltzk pseudonym in 2022 This wording would make it seem that Census Designated is the debut album under the Jane Remover alias, when the article Frailty (Jane Remover album) attributes the release to Jane Remover instead of dlktz. The Fader source claims that "dltzk has officially changed their stage name to Jane Remover". You did mention deadnaming in this discussion, so I think it would be useful to briefly acknowledge the context of Jane's coming out as a trans woman.
• The fourth paragraph contains three very close instances of the word "pseudonym".
• Following the Dariacore trilogy,[21] Why is there a citation for this?
• and indie rock[27] influences.[24] same issue
• The prose doesn't mention any chart performance for the albums, most notably NACC, which appears to be the only album to have charted.
• That's all! I weakly dislike the separate paragraph regarding side projects, as I'm more of a fan of putting things in a chronological structure, but I suppose this is more of a stylistic choice so I'm not going to insist on it. Cattos^💭 02:27, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

  @Cathodography

  • Clarified issue 1
  • Removed the line from issue 2
  • Clarified issue 3 with "most of Remover's work" instead
  • Removed any mention of High Zoey from issues 4-5
  • Unliked DeadAir on issue 6
  • Replaced with "After coming out as a trans woman", also using the Pitchfork Frailty review *citation instead, on issue 7.
  • "pseudonyms" now only mentioned one on issue 8
  • Moved back to Dariacore 3: was mainly to cite it just in case, for issue 9.
  • Fixed citation problems on issue 10.
  • Added NACC performances on final part of the last paragraph for issue 11. -

  RTSthestardust (talk) 02:53, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Image review

Image review from me. Gavetheman555 (talk) 15:17, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

• File:Jane Remover performing November 2025 (cropped).jpg - Own work, alt text is provided, cropped from another file, appears to be no issues

Considering theres only one image here, and it appears to be okay, that is a pass on the image review and a support from me. I have my own FLC open at List of awards and nominations received by My Chemical Romance if you wish to leave comments :) Gavetheman555 (talk) 15:17, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

Support from Dylan620

Heart was a belter of an EP and I also enjoyed Status Update Music, so I figured I'd give this a prose review.

• American rapper Jane Remover – I would replace "rapper" with "musician", as the lede of the Jane Remover article also calls them a singer-songwriter.
• Add an acronym (EP) in the opening sentence, where extended play is linked.
• In November 2021, Remover's debut studio album Frailty was released by DeadAir. – This one isn't super important, but you may want to reword this in a way to convert it from passive voice to active voice.
• which had a shoegaze and post-rock influence – the current phrasing creates a singular-plural conflict, methinks. Maybe something like which had influences from shoegaze and post-rock?

And that's it! Great work. If you found this review helpful, or if you have any time or interest, I have an open FLC for Timeline of the 2003 Pacific hurricane season. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 17:55, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

@Dylan620

1) Replaced with "The American musician"

2) Acronym in opening sentence isn't really needed. See the featured Black Country, New Road discography for example.

3) Reworded as "In November 2021, Remover released their debut studio album Frailty through DeadAir."

4) Done.

All of these have been addressed. - RTSthestardust (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

All looks good to me RTSthestardust – happy to support. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 19:03, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

List of consorts and children of the Jiajing Emperor

Nominator(s): Min968 (talk) 13:00, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

This article is about list of consorts and children of the Jiajing Emperor. I am nominating this for featured list status because I believe it meets all the FL criteria and it is an important part of the series of articles on the topic of the Ming dynasty that I am currently improving Min968 (talk) 13:00, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude

• "she suffered a miscarriage and died on 21 October of that year due to a dispute with the Emperor" - She died due to a dispute? Or both? Either way I think maybe we need something more descriptive than "a dispute", as having a dispute with someone doesn't normally cause a person to literally die........
• "The Emperor showed his displeasure towards her by giving her [...] the posthumous name Daoling" - can we get a little context on how this showed his displeasure?
• Think that's all I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:32, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude Done. Min968 (talk) 17:25, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:23, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Векочел

• "Lady Chen became empress in 1522." Do you have the exact date she became empress?
  • His first consort, nee Ch'en, was selected for him by his aunt and installed as empress in 1522.
• "In early 1534, she was inexplicably deposed, possibly due to her intervention on behalf of Empress Dowager Zhang." Does the source state exactly how Empress Zhang intervened?
• "The Emperor is said to have chosen her because she shared his views on ceremonies." Could you be more specific about the Emperor's views on ceremonies?
• "Despite this, he gave Empress Fang a lavish funeral and bestowed upon her an auspicious posthumous name." Provide the posthumous name if possible.

Векочел (talk) 01:08, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

@Векочел Done. Min968 (talk) 03:55, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

Support Векочел (talk) 07:16, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

List of constituencies of the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly

Nominator(s): -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:11, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

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

The 16th in the Indian constituency series. I've improved the lead, included some history and brought the table accessibility to FL-standards. The lead has more footnotes than usual as the state was split after the last census due to which more explanations were necessary. Similar, recent FL: Gujarat. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:11, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "In 1955 elections were only held in the new added regions" => "In 1955 elections were only held in the newly-added regions"
• That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: I fixed that yesterday, but forgot to reply here. Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:34, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:35, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Support from Dylan620

Prose review forthcoming. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 06:32, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

I've got nothing :) Dylan620 in public/on mobile (he/him • talk) 10:51, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments from NapHit

• "Constituency boundaries are periodically redrawn by the delimitation commission which tries to keep them as geographically compact areas, " comma after which

  I'm assuming you meant "comma before which". -MPGuy2824 (talk)

  • Yes I did, sorry. NapHit (talk) 08:45, 12 October 2026 (UTC)
• "According to the 2011 census of India the Scheduled Castes constitute 16.4%, while the Scheduled Tribes constitute 7% of the population of the state." should be a comma after India, and I'm going back and forth on whether 'the population of the state' part should be after 16.4% rather than at the end of sentence. Feels like the sentence would flow better if it were

  I've rewritten that part of the sentence. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:45, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Everything else look good! NapHit (talk) 10:13, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

@NapHit: I've done both. Thanks for the review. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:45, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Happy to support now my comments have been addressed. Great work! NapHit (talk) 08:45, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

Russian Figure Skating Championships

Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:45, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Soviet Figure Skating Championships was promoted to Featured List in February. I actually completed the Soviet and Russian lists concurrently using the same sources. Please let me know if you have any comments or suggestions, and I look forward to your constructive feedback! Bgsu98 (Talk) 13:45, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "The last installment of the Soviet Championships were" - the subject is "instalment", which is singular, not plural. Maybe simply to just "the final Soviet Championships were"......?
• Think that's literally all I got! Stellar work as ever! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:07, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

• Fixed. Thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:51, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:08, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

2026 Women's T20 World Cup squads

Nominator(s): Vestrian24Bio 09:26, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

I am re-nominating this now that my other nomination has two supports; this article uses the same format as 2026 Men's T20 World Cup squads which I got to FL status earlier this year... Vestrian24Bio 09:26, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "Each team was allowed [...] and were required " - singular/plural disagreement
• Think that's all I got....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: done.. Vestrian24Bio 10:38, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

• I personally think you made the change the wrong way round, as in this context "team" should be treated as singular, but I made that adjustment and am now happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:40, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• '...required to submit the provisional squad to the ICC by 1 May 2026.' change to 'a provisional squad...'
• ref 2 needs a publication date
• ref 6 needs the author adding
• ref 18 needs the author adding

That's all from me. I also have a list here, that could do with a review, if you'd like to take a look that would be much appreciated. NapHit (talk) 14:49, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

List of EFL Cup–winning managers

Nominator(s): NapHit (talk) 21:25, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because after doing some extensive work on the list over the past week or so, I believe it's now close to featured standard. My current list has three supports and no outstanding comments. All comments are welcome, and I'll try to get to them as quickly as possible. NapHit (talk) 21:25, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• This article has a hyphen but List of FA Cup winning managers does not. Which is correct.........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Ah, you're right. I think it should be with a hyphen, judging by some of the other manager lists. I'll add the hyphen to the FA Cup one. NapHit (talk) 07:42, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Further comments

• The article should mention somewhere that the competition was known for decades as the Football League Cup
• "It's open to teams" => "It is open to teams"
• That's it, I think -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:21, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments, @ChrisTheDude:, I've addressed them all. NapHit (talk) 07:42, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Pass on image review - Just the one image that's got appropriate rational. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 12:16, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:26, 11 October 2026 (UTC)
• If interest and time permit, please comment at my FL nom.

1992–93 snooker world rankings

Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

This is the 18th nomination for a snooker world rankings list by me, and it's another long one. Sadly, there are a couple of unknowns, despite a careful trawl of book, magazine and newspaper sources. I'm happy to provide extracts of sources on request. Thanks in advance for improvement suggestions. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• Lead image could probably be made larger by being set to e.g. upright=1.4
• Images beside the table should probably be made consistent in size with upright=1
• "There were eighteen ranking events taken into consideration for the 1991–92 ranking list" - presumably this should say 1992-93......?
• The last three paragraphs of the lead only have five sentences between them, could they be merged?
• "By number of ranking points." - not a sentence, doesn't need a full stop
• That's what I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Many thanks, ChrisTheDude. Hopefully I've fixed those. Let me know if anything else is required. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:36, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:53, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Rodney Baggins

Lead

• World Snooker Championship is duplinked. Unless you wanted to link the second one specifically to 1993 World Snooker Championship? If so, you should probably also link specifically to 1993 Masters (snooker) in same sentence (with or without pipes).

• Image caption: "retained top place in the ranking list" sounds a bit off to me. Maybe clarify: "retained his position at the top of the ranking list"

• I'd like to see non-breaking endash in seasons, to keep it tidy and avoid scrappy breaks across lines. Example: 1992–93 > 1992{{nbnd}}93, etc. However, this would require pipes for the linked seasons, so slightly more awkward coding. Certainly the non-linked examples could be easily done, e.g. "There were eighteen ranking events taken into consideration for the 1992{{nbnd}}93 ranking list"

• Dashes have been discussed at WP:SNOOKER a couple of times in the last year: Are non-breaking en-dashes worth it?; Use of "nbnd" in pages. My reading is that the consensus is not to use {{nbnd}} for now. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:43, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

• That's fine. I had no idea they were causing problems in visual editor. Will bear this in mind in future. Rodney Baggins .talk. 20:44, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

• "swapping places with Steve Davis" makes no sense unless you state both of the places (2nd & 4th), i.e. "John Parrott moved to second" > "John Parrott moved to second from fourth"

• Is it normal to say "exemption to" (or into) the later rounds (or main stage)? It sounds illogical to me because the word 'exemption' means 'permission not to do something', in this case not to take part in the qualifying rounds. I prefer "automatic qualification" or at least an explanatory note for what we mean by 'exemption' here.

• "Exemption" or "Exempted" are used in sources but I think "automatic qualification" is a better option as it is more accurate. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:43, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

• "the first two-season professional to reach the top 16 since Tony Knowles had done so ten years earlier." Suggest it would be OK to trim to "the first two-season professional to reach the top 16 since Tony Knowles ten years earlier" (or just state the season explicitly in place of "ten years earlier"?)

• Suggested wording change: "...and Darren Morgan were in the top 16" > "...and Darren Morgan entered the top 16"

• Suggested wording change: "Peter Ebdon was the highest-placed of the players who had only been a professional for one season, at 47th," > "Of the players who had been a professional for only one season, Peter Ebdon was the highest-placed at 47th"

Points tariff and basis of ranking

• In tables: "Second round loser" > "Second-round loser" (x2) // "First round loser" > "First-round loser" (x2) // "Last 16 loser" > "Last-16 loser" // "Last 32 loser" > "Last-32 loser"

• I've never come across 'Antepenultimate' before! May need a footnote? Ignore if I'm being too pedantic.

• I've changed to "Third-from-last"; is that better? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:01, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

• It still says 'Antepenultimate', but I have a more general problem with the round names in those four tables, which I'd like to run past you. Maybe best if I expand further below... Rodney Baggins .talk. 20:54, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

• There's no explanation of what an A point is. Does it stand for "Advantage" by any chance?

• I've drawn a blank on what 'A' might stand for; even the Benson & Hedges Yearbook which typically has the best explanation of how the rankings work is silent on this for the year when A points started. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:01, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

• Second bullet: "If players had an equal number of ranking points," > "For players with an equal number of ranking points," and possibly also change "earned more ranking points" > "earned the most ranking points" --- simply because when I first read it, I thought it meant "earned more ranking points in the later season than in the earlier season"!

Rankings

• For the three images, 'upright=1' is default/implied so doesn't need to be included. The Parrott pic should really be scaled down to 0.8 because it's upright (unless that makes it look odd).

• Jimmy White image caption: suggest changing "as he had in the previous rankings." to "as in the previous season." or "as in the previous ranking list."

• What's the difference between a dash and a zero in the rankings table? Is the dash supposed to mean it's irrelevant, whereas 0 actually means the number zero? Or are they interchangeable? With that in mind, there are loads of anomolies in the table, too many for me to list here, but I can give a few examples: Players 231 (Werbeniuk) and 232 (Hughes) have dashes in Merit points and A points columns, but those above have zeroes in those columns. Player 205 (Clarke) has dashes instead of zeroes in Merit points and A points column. Same for player 192 (O'Brien). Players 154 and 155 have dashes in the Merit points column. Player 143 has a dash in the A points column rather than a zero. Many other examples of this... 132, 128...

• This does look weird, let me see if there is any reason. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:43, 7 October 2026 (UTC)
• I think I might have been using the style from whichever source I was looking at, at the time. The B&H Yearbook and Snooker Scene both have dashes, not zeroes; Pot Black has zeroes, not dashes. I think dashes look better. What say you, Rodney Baggins? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:01, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

• Yes, dashes definitely look better! Thanks, Rodney Baggins .talk. 21:09, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

• Comparing players 16 (Morgan) and 17 (Hallett), tied with 24 ranking points – why do Morgan's 5 Merit points and 1 A point trump Hallett's 10 Merit points? Is this an example of merits being earned in the later season?

• Morgan earned more ranking points in the later season. (see table; "For players with an equal number of ranking points, precedence was given to the player that earned the most ranking points in the later season.") BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:18, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

Rounds reached and points awarded

Tournament name	Hallett		Morgan
Dubai Classic	L64	1M	L16	2
Grand Prix	L16	2	L64	1M
UK Championship	L64	1M	L16	2
The Classic	QF	3	L16	2
Asian Open	L32	1	L64	1M
Welsh Open	L64	1M	Runner-up	5
British Open	L32	1	L16	2
Strachan Open	L64	1M	L16	2
European Open	L64	1M	QF	3
World Snooker Championship	L32	2M	Qual R8	2M
Total		7 + 7M		18 +4M

• Players 161 to 166 all have zero Merit points and 2 A points, but surely Dunning should be at the top of that list with his 14 frames won and Ashby at the bottom with zero frames won?

• If they were tied on everything up to A points, precedence was given to the player with the higher number of A points in the later season. Frames were only taken into consideration if they were still tied. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:25, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

• The transition from player 185 (King) to player 186 (Rigitano) doesn't make sense. Assuming they both have zero Merit points and 1 A point, surely Rigitano should be above King according to frames won (18 vs. zero).

• Same as previous point; lower tiers of points were only considered if the higher tiers resulted in a tie. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:25, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

• At bottom of table, how were players 241 to 546 in the table differentiated for ranking? They all have four dashes against them, so look equal. It's not alphabetical. Is it by birth date or date of turning Pro? Or is it simply sorted in terms of "the player with the better performance in the most recent world championship" as stated under "Ranking was determined as follows"? Same question for players 233 to 240 (all won one frame).

• Pot Black says that "players from No. 241 have been allocated seeding places based in respect of their one season performances using the 'new' ranking." The "new" ranking system, used for 1993–94 snooker world rankings is, unsurprisingly, pretty complicated, as can be seen from the tables at 1994–95 snooker world rankings. I've not seen a source for the 'new' tariff for numbers 241 to 546 for 1992–93. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:43, 7 October 2026 (UTC)
• Looking for something else, I've seen that Pot Black for July 1992 actually listed all the "new points" for places 241 onwards. I suppose I had better add them into the table... 496 onwards have zero new points and seem be ordered alphabetically by surname. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:01, 7 October 2026 (UTC)
• Added them in; you might be able to suggest improvement to the explanations

• I think we can all agree that the WPBSA ranking system is "unsurprisingly, pretty complicated"! Thank you for your valiant efforts to explain the reasoning behind the ranking positions. I have to say I'm still a bit baffled, but as long as you're able to confirm the veracity of all the positions, then that's good enough for me! The split table is a big improvement, and the addition of the "New" points column for pointless players looks impressive. I've suggested some slight wording changes in the intro there – please check my edit to see if it makes sense. I have one further point to make about ranking positions 241–546, but I'll pick it up below... Rodney Baggins .talk. 21:47, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 12:42, 7 October 2026 (UTC) I may be completely misunderstanding the ranking system and how it feeds into the table, but I guess the purpose of the article is to make that clear for all readers! Regards, Rodney Baggins .talk. 22:17, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

• Many thanks, Rodney Baggins. I've implemented the copyedits suggested. Your comments were really useful. Some of the rankings are quite counter-intuitive and absolutely we should try and make it a bit easier for readers. I also spotted that the word "qualifying" had crept into one table where it shouldn't be. Let me know what I should fix next! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:30, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

• (from above) Just to check my understanding of the players ranked 241–546. These 300+ players did not earn any points in the previous two seasons (90–91 & 91–92), i.e. the two seasons used as the basis for the 92–93 rankings. Therefore these 'pointless' players could not be differentiated (ranked) for 92–93 and spent the entire season all bunched together effectively awaiting an end-of-season performance review. Does this mean that they spent the whole 92–93 season labelled "unranked", and it was not until the END of the 92–93 season that they could receive their actual (retrospective) ranking positions for that season? Rodney Baggins .talk. 22:20, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

• The "new" ranking system, with points scaled according to tournament prize money, was agreed at the WPBSA AGM in July 1990, at the same meeting as membership was opened up. At the July 1991 AGM there was a vote on whether to retrospectively apply the "new" system to take effect in 1991–92; it failed by a single vote. Needing a two-thirds majority, the vote was 23-12 in favour. I don't know when it was decided that players with no "old" points would be ordered based on the "new" system for 1992–93 but it's quite possible they knew during the 1991–92 season that it would happen at the end. The listing in the article here was used for the 1992–93 season. The apparent terminological distinction between "ranked" (had old points) and "seeded" players (with no old points) didn't matter as far as I know. Does that help, Rodney Baggins? Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:00, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

• Thank you. That doesn't really answer my question but is still very interesting!! I was simply checking that players ranked 241–546 were effectively unranked for the duration of the 92–93 season and got ranked retrospectively at the end of the season according to the "New" points calculation, whereas the players ranked 1–240 were given their 92–93 rankings prior to the start of the season. Anyway, I have more pressing concerns over the points tariff tables...

• Sorry for the dump... I did try to answer but it got lost in the ramble. This list was used in 1992-93, e.g. Snooker Scene for September 1992 reports on "world no. 349" David Singh's match agaisnt Alex Higgins in the Grand Prix qualifying. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:41, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

• 1991 World Championship table has four qualifying rounds: Preliminary / Antepenultimate / Penultimate / Final. However, according to the 1991 World Snooker Championship article, there were FIVE qualifying rounds.
• 1992 World Championship table shows that there were eight qualifying rounds, but according to the 1992 World Snooker Championship article, there were NINE qualifying rounds.
• Other ranking tournaments 1990–91 table has "Last-16 loser" and "Last-32 loser", whereas the Other ranking tournaments 1991–92 table has "Sixth-round loser" and "Fifth-round loser". Assuming these are equivalent, why the change? Extrapolating from that, the 1990–91 table has Final/Penultimate/Antepenultimate qualifying round loser, whereas the 1991–92 table has Fourth-round/Third-round/Second-round loser. Shouldn't all these rounds be consistently named in the two tables?

• I must have forgotten to press save. Amended to "third-from-last" for now pending what we come up with following the discussion. I'm checking sources on round names. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:58, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Sources differ in what they call the rounds, depending on what they class as "pre qualifying" or "preliminary" as against just "qualifying". Example below. The B&H Yearbook, although from 1991, mentions that there were 478 entrants for 1992. Another complication is that events can have different numbers of rounds. The 1991 UK Open attracted 509 entries, while the Dubai Classic had 430. Hard to know how we can be accurate without swamping readers with notes. I'll see if tournaments (apart from the World Championship) each had the same structure; if they did then "last-64", "last-128" etc could be an option. As the World chapionship has its own tables we could perhaps use that form in those. Or how about the terms "hexadecimal-finals" and "octagonal-finals" used by Kobylecky in his book of results? Thank you for your attention to this matter! BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:06, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

1992 World Championship; names of rounds in sources

Round	Points	B&H 1991	Snooker Scene	1992 press (small sample)	Downer	Cuesport book
First-round loser	1 R or 2 M	First round	First round	First round	First round	First round
Final qualifying round	2 merit points	Eighth	Fifth	Fifth	Ninth	Ninth
Penultimate qualifying round	1 merit point	Seventh	Fourth	Fourth	Eighth	Eighth
Third-from-last qualifying round	1 A point	Sixth	Third	Third	Seventh	Seventh
Fourth-from-last qualifying round	Frames won counted	Fifth	Second	Second	Sixth	Sixth

• Sorry for the bitty replies but, with the important caveat that I used an AI tool to help me do it, using a blacklisted source, I put some tables together at BennyOnTheLoose/sandbox8. I checked some of the numbers that look wrong, e.g. 70 matches in round 3 at 1992 Strachan and 34 matches in round 4 at 1992 Welsh Open and they do appear to be wrong in the source. I think this means that we can use the "last-x" forumlation as long as relaible sources support that. Does that work, Rodney Baggins? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 12:18, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

I've also noticed that the 1992–93 snooker season (to which these rankings apply) is not linked in the lead section and not actually mentioned until the third paragraph. I'd say it's quite important to state at the beginning that the 1992–93 rankings were those used for the 1992–93 season. Instead, the lead opens with an explanation of how the WPBSA introduced the ranking system in 1976. That should perhaps come lower down?

I think that would make sense but I'd like to see whether ChrisTheDude agrees. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:58, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Makes sense to me........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:26, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Finally, a wider issue and something I've noticed on several occasions in the past, is that when you're looking at one ranking list article, it's difficult to jump back and forth to other ranking lists. For example, I might be interested in taking a quick look at the 1991–92 snooker world rankings article, for comparison, but there's no quick and easy way to do that (I've got into the habit of just editing the filename in my search box), but now I discover that there's a sequence template hidden at the bottom of the article that I'd never noticed before! Would it be possible to incorporate that at the top for ease of use? It would of course apply to all the rankings articles and is outside the scope of this FLC. Regards, Rodney Baggins .talk. 08:03, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

This came up in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Snooker world rankings 1976/1977/archive1 and Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/1991–92 snooker world rankings/archive1. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:58, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Timeline of the 2003 Pacific hurricane season

Nominator(s): Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 07:42, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

The 2003 Pacific hurricane season was one of contrasts. It generated a near-normal amount of tropical storms and hurricanes, but was the first in 26 years not to have any major hurricanes. Despite the low activity, an unusually large number of systems struck Mexico, most significantly Hurricane Marty.

This timeline was converted from a redirect in July and follows the template established by several other hurricane season timeline FLs, including the recently promoted Timeline of the 2000 Pacific hurricane season and the headed-for-promotion Timeline of the 2001 Pacific hurricane season. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 07:42, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Image review pass - Essentially everything here is public domain, and all images have appropriate alt text. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 18:04, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

This nomination has not gotten any comments for the past month, but has not reached a strong enough reviewer consensus to promote. If no further reviews occur, it may be closed due to inactivity. In order to get more reviewer attention, please consider reviewing other nominations with a link back to this one, or reaching out to related wikiprojects or editors; note that for FLC to function, in general nominators should be performing 3 reviews for every nomination they make. --PresN 13:25, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

@PresN: Argh, I have to admit I've been slacking on the reviews. I'll see if I can get a couple done today. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 12:28, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• Fixed one typo. Didn't find anything else for you to fix/clarify. Support on prose.
• If interest and time permit, please comment at my FL nom. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:13, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Mikołaj Kruszewski bibliography

Nominator(s): Kisseran (talk) 19:51, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

This is my first FLC! Mikołaj Kruszewski is one of the founders of modern phonological theory, but he has remained obscure in English sources for a long time. I have based my organization of the list on List of bibliographies of works on Catullus, using cite templates to their fullest. The list of works is derived mostly from E. F. K. Koerner's bibliography of Kruszewski, but also supplemented by Zinaida Pakholok's more recent compilation. Kisseran (talk) 19:51, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

I'll review this page! I do need some time to look it over though. 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 17:33, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• You may not see this highlighted unless you have a particular script installed, but there are quite a few reference errors caused by the fact that you have spelt the authors' names wrong in the reference. Ref 3 has "Koerne" (final R missing) and refs 9, 21, 22 and 25 have "Pakohlok" (should be Pakholok") -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:35, 7 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Oops, you're right. That's an embarrassing amount of typos I failed to catch. I'd disabled the harverrors script because most of the cite templates were warning me for not being referenced elsewhere, but forgot that the errors would also stop being displayed. Everything should be fixed now. Kisseran (talk) 09:57, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "the revised theoretical introduction to his master's dissertation" - I would suggest linking Master's degree and maybe even write it in full, as this kinda reads like he translated a dissertation written by his master ;-)
• "A critique of the concept of analogy as applied by Neogrammarian linguists at the time." - this sentence fragment doesn't need a full stop
• "A follow-up note to Kruszewski (1879b), in which he criticizes the Neogrammarian Karl Brugmann's usage of the term association for analogy." - nor does this one
• "Favorable reviews of Brugmann's 1876 Nasalis sonans[b] and Saussure's 1879 Mémoire." - or this one :-)
• See also many other entries from that point on......
• Think that's all I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

  I've linked to master's degree, but I'm not sure what you mean by "write it in full" since I'm not aware of the term "master's dissertation" being short for anything. I've removed the periods after sentence fragments as well. Thanks for the comments! Kisseran (talk) 08:00, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

  I meant write "master's degree" rather than just "master's" but I guess it's OK now that the link has been added. Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:00, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

This nomination has not gotten any comments for the past month, but has not reached a strong enough reviewer consensus to promote. If no further reviews occur, it may be closed due to inactivity. In order to get more reviewer attention, please consider reviewing other nominations with a link back to this one, or reaching out to related wikiprojects or editors; note that for FLC to function, in general nominators should be performing 3 reviews for every nomination they make. --PresN 13:24, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Timeline of the Green Bay Packers

Nominator(s): « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:52, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Following the general layout of similar "Timeline" FLs, the Timeline of the Green Bay Packers covers key organizational milestones and moments that defined America's last small-town NFL team. The timeline is meant to complement History of the Green Bay Packers and List of Green Bay Packers seasons, among others, and not supplant them. Thanks for the opportunity to bring another Packers list here and happy to address any issues that come up! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:52, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments by Birdienest81

Just a quick comment for now, but there is an error message on ref 1. I do not know where the original ref bundling tag was meant to be in but just wanted to point it out to you. I will give this list a further look maybe no later than September 12.

--Birdienest81talk 22:51, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Birdienest81 *facepalm* ... fixed it! Thanks « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 02:02, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Birdienest81 just checking in to see if you'll have a chance to review this nomination. Cheers! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:28, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Dylan620

A timeline nomination? Don't mind if I do! I'll take a look at this in the coming days. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 07:45, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Apologies for the wait. I had been making minor edits as I was reading along, but eventually got to a point where I didn't feel comfortable making any more because I felt like I would become too involved to uphold my commitment to review the list being nominated. It's all minor things, though:

• File:The 1919 Green Bay Packers.jpg: Caption is not a full sentence and should not have a period
• File:Pro Football Hall of Fame (27033867699).jpg: Caption is a full sentence and should have a period
• File:Robert Tonyan.jpg: Caption is not a full sentence and should not have a period
• the plaza included new statues of Curly Lambeau and Vince Lombardi were unveiled during the dedication ceremony – This is grammatically incorrect
• File:Obama Receiving Share of Green Bay Packers.jpg: Caption is not a full sentence and should not have a period
• File:The Don Hutson Center.jpg appears twice
• In §2015, a colon is needed after July 24
• File:RAF Mildenhall, RAF Lakenheath Airmen represent U S during pre-game NFL ceremony (7478417).jpg: Caption is not a full sentence and should not have a period
• File:Packers vs Philadelphia Eagles NFL Brazil Sao Paulo.jpg: Caption is not a full sentence and should not have a period

That's just about it, methinks. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 14:05, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Dylan620 thank you for your review! I believe I have addressed the two grammar errors, fixed the captions, and replaced the first Don Hutson Center photo with another. Thanks again! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:28, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

No problem – happy to support. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 07:59, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

77th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards

Nominator(s): Birdienest81talk 23:30, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating the 2025 Primetime Creative Arts Emmys for featured list promotion because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I followed how RunningTiger123 formatted the 2007, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 ceremonies for this edition. Birdienest81talk 23:30, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Olliefant

• Link SNL 50th The Anniversary Special: Immersive Experience
• Use Template:multiple image

Thats what I found, preemptive support assuming these are done Olliefant (she/her) 20:48, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

• @Olliefant: Done - I have read your comments and have used the multiple image template for the winners pictures, but I did not link SNL 50th The Anniversary Special: Immersive Experience because while the link redirects to the SNL 50th special, that article makes no mention whatsoever of the Immersive Experience part.

--Birdienest81talk 00:21, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• The nominee information aren't really a table (the columns have nothing to do with every row). To indicate that it isn't a "data" table but a "presentation" table see MOS:LTAB. You add role=presentation to the table, drop the caption, and it should be ok.
• 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. in the "Nominations and wins by program" table | ''[[Severance (TV series)|Severance]]'' becomes !scope=row | ''[[Severance (TV series)|Severance]]'' (on its own line).
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
• Craig Robinson and David Hoffman are links to disambiguation pages.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:59, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

• @MPGuy2824: Done - I have read all your comments and have made the appropriate corrections and adjustments based off of them. Thank you for your feedback.

--Birdienest81talk 06:38, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

The table captions for the presentation tables need to be removed.

Also a few of the image captions now have a dangling "]]" at the end. Please fix. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:14, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• @MPGuy2824: I do not know where are the table captions for the presentation tables. Is it the one with the template that starts with {{sronly|XXXX}}?

--Birdienest81talk 02:40, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• The only thing I got is that "Additionally, any performer who previously won or has been nominated in the lead or supporting acting categories would be ineligible to submit a performance" should probably be "Additionally, any performer who had previously won or been nominated in the lead or supporting acting categories would be ineligible to submit a performance" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:27, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: Done - Changed the wording of the sentence according to your comments.

--Birdienest81talk 05:31, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:17, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Medxvo

• "Severance followed with eight awards. Severance also tied with The Penguin for the most nominations, with each receiving 17" - I believe Severance and The Penguin should be swapped here (The Penguin won eight awards, not Severance)
• Jamie Lee Curtis presented Outstanding Guest Actress in a Drama Series, not Outstanding Guest Actor in a Drama Series
• Zero Day is misspelled as Zerp Day in the "Nominations and wins by program" subsection
• The "Networks with multiple Creative Arts wins" table has a wrong column heading (its first column says "Nominations" instead of "Wins")
• Source review
  • Sources appear reliable and consistently formatted
  • Spot-checked refs 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 2(c), 2(d) 6, 7, 13, 15, 16 - no issues

Medxvo (talk) 16:39, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

• @Medxvo: – I have read all your comments and have made corrections and adjustments based off of them.

--Birdienest81talk 07:11, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

Happy to support the FLC and pass the source review. Medxvo (talk) 10:48, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

List of Left Democratic Front (Kerala) members

Nominator(s): TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 20:12, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that it satisfies the Featured List criteria. The list documents the composition and representation of the Left Democratic Front, which is one of Kerala's two major political alliances. The list covers constituent parties, electoral data, and historical changes in membership. The former nomination was archived because I was not active. Now, I have improved the article by adding citations and references. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 20:12, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Please ping me here when you fix all the issues pointed out during the previous nomination. I see that the accessibility issues haven't been taken care of. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:50, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824, What do you mean, I think all issues are solved. What do you mean by accessibility issues. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:45, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824I have improved the article, Please check. I have changed l, e.g. |[[Communist Party of India (Marxist)]] to !scope=row | [[Communist Party of India (Marxist)]], !Flag to !scope=col | Flag. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I didn't understand by what you meant by caption. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 19:09, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

See this section from the previous nomination: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Left Democratic Front (Kerala) members/archive1#Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB). The issues (and solutions) are explained well there.

Additionally, all images should have alt-text, including the flags. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:39, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

But, it is clear that the flags belong to the party. If i add a caption, the article will lose its simplicity. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 15:50, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824, can you please respond. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 11:20, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you keep saying "caption". I haven't used that word on this page till now.

• Did you fix all the issues pointed out in Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Left Democratic Front (Kerala) members/archive1?
• Did you carefully read the page MOS:ALT, which I linked above? (Alt-text and image caption are different things.) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:58, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Actually, I feel like i did solve all the issues. Can you please make an example. Also, can you please add an image caption. I still didn't understand what it is. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:37, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

• is an example where I converted a row into a table caption.
• is an example where I'm improving the alt-text of an image.
• An example of something from the previous nom that isn't done is "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. !Flag becomes !scope=col | Flag."

Hope these help. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:30, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Dude, this is clearly what I wanted. Thanks bro. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:34, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

 Done TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:51, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Are you trying to explain that a flag is used by 2 or more parties. Then, I wanna say that the Kerala Congress faction's all claim the same flag, so I can't change it. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 17:39, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824, I have put a note that Kerala Congress faction's all claim the same flag. Can you please check again. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 11:10, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

When, I meant caption, I meant the text under an image, also, I believe that I did solve all the issue in Archive1 TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 18:54, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824, Please check the list now. I completed everything. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 09:45, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude@MPGuy2824, any more improvements TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 14:45, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• " It is currently the official opposition in Kerala Legislative Assembly since 2026." => " It has been the official opposition in Kerala Legislative Assembly since January 2026." (just saying "since 2026" makes no sense given that we are still in 2026)
• "the other being Indian National Congress–led United Democratic Front" => "the other being the Indian National Congress–led United Democratic Front"
• "It is led by Communist Party of India (Marxist) " => "It is led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) "
• "had a historic re-election in 2021" - why was it historic?
• "In the 2010s, the Janata Dal (Secular) and the Nationalist Congress Party were brought into the fold in 2009 and 2010 respectively" - 2009 was not in the 2010s
• "UDF" is not expanded/explained, also it is linked on the second usage and not the first
• All of the paragraphs in the history section (apart from the first) are extremely short. I suggest they are merged into longer paragraphs
• Five out of the last six sentences of the history sections start with "In 20[whatever]". Can you vary this highly repetitive language a bit?
• In the "former members" table, there should not a capital L in "Year left"
• In the same table there are initialisms which are not expanded/explained e.g. ISJD, NDA
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:19, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you so much Chris, regarding the UDF claim, this list is about the LDF, not UDF. That list will also be improved. Also, about the years, some years are in brackets because they have left and rejoined the alliance. and some edits were created by another editor. I will fix that too. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 09:07, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  The 2021 election is historic as it is the first election in Kerala where the ruling party won the election. Normally, the ruling party always loses the elections and the opposition wins. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 09:10, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude

• Corrected

  • It is currently the official opposition in Kerala Legislative Assembly since 2026." => It has been the official opposition in Kerala Legislative Assembly since May 2026.
  • the other being Indian National Congress–led United Democratic Front" => "the other being the Indian National Congress–led United Democratic Front"
  • "It is led by Communist Party of India (Marxist) " => "It is led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist)
  • Rewrote In the 2010s, the Janata Dal (Secular) and the Nationalist Congress Party were brought into the fold in 2009 and 2010 respectively" - 2009 was not in the 2010s
  • had a historic re-election in 2021" - why was it historic NO CHANGE, IT IS HISTORIC BECAUSE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN KERALA ELECTORAL HISTORY, THE INCUMBENT GOVERNMENT WAS RE-ELECTED.

  • In that case, say that. Just describing it as "historic", without any additional information/context, is meaningless -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  Okay, Ill do that. TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:02, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

   Done TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 16:06, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

  • Removed the capital L in "former members" table, there should not a capital L in "Year left"
  • EXPANDED In the same table there are initialisms which are not expanded/explained e.g. ISJD, NDA

  TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 09:23, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  • All of the paragraphs in the history section (apart from the first) are extremely short. I suggest they are merged into longer paragraphs. Converted to long paragraphs

  TheGreatEditor024 (talk) 09:31, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• Why is the "year joined" info for some parties in brackets?

This nomination has been open for one month without any reviews resulting in agreement to promote. If this continues, the nomination may be closed due to inactivity. In order to get more reviewer attention, please consider reviewing other nominations with a link back to this one, or reaching out to related wikiprojects or editors; note that for FLC to function, in general nominators should be performing 3 reviews for every nomination they make. --PresN 13:29, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

List of cities in India by population

Nominator(s): Thelifeofan413 (talk) 08:49, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I've worked on this on and off for about a month, and I believe that it meets the criteria, when comparing to similar featured lists. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 08:49, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Drive-by comments

• Improve the alt-text for the map. Currently it is "List of cities in India by population is located in India".
• Color/Bolding should not be used as the sole visual means of conveying information; use a symbol in addition.
• ref4 doesn't need to be duplicated as a general ref too.
• ref1 leads to an error page. In any case, it isn't the official government census site. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:25, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

  I have finished all of your comments. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 11:45, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824 Thelifeofan413 (talk) 11:47, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

  • Since you've used the same symbol for every oddity, color is still the only way to differentiate them. Use different symbols for each color. Also I'll note that the red color isn't used anywhere and that key can be removed.
  • I would remove the "total" row for the two tables. I don't feel it is very significant. Keep the row for the country though.
  • Both Hisar and Puri have population figures from the 2001 census whereas here they aren't mentioned. Check the other cities with a "—" while you are at it. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:08, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

    What symbols should I use for each colour? Thelifeofan413 (talk) 17:17, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• No reason to bold India in the first sentence
• "This is a list of the most populous cities in India" should be removed per MOS:THISISALIST
• "Cities are a type of sub-administrative unit and are defined by the Ministry of Home Affairs. In some cases, cities are bifurcated into municipalities, which can lead to cities being included within other cities." - unsourced
• "Towns/Cities with populations of 1 lakh (100,000) are categorized as Class-I towns or Cities." - unsourced
• "The 46 cities with populations of 1 million and above are known as Million Plus UAs or Cities." - unsourced
• You also don't explain what "UA" stands for
• Bolding alone cannot be used to indicate capitals per MOS:ACCESSIBILITY
• "and, the national capital New Delhi." - no reason for that comma
• THe first sentence says "There are 496 cities in India with a population of over 100,000" but the threshold for the article seems to be 100,000 and there are only 340 listed. Where are the other 156......?
• The "total" and "India" rows in both tables should not have rank numbers
• Formatting of the "total" row is different in the two tables
• Note a needs a full stop
• That's what I got on the prose and tables -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:37, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

  Done. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 20:21, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• The first note in the lead should be actual note beside "population" in the table, for example {{#tag:ref| |group=lower-alpha}}.
• Need a reference in the table for both popululation columns.
• Need to update wording, featured lists no longer use "This list is based on the Census of India ". You can write "India conducts conducts censuses regularly with the two most recent being...".
• The lead needs to be significantly expanded, and summarize the table. Much can be said here, see other featured lists. For example, you say Mumbai is the largest city, but don't say it's population, or the date from which this claim is made.
• The last three notes can be incorporated into a paragraph in the lead, with an opening sentence like "Cities in india are classified into three categories..."
• Image caption should say "Map of most populous cities in India"
• Why have two lists? It seems arbitrary? Why not just one?

• Lots of work needed to get this up to featured list, but a great start! Mattximus (talk) 02:25, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Most done. Will do the significantly expanding. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 18:31, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• I count 1 completed, unless I missed something. It's still quite a long way from featured status. Mattximus (talk) 22:28, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

  Oppose for now, issues not addressed and appears to be inactive? Mattximus (talk) 16:16, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Drive by comment

Gopalpur and Dharmavaram are disambig links. splains (💬/📝) 13:10, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Done. Thelifeofan413 (talk) 19:02, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

This nomination has been open for one month without any reviews resulting in agreement to promote. If this continues, the nomination may be closed due to inactivity. In order to get more reviewer attention, please consider reviewing other nominations with a link back to this one, or reaching out to related wikiprojects or editors; note that for FLC to function, in general nominators should be performing 3 reviews for every nomination they make. --PresN 13:30, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by My Chemical Romance

Nominator(s): Gavetheman555 (talk) 00:29, 29 August 2026 (UTC) (UTC)

After the List of songs recorded by My Chemical Romance article got promoted, I figured I would tackle this next. A comprehensive list of all the notable nominations My Chemical Romance has received over the years. I've been working on this for a couple days now and I finally believe it meets the criteria for FL. Looking forward to hearing everyone's comments, thanks! Gavetheman555 (talk) 00:29, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• Within the first para you have both "My Chemical Romance is" (singular) and "My Chemical Romance have won" (plural)
• " It's success" => " Its success"
• In the table, titles starting with The should sort based on the next word in the title
• For consistency, I think the band's name should be linked on each use in the table like everything else is
• That's all I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:26, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude: All changes have been implemented! Gavetheman555 (talk) 13:40, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

  The Black Parade and The Ghost of You still sort under T.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:24, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

  Oh, sorry must've misunderstood. Should be fixed now :) Gavetheman555 (talk) 13:30, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:33, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
• Support - RTSthestardust (talk) 15:21, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• For header cells that span multiple rows the scope should be rowgroup.

  @MPGuy2824: Could an example of this possibly be provided? Just worried I might accidentally do it incorrectly. Gavetheman555 (talk) 20:40, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824: Should be addressed now. Gavetheman555 (talk) 13:31, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

• I didn't see any problems with the prose. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:21, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Watagwaan

Hi @Gavetheman555: I hope all is well! I have a few comments, but while a few are genuine concerns I've found, other things are admittedly just nitpicky, so take what you will from those. Great work!

Concerns

• Per WP:CITESTYLE, the titles of all sources should use either title case or sentence case; you've got a mix of both.
  • Changed to title case. Gavetheman555 (talk) 19:24, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
• Within the table, there are several categories that have Wikipedia articles which are not linked (i.e "Favorite Alternative Artist" is not linked to its article, "Best Boxed or Special Limited Edition Package" is not linked to its article, etc) so I'd suggest going through each association and making sure it's linked.
• Your table caption could be more descriptive, i.e "Awards and nominations" could be changed to "Awards and nominations received by My Chemical Romance" (seems redundant but this does aid readers).
• In the table header, "Award" should be "Association" or "Organization" (take your pick) since awards come... well, from organizations and associations LOL
• All instances of Kerrang!, Metal Hammer, and NME need to be italicized.

Others/nitpicks

• The lead is very detailed, but almost too detailed and padded, becoming sort of like—purely for lack of a better term—verbal diarrhea. Take for instance, the lead at the Raye listicle, promoted in 2025, or the Yeah Yeah Yeahs listicle, promoted in 2026; both keep the focus on the topic and are comprehensive, condensed, whilst still being interesting. This is not a showstopper for my support, as this is only something I found myself struggling with (I have ADHD, so I try to take that into account when making comments) so it's just food for thought.
  • I've copyedited/trimmed it down a little, however I don't know how much I can remove without it becoming considered too short. Gavetheman555 (talk) 19:24, 9 October 2026 (UTC)
• You probably don't need the month the band was formed here, you could simply mention 2001.
• You could remove "at Reading Festival 2011" for the Greatest Music Moment of the Year award at the NME awards.
• Instead of X on vocals, Y on lead guitar, it may be simpler to use descriptors, i.e vocalist X, lead guitarist Y, so on so forth.
• The image is quite blurry and obscures the members' faces, I would suggest using this image instead.
  • The reason I chose the current image was to avoid repetition in using it as it is already used on the List of songs recorded by My Chemical Romance article (another FL). I would be up for using this one here, but it is already used on the main band article, and List of My Chemical Romance members. Compared to other images, I think the current one is probably the best one. Gavetheman555 (talk) 19:24, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

That's all I have! I hope this helps, ping me here when everything is responded to and/or addressed, and I'll be happy to give another look! Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 00:14, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

• • @Watagwaan: Thank you for taking a look! I've implemented the changes that have been suggested. Gavetheman555 (talk) 19:24, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

    Everything seems alright! Some things were missed in the references (like using endashs, one ref missing titlecase, though that was mostly my fault for not noticing it sooner) so I fixed that for you. Support! Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 02:24, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

List of pharaohs

Nominator(s): PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 15:45, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because this is a very high quality list. ever sense it was overhauled by Tintero21 about half a year ago it has become quite detailed and also contains a lot of citations and footnotes. it also explains to the reader how Egyptologists got this information and explains several of the conventions used by Egyptologists to make it easier to understand. PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 15:45, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• 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.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
• All images should have alt-text.
• Color/bolding should not be used as the sole visual means of conveying information; use a symbol in addition. (You have a symbol in the key, but haven't used it appropriately.
• You'll need to use the upright param for the images instead of a pixel size (MOS:UPRIGHT).
• I suggest that the tables be simplified and background colors only be used when strictly necessary. e.g. if background color is needed for a row then only add it to the pharoah's name and not the rest of the row.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:46, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

• In addition, many of the tables (for example, the one under First Dynasty) have mid-table headers, which is plainly against MOS:DTAB. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:03, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

  • For PharaohCrab's benefit I'll mention that this is an MOS:COLHEAD issue which needs to be fixed. For "The position and identity of the following pharaohs is unknown:" I would suggest that you remove this and add a footnote to the "*" in the first cell of every such row.
  • Another point that I just saw is that the information in "Modern" table in the Second dynasty isn't really a table (the columns have nothing to do with every row). To indicate that it isn't a "data" table but a "presentation" table see MOS:LTAB. You add role=presentation to the table, drop the caption, change all '!' to '|' and it should be ok. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:40, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Edward056686

• Excellent and very important list but the sourcing is somewhat lacking. The lede includes information that isn't present elsewhere in the article and which isn't sourced, but this should be an easy fix.

• In fact, the sourcing throughout the article is sometimes absent or hard to follow. There are paragraphs that don't have any sources at the end, which makes it unclear whether there is a source.

• There are sentences that tell readers to go consult a range of sources for more information. At the end of "Sourcing and chronology", readers are encouraged to compare eight different published sources. Sentences like these could be converted into a footnote at least. Edward056686 (talk) 18:42, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

@PharaohCrab: Do you intend on continuing with this nomination? --PresN 11:52, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Right now it appears the article needs more accessibly features but besides that it seems very close to being featured list material. PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 12:45, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

This nomination has been open for one month without any reviews resulting in agreement to promote; additionally, none of the posted review comments have been addressed. If this continues, the nomination may be closed due to inactivity. In order to get more reviewer attention, please consider reviewing other nominations with a link back to this one, or reaching out to related wikiprojects or editors; note that for FLC to function, in general nominators should be performing 3 reviews for every nomination they make. --PresN 13:31, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

List of international goals scored by Dwayne De Rosario

Nominator(s): kline / talk / contribs 04:25, 22 August 2026 (UTC), SounderBruce

Welcome to round five of Kline nominating a featured list! I decided to do this one in quick succession after the promotion of the Cyle Larin list to hopefully complete the trifecta of all three top Canadian goalscorers having featured lists. SounderBruce ended up making the list in 2021, creating most of the prose, and with some cleanup, we believe it is ready! Cheers, kline / talk / contribs 04:25, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "Canada had a 11–4–4 record" - this probably needs explanation
  • Expanded out.
• "during matches where De Rosario scored" => "during matches in which De Rosario scored"
  • Fixed.
• "He continued to hold the goal scoring record" => "He continued to hold the goalscoring record"
  • Fixed.
• ""Score" and "Result" list the Canada's goal tally first" - there's a spare "the" in there
  • Fixed.
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:40, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
  • @ChrisTheDude: Thank you for the review. All comments have been addressed. SounderBruce 22:14, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:08, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

Support on accessibility

Tables were all fine; I had to add the column scope for one of thembut that's nothing that can't be done in 20 seconds. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 20:00, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• He was the country's all-time leading male goalscorer from 2012 to 2022 I'm assuming there was at least one female player who scored more than him. If so, add that info as a footnote.
  • @MPGuy2824: Added a mention of Sinclair's career. SounderBruce 22:33, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
• The venue column should sort by country then stadium.
  • Added sorting with a secondary for cities to clump stadiums together.
• I didn't see any other problems with the prose.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:58, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
  • Works for me. You might want to change "He announced his retirement" to "De Rosaria announced his retirement" since the previous sentence is about Sinclair.
  • Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:19, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

• Image review – The lead photo (the only one used in the article) has appropriate free licensing, caption and alt text. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:16, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Juhi Chawla filmography

Nominator(s): 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 08:45, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

After extensive work on its sourcing, comprehensiveness, prose, and formatting. I believe the list now meets the Featured List criteria and I welcome constructive feedback and suggestions for further improvement. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 08:45, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• Lead image could be made bigger using the "upright" parameter
• "Chawla established herself as leading actresses" => "Chawla established herself as a leading actress"
• Any role which has a surname should sort based on that name
• She seems to have played a doctor several times, but "Dr" and "Dr." are used inconsistently
• "Filmed in 4 languages (Nattukku Oru Nallavan)" - I don't understand what this means
• "Punjabi film" - is there any need to write that when it already has "punjabi" in the column immediately to the left?
• Co-producers should also sort by surname
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:49, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

  Hello @ChrisTheDude thanks. I have addressed all of them. Kept "Dr", changed to "The film was shot simultaneously in four languages with title Nattukku Oru Nallavan", removed "Punjabi film", added sortname toCo-producers.-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 16:59, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

  • One thing I just noticed (apologies if this was the case before and I just missed it) - the films from (presumably) 1993 just have a blank cell in the year column..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:10, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

    Unbelievable. I just noticed it too. Corrected. Thanks.-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 07:12, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:10, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• 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).
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
• The lead image needs alt-text.
• Since you aren't using any functionality of {{sort under}}, you can remove that line.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:27, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

  Hello @MPGuy2824 I've corrected all of the mentioned points. However, regarding ! scope="row" | 1987, I'm getting an error when a single year applies to multiple films in the same row. Could you please make the change for one of them, say 1988, as an example? I'll make the corresponding changes to the rest.Thanks.-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 17:04, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

  It looks like I forgot to change the example in my statements here. The year isn't the main cell of the row, the movie/series name is. You'll need to move the "!scope=row" parts to the cell containing the movie or tv series title. I've fixed the first table, please fix the rest. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:29, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

  Fixed for Television and Producer tables. Thanks-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 07:15, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824 FYI.-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 09:12, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

  Support on accessibility. I noticed that the first link to Asoka is to the historic figure and not the movie. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:27, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks @MPGuy2824 I have replaced the link.-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 10:16, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Driveby comment

• There are extra (.) after ref. in Producer table

--Preferwiki (talk) 17:04, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Preferwiki thank you. Corrected-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 13:59, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

One more thing, in table, Note column should be named Notes, and unsortable as per WP:FILMBIO Preferwiki (talk) 14:14, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Corrected @Preferwiki.. thanks-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 07:15, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Preferwiki please let me know if any other improvement is required.-25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^🍁 09:18, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

I took a look again and my findings are below:

• During the 2000s, Chawla increasingly appeared in independent and critically acclaimed productions, including Jhankaar Beats (2003), 3 Deewarein (2003), My Brother Nikhil (2005), 7½ Phere (2005), Bas Ek Pal (2006), and Swami (2007), while also continuing to appear in mainstream productions such as Bhoothnath (2008). Her performances in 3 Deewarein and My Brother Nikhil rwere particularly well received by critics.

Fixed

• • rwere? is this typo?

Fixed Yes it was a typo. Sorry

• • sentence felt repetitive and dense, how about: During the 2000s, Chawla shifted toward independent and critically acclaimed productions, starring in features such as Jhankaar Beats (2003), 3 Deewarein (2003), My Brother Nikhil (2005), 7½ Phere (2005), Bas Ek Pal (2006), and Swami (2007). Her performances in 3 Deewarein and My Brother Nikhil were particularly well received by critics. She also appeared in mainstream productions, such as Bhoothnath (2008).

Fixed

• She subsequently continued to work in Hindi and regional cinema, alongside occasional appearances in television and other screen productions.(need source)

Added

• I think pending film key should be hidden by comment because so far there is no pending project exist in the table

Fixed

• All the title starting with "The" should be sort like this example: The Hundred-Foot Journey to {{sort|Hundred-Foot Journey, The|''[[The Hundred-Foot Journey]]''}}

I tried applying this to The Gentleman, but "The" disappeared. Also, please let me know whether the same logic should be applied to Karobaar: The Business of Love and Ramayana: The Epic.

• Sources:
  • I see few links that aren't archived yet

Fixed

• • Even though it is not shown, adding language code in each source would be nice, |language=en-US or |language=en-IN for Indian English

I haven't done this before. Do you have an example I could refer to in order to understand the process?

• • Standardized citation spacing (I already used script to make it tidy)
  • I see some sources use |last=Hungama |first=Bollywood when that is actually the website name. Delete them or use |author=Admin consistently in all the sources from that certain media.

Fixed

Preferwiki (talk) 01:52, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

List of Emperor's Cup finals

Nominator(s): Wikipediæ philosophia (talk) 23:00, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Solo nomination regarding a very niche topic. Not reading Japanese (I can recognize only a few kanjis), I did my best to find as many reliable sources as possible over attendance. Note: I've already submitted a candicacy on List of Copa del Rey finals but I have the conviction I can manage both of them. Wikipediæ philosophia (talk) 23:00, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Note: The top section of the candidates page says "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." Usually we consider 2 to be "substantial" enough for this rule. Please withdraw this nomination until then. Meanwhile, you can apply the accessibility recommendations that I left on the Copa del Ray list to this list too. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:37, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824, I think I've addressed both your and ChrisTheDude's concerns over the other page. Btw, I've also followed your suggestions by editing this page too so that the Japanese list complies with MOS:ACCESSIBILITY. Wikipediæ philosophia (talk) 12:41, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Some of my points are still left to do (I've replied there). Even when you fix those, I'll only be adding an accessibility support there (since I've only looked at that aspect), which doesn't help your case here. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:01, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

This nomination has not gotten any comments for the past month, but has not reached a strong enough reviewer consensus to promote. If no further reviews occur, it may be closed due to inactivity. In order to get more reviewer attention, please consider reviewing other nominations with a link back to this one, or reaching out to related wikiprojects or editors. --PresN 17:58, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• The lead should probably specifically state that it is an association football competition
• "representing their relating prefecture " - the word "relating" makes no sense there. I suggest "each representing a prefecture"
• "The 1934 cup was not held in conjunction with the 1934 Far Eastern Championship Games." => "The 1934 cup was not held due to the 1934 Far Eastern Championship Games."
• "the competition was open also to the clubs" => "the competition was open also to clubs"
• "twelve were decided on extra-time" => "twelve were decided in extra-time"
• "and on five occasions, the winner was ruled by penalty shoot-out" - I think just "and on five occasions by penalty shoot-out" would suffice
• "after the scoreboard was 0–0 after extra-time" => "after the score was 0–0 after extra-time"
• "Italics - Team from outside the top tier of the Japanese football league system (after 1965)" - italics cannot be used to indicate something per MOS:ACCESSIBILITY. You will need to use another symbol
• "University club's performance separated as follows: Players are enrolled students / Players are enrolled students and graduates." - I don't understand what this means or how it relates to the table
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude  Done. Wikipediæ philosophia (talk) 20:10, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:18, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

List of rodents

Nominator(s): PresN 16:22, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Hey y'all, mammal list #79 in our perpetual series and rodent list #24: Rodents! This is our final list of the order, and the second-to-last list of our entire series. This is a giant list, with 511 genera containing 2360 species, and follows on from the structure of similar (smaller) lists for other orders like list of carnivorans and list of chiropterans. As I said on Discord when I finished the list back in January: you deserved every rat on the planet in one spot, and by god you got it. Fortunately for you reviewers, while this is a giant list in kilobytes, it's actually significantly shorter than the previous list for Murinae - a massive chunk of the size is the 593 references. I've resisted citing to the IUCN for per-family rather than per-genus, which does make for a lot of cite templates. As always, the list reflects the scientific consensus as well as the results of prior FLCs. I hope you enjoy one last look at these little guys. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 20:32, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Easy review of image source links

• Question: did all of these images appear in previous lists in this series? - Dank (push to talk) 22:57, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

  @Dank: All of the rodent images did; some of the map images are new but only because I've been creating them one by one for the past few months, so they all have the correct tags (ex.: File:Pipanacoctomys_distribution.png). --PresN 00:50, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

  Review passed, but I haven't looked at the maps. I asked because I think this is one of those "trust but verify" situations ... I checked the licenses on the first 36 images for this list and found no problems. If you believe the rest (except the maps) have passed reviews in previous lists, that's fine. - Dank (push to talk) 01:24, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

  "image source" -> "image source links"; there might be a few people who read "image source review" as "image and source review". - Dank (push to talk) 13:48, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Dank

• Continuing. I'm assuming that intro text for the tables and everything in the 2nd columns of the tables appeared in previous lists ... checking quickly, it looks that way. - Dank (push to talk) 21:19, 24 September 2026 (UTC)
• Not much to complain about, but I found a few. "Size range: 11 cm (4 in) long, plus 14 cm (6 in) tail (Mindanao mountain rat) to 15 cm (6 in) long, plus 18 cm (7 in) tail (Mindanao mountain rat)": Same species, two different sizes? - Dank (push to talk) 02:25, 26 September 2026 (UTC)
• "Size range: 7–9 cm (3–4 in) long, plus 8–10 cm (3–4 in) tail (northern groove-toothed shrew mouse)": List of murines, at Microhydromys, gives a slightly different sized tail for the southern species.
• Looking quickly, there are similar problems (where just one species is mentioned with two different sizes) for Thrichomys and Hadromys.
• Another reviewer may want to supplement my image review.
• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. Nothing else is jumping out at me as a prose problem. There were no sortable nonnumeric columns. I sampled the table links.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, and it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find).
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements.
• 6. It is stable. - Dank (push to talk) 03:46, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  @Dank: Good eyes! Scanned through all of the rows and fixed anywhere with the same species listed twice in the sizes. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 13:36, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support, provisional on what I assume will be a clean source review. - Dank (push to talk) 15:35, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment from Wolverine

My only comment

• Anomaluromorpha contains two families, the scaly-tailed squirrels and the springhares. Castorimorpha contains three families and includes beavers, gophers, kangaroo rats, and pocket mice. Hystricomorpha contains 18 families and includes mole-rats, porcupines, cavies, hutias, tuco-tucos, and Neotropical spiny rats. Myomorpha contains nine families and includes jerboas, hamsters, voles, and a wide variety of rats and mice. Sciuromorpha contains three families and includes squirrels, chipmunks, and dormice.[1][2] I notice these sentences all start the same. Can you switch things up a bit or maybe even use passive voice? I'm not sure.

Wolverine X-eye (talk) 11:58, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

@Wolverine X-eye: Tried to mix it up more, thanks for reviewing! --PresN 13:36, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Ah yes, much better. You now have my Support. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 14:09, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Keyshia Cole discography

Nominator(s): Indigault (talk) 02:00, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets the featured list criteria. Since its previous nomination, the discography has undergone a substantial overhaul. The lead has been expanded to provide a more comprehensive overview of Keyshia Cole's recording career, while the prose and sourcing have been reviewed and improved throughout. The tables have been updated for consistency and completeness, and all chart positions, certifications, and release information have been verified against reliable sources. I have also addressed the issues raised during the previous nomination and subsequent peer review. I welcome any comments or suggestions for further improvement. Indigault (talk) 02:00, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Image review is a pass. It's just one image that has adequate explanation for being on wikicommons. Since there's only one image I've added some alt text for it - please keep in mind this is required for any images in a FL/FA nomination. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 20:14, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Great. Thank you! Indigault (talk) 03:17, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "Cole's musical career officially began" - not sure the word "officially" is needed here, unless she somehow had some sort of prior unofficial career
• "and was later certified a platinum" => "and was later certified platinum"
• "by the RIAA" - write this out in full with the initialism in brackets
• "produced the massive hit" - "massive hit" is a bit unencyclopedic. You quantify its massiveness almost immediately, so I would just lose those two words
• "has been certified platinum—while further singles" => "has been certified platinum, while further singles"
• "Her third album, A Different Me (2008), became the peak week " - this doesn't make sense, as an album can't "become a week"
• "The album produced three singles, such as" - as you go on to list all three in the same sentence, "such as" isn't appropriate. I would replace it with a colon (and remove "alongside" later in the sentence).
• "which became one of her releases to top the Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums chart." => "which became another of her releases to top the Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums chart."
• In the tables, any releaes that didn't chart anywhere will need separate sourcing, as they aren't sourced by the refs in the column headers
• That's all I got - nice work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:06, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you so much for the feedback! I am almost finished completing your suggestions, here are my replies!

  • I think it's best to keep "officially began" because it seems that Cole did have a prior unofficial career through 1998-2003 since that's when she was featuring on other musical projects and was apart of a short-lived trio called Grip before going solo and later signing to A&M/Interscope. (check "Guest appearances" and the Early life and Career beginnings section of her main article.)
  • I changed "Her third album, A Different Me (2008), became the peak week" to "Her third album, A Different Me (2008), became the pinnacle of her commercial success up to that point" instead. I hope that works!
  • I've finished the rest of the suggestions so far except for the tables.

  Cheers! Indigault (talk) 16:52, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

  I'm not seeing any sourcing for non-charting releases like "Next Time (Won't Give My Heart Away)"..........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:51, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

  Yes. I'm still working on adding those as aforementioned in my previous reply. Indigault (talk) 20:47, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

  Hello! My apologies for the delay. I have now added sourcing for all of the non-charting releases in the tables. Cheers! Indigault (talk) 01:40, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:02, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• Please do this fix for all the tables where it is applicable.
• No problems that I could see with the prose.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:08, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824 Fixed. Thank you! Indigault (talk) 17:46, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

• Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:07, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

This nomination has not gotten any comments for the past month, but has not reached a strong enough reviewer consensus to promote. If no further reviews occur, it may be closed due to inactivity. In order to get more reviewer attention, please consider reviewing other nominations with a link back to this one, or reaching out to related wikiprojects or editors. --PresN 12:31, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment from Wolverine

• The album produced three singles: "Enough of No Love" (featuring Lil Wayne), which entered the Hot 100 and reached the top ten on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart, "Trust and Believe" and "I Choose You", which further charted on Billboard's urban rankings. I suggest restructuring the sentence because I had to re-read 3 times just to comprehend what was being said.

That is it from me. This article is in good shape! Ping me when issues are addressed. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 12:08, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

@Wolverine X-eye Thanks for the feedback! I've now fixed the sentence. Indigault (talk) 14:25, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

I like the changes. Support. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 14:33, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Source Review

• An EBay description is not a reliable source as it's user-generated (ref 98)
• IMDB is not a reliable source as it's user-generated (refs: 122, 123, 128–131, 133)
• WP:Albums does not consider DJBooth to be a reliable source (ref 132)

--PresN 15:11, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

List of paintings of George Washington

Nominator(s): ReelCosmix (talk) 12:53, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets the standard and is more developed than a lot of other lists on Wikipedia

Comments

• A couple of drive-by comments (in no way a full review):
  • The article should not start "A list of notable paintings" per MOS:THISISALIST
  • While (as far as I know) not prohibited it looks really weird to have the reference column as the very first column. If refs are in their own column, the norm is to have them at the end -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:48, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

  Okay, thank you for this feedback; I will make adjustments now! ReelCosmix (talk) 15:49, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98 (6/25/26)

• There is no reason for the Reference column to be sortable. Removing that will narrow the column. Also, replace Ref. with {{Abbr|Ref.|References}}.

Lead

• "the first U.S. president" --> "the first president of the United States".
• "one of the many Founding Fathers of the United States." --> "one of the country's many Founding Fathers."
• No reason for "Patriot" to be capitalized.
• "Washington presided over the Philadelphia Convention in 1787, which drafted the Constitution of the United States, and served as president of the United States from 1789 to 1797." --> As written, this implies that the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 served as president of the United States from 1789 to 1797, which we know is not correct.
• No reason for "Vice President" to be capitalized.
• "he was entombed at Mount Vernon estate in Fairfax County, Virginia, alongside his wife Martha Washington." --> Did Martha Washington die before him? Because I thought he died first.
• "Washington was painted many times throughout his life due to his high importance in the United States." --> This is a very banal sentence.
• "Because he was also the first president of the United States, people wanted official portraits for government buildings, statehouses, and public institutions." --> Source no. 12 says nothing about any of this.
• "There were also no cameras during his lifetime, as they were invented about 50 years after he died, meaning paintings were the main way to preserve his likeness." --> Sources no. 13 and 14 say nothing about cameras.
• However, sources 12, 13, and 14 do discuss the questionable validity as to how accurate these portraits of George Washington actually were, which your lead does not discuss.
• "One of the most widely recognized paintings of Washington is the Athenaeum Portrait." --> Source no. 15 does not confirm this statement. The citation is also improperly formatted.
• All of the citations need to be cleaned up and archived.
• Note a: "This painting was never complete, although, many complete copies exist" --> Get rid of that second comma, and end the sentence with a period.

User:Realcosmixyt: To be honest, the quality of the prose is beneath what I would expect from a Featured Article/List. It needs to be cleaned up and strengthened to make it more engaging. It reads more like an essay a student might write for a high school history class. Oppose for now until major improvements are made. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:39, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I am really thankful for this feedback as I didn't realize pretty much all of the mistakes you pointed out. I have since fixed a couple of them, and I am planning to fix more. ReelCosmix (talk) 21:05, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

I think this is a very interesting topic, and I will certainly be happy to change my vote if the prose is strengthened up. I haven’t looked at the formatting of the table yet, but the contents of the table look good. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:06, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Bgsu98, I think I've fixed all the problems you've listed. If you want to take a look, let me know how I did. ReelCosmix (talk) 21:42, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:38, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Another drive-by comment

• What's the ordering of the entries within the tables based on? As far as I can see it isn't chronological by date or alphabetical by either the title or the name of the artist. It just seems to be completely random........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:16, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

  Hey! Thanks for pointing that out! I've ordered them by date now. Oldest to newest. ReelCosmix (talk) 17:46, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Dylan620 (image review)

I've just finished looking over the images, and unfortunately there are some issues. Getting the positives out of the way: all images add encyclopedic value to the list, and are appropriately licensed for either Creative Commons or the public domain. Sourcing also verifies for most images, though I went over to Commons to fix some broken links (see my edits there), and I don't consider Christie's to be an adequate source for File:Thomas Sully, Portrait of General George Washington, 1842.jpg. The biggest issue is the complete absence of alt text. Quoting from WP:MOSALT: In situations where the image is not available to the reader, perhaps because they have turned off images in their web browser or are using a screen reader due to a visual impairment, the alternative text ensures that no information or functionality is lost. Alt text needs to be added to every image before this list can pass FLC; until then, this list falls short on accessibility. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 15:17, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Hey! Thank you for pointing this out! I have added some alt text to a few of the paintings, and I'll finish the rest later when I have the time. Thank you again for pointing this out! I probably should have requested a peer review before blindly nominating this list for FLC. ReelCosmix (talk) 16:01, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

👍 please ping me when you're done, Realcosmixyt. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 17:42, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Dylan620 I've finished adding all alt text, so hopefully that fixes that issue. ReelCosmix (talk) 17:49, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Also, I think Christie's is the WP:RS for this painting; I couldn't find any other sources. ReelCosmix (talk) 17:55, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

And so it is! My apologies—the Commons upload didn't link to the website, which I've now fixed, and the word "Christie's" on its own sounded very vague. And fantastic work on the alt texts. I'm happy to support on images. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 21:45, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! ReelCosmix (talk) 21:46, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• 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. | 1 becomes !scope=row | 1. If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead. The row header doesn't have to be the first cell, so for this one it should probably be the title, not the image.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. This is not a full review, and does not result in a support vote. --PresN 14:45, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

  Done ReelCosmix (talk) 03:32, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

This nomination has been open well past the time it would normally be closed, without sufficient support. It will be closed soon if that does not change; consider reviewing other nominations with a link back to here, or reaching out to relevant editors/wikiprojects. --PresN 20:00, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

@PresN, @Dylan620, @ChrisTheDude, and @Bgsu98 I think all issues pointed out are now fixed; please let me know if it was all done correctly. ReelCosmix (talk) 21:57, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "Washington was succeeded by John Adams, who was previously the vice president.[5] He died on December 14, 1799" => this wording makes it sound like the "he" who died in 1799 was Adams
• "is still painted constantly today" - maybe "regularly painted"? I doubt that at every single moment there is literally someone somewhere in the world painting him
• "such as the Gibbs-Channing-Avery Portrait, the Lansdowne Portrait, the Athenaeum Portrait, and many more." - why are these inconsistently italicised?
• Note a is not a sentence so it should not have a full stop -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:29, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

  I fixed all the other problems, but they should be all italicised like how they are in their articles, no? Also I was told by someone else here in this talk that it should have a full stop. ReelCosmix (talk) 12:45, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

  I can see that comment above and they were referring to what is now note b -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:19, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

  I forgot to respond but I think I fixed it I can't remember. ReelCosmix (talk) 01:14, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

  May I get another review of the article, as I think all issues are fixed. ReelCosmix (talk) 15:38, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

  Courtesy ping to ChrisTheDude. ReelCosmix: most reviewers do not watchlist nominations, so if you don't ping them in your replies, they are unlikely to see it. --PresN 02:24, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:53, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

  @PresN, @Dylan620, and @Bgsu98, would you guys like to recast y'all's votes now that (I think) all issues are fixed? ReelCosmix (talk) 13:14, 5 October 2026 (UTC)

  @PresN @Dylan620 and @Bgsu98 I would like if you guys could reply, as I can't like this FL talk has been moving like a snail, and I don't even think this should still be open. I've fixed all issues brought up as well. ReelCosmix (talk) 23:28, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

  Sorry, I missed the first ping earlier in the week, but sure: support for clarity. Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 05:53, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Operator 16

Hi Realcosmixyt, thanks for your work and sticking to this one; t's a topic that deserves a featured list. I've limited myself to the lead, since that's where I think the remaining work is, the rest of the list looks good. I checked the lead's sources where I could reach them (the NYT piece is paywalled, so I haven't looked it over).

Criterion 2

scope and inclusion criteria

• Lets get to it, the lead never says what gets a painting onto this list. I brought this up in the discord channel and its still true today. WP:FLCR 2 asks the lead to define "the scope and inclusion criteria", and without them 3a can't really be assessed, because there's no defined scope to be comprehensive against. The list is basically just a selection at this point: the lead itself says Stuart used the Athenaeum Portrait for "other copies and adaptations", and the Smithsonian source cited for the Paris painting notes that Peale made several copies of Washington at Princeton. So the reader needs to know what the basis for selection is. This is a little weird to include but here's some options I thought of: paintings with their own article or significant coverage in reliable sources; Washington's life portraits plus notable posthumous works (the Mount Vernon "Life Portraits" page you already cite is built around that exact idea); or works in public collections.
• The criteria should also settle a few edge cases the tables already raise:
  • Medium. Washington as a Freemason (1866) is credited to the Strobridge Lithographing Company and sourced to a Library of Congress prints record, so it reads as a lithograph rather than a painting. The Apotheosis of Washington is a fresco, which I'd say belongs, but the lead should say whether murals count or not.
  • Copies and versions. Several rows are titled George Washington (Peale). Does each version or replica get its own row, or only the distinct compositions?
  • Subject. Does Washington have to be the principal subject, or does any painting depicting him count here? (This matters for the 3a point below.)
• The lead should also explain the two list you have here. Nothing under "Landscapes" is really a landscape: these are history paintings and scenes (The Washington Family is a group portrait). Something like "Portraits" and "History paintings", with a sentence in the lead saying how the split works, would fix both problems in one go.

Criterion 3a

• 3a asks for "at least all of the major items", and some major items are missing under any reasonable reading of the scope the list implies. Check against Category:Paintings of George Washington. These all have their own articles there but aren't in the list: The Capture of the Hessians at Trenton, December 26, 1776, The Death of General Mercer at the Battle of Princeton, January 3, 1777, and Surrender of Lord Cornwallis (all Trumbull); Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States (Christy, 1940); Washington Crossing the Delaware (Larry Rivers, 1953, MoMA); Life of Washington (Arnautoff's 1936 mural cycle); and Warhol's dollar bill works. Since Shadows of Liberty (2016) and The Prayer at Valley Forge (1975) are in, Rivers can't be excluded on date. If some of these are left out on purpose (Washington not the main subject, or currency rather than a portrait), that's fine, but that is exactly why you need to define the scope in the lead.

Balance

• Two of the four paragraphs are a short Washington biography (the Adams succession, epiglottitis, the entombment, Martha's death in 1802). That first half has nine citations, and almost none of it relates to the paintings. If readers are super interested they can just click through to George Washington. One sentence of context is enough. That also frees up room to explain what the list actually contains:
  • Life portraits versus posthumous images. Your Smithsonian source says Washington sat for Peale seven times from 1772 to 1795, and the Mount Vernon page you already cite says he sat for Stuart in 1795 and 1796.
  • The accuracy question Bgsu98 raised earlier. Those sources discuss how far the portraits can be trusted as likenesses, and the lead still doesn't mention it.
• I brought this up last night and you did fix it but, "Washington was painted several times between the 1700s and 1800s and is still regularly painted" now undersells this 50+ row list, and five bundled citations for one sentence is a sign it isn't saying anything specific. A solid version would need fewer citations and do more work.

Accuracy and sourcing

• "became prominent during Donald Trump's first presidency" the NPR piece you cite ties the painting's importance to the current administration. The examples it vies are Hegseth talking about the scene at the Pentagon's Christmas tree lighting, reproductions on the Freedom Trucks touring for the 250th anniversary, and a White House page. That's recent stuff from the second presidency, so the link and wording need fixing.
• "French conservators" is pointing to Conservatism in France, which is the political ideology. You want Conservation and restoration of cultural property, or just no link.

Noticed in passing (outside the lead)

• Two rows have Location and Artist swapped: Washington as a Freemason (the Masonic Memorial sits in the Artist column) and Shadows of Liberty (Kaphar under Location, Yale under Artist). I figured I'd at least mention this even though I mostly looked into the lead.

Unfortunate, I'm going to Oppose this for now on criterion 2 and 3a. The missing inclusion criteria are a structural findings rather than just polish, and the "first presidency" error and the Conservatism link are factual problems in the lead. None of this is a lot of work, and I'm happy to look again once it's addressed. 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 11:19, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Operator 16! Thanks for this review, and I am currently fixing these issues. But I would like to say that I don't think the lead needs to define anything? That would be like putting at the start "This is a list of..." which is not allowed. But if I'm wrong, it would be kind of awkward to place that in somehow. ReelCosmix (talk) 13:28, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Also, I forgot to say this, but instead of replacing the mini bio of Washington with more info about paintings I could just remove it? I've had my mind on that mini bio for a while and had a feeling it might bring up issues as half of the lead is about that. ReelCosmix (talk) 13:30, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Realcosmixyt =D

Fair pushback, I wont hold that against the review going forward. In terms of the bio replacement/drop, Id honestly like a bit of an overview on different types of paintings featured in the list. Maybe different techniques or paradigms for each era of art since the list spans several hundred years. I know in music, Baroque period pieces are far different stylistically than Late Romantic pieces so I wonder if similar stylistic differences exist in these paintings. Just my $0.02 though. 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 13:43, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

I don't think there is really a need to mention the rest of the paintings unless they were involved in something big. I think I've fixed all issues brought up? I'm not sure, as it's quite a lot for one person to fix in my eyes. @Operator 16 let me know if everything is all good now or if I forgot something. Thanks! ReelCosmix (talk) 13:49, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

And another thing. I don't think there needs to be a source in the lead for the claim that Stuart painted many paintings of Washington, as all the reader has to do is scroll down and see that a good amount of paintings on this list were from him. ReelCosmix (talk) 13:40, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

@Realcosmixyt Thanks for getting right to this and fixing things. Cutting the biography down to one sentence was a good move. I also see that you fixed the presidency thing, the conservatism link, and the two rows with flipped information.

I unfortunately do need to walk back my "fair pushback" on the inclusion criteria though. I went back and checked, and it isn't optional here. WP:FLCR 2 requires the lead to define "the scope and inclusion criteria". MOS:THISISALIST only bans the formula "This is a list of X" as the opening sentence; it asks for "a clearer and more informative introduction" instead. So the two don't conflict. It doesn't need to be a rigid "inclusion criteria" sentence or even sit up front. A regular statement of what the tables contain, as the last paragraph of the lead or at the top of "Paintings", does the job. For example (do note that whatever you decide is up to you): "The paintings below, including murals, depict Washington as their main subject, from Charles Willson Peale's 1772 portrait, the earliest known likeness of him, to Titus Kaphar's Shadows of Liberty (2016)." Whatever you pick, the tables then need to match it, which is where the open items below come from. PresN brought this up in the discord on 10/8/2026 at 10:47 EST, asking what the inclusion criteria are.

To do

• Inclusion criteria (above). Related: the new sentence "Artists painted Washington in all different types of material, such as in paint, print, and plaster" points away from the "paintings" part of the page title, since prints and plaster busts aren't paintings. In the NGA source, the wording is now too close to the source's. You can just drop it or turn it into the scope sentence (Ex."Washington was also depicted in prints and sculpture; this list covers paintings").
• Washington as a Freemason is a Strobridge lithograph, not a painting. It either goes, or the criteria have to allow this kind of thing.
• Major items (3a). None of the missing paintings have been added. Rivers's Washington Crossing the Delaware (1953, MoMA) is the clear one: Washington is the subject, and nothing about its date or fame would exclude it while Shadows of Liberty is in the list. Christy's Scene at the Signing of the Constitution (1940) is also compelling, depending on how you word the criteria. If your criteria deliberately exclude the Trumbull battle scenes, Warhol, or Arnautoff, that's fine, as long as the criteria say so.
• Rembrandt Peale (new). "having painted over 70 paintings of him" is cited only to the Mount Vernon page on Charles Willson Peale's 1772 portrait, which doesn't mention Rembrandt at all. The NGA article you added does give a figure ("over 79 pictures"), but it attributes it to his father, Charles Willson Peale, and "pictures" isn't the same as paintings. This needs a source that says it about Rembrandt, or it should come out. "widely known for painting Washington" needs support too.

Also, my suggestion about styles across eras was just a thought, not a requirement; ignore it if it doesn't fit. I'm keeping the oppose for now, on the criteria and the missing major items. Once the "needed" list is done Ill to be able to support this. 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 14:30, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

All issues brought up have been fixed. Thank you @Operator 16! ReelCosmix (talk) 15:46, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Great work @Realcosmixyt! You have my support! 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 17:19, 9 October 2026 (UTC)

Nominations for removal

List of tallest buildings in Los Angeles

Notified: Example user, Example WikiProject

I am nominating this for featured list removal because the article has multiple issues.

• Of the four large paragraphs in the lead, only two facts have references. Many facts in the lead are not mentioned in the article and so rather than removing these two references, the entire section should be referenced.
• The writing is sloppy. I did a quick pass of the lead and made numerous changes; even so, the lead needs more work and the text in the rest of the article needs review
• I believe many of the sources, including emporis and skyscraperpage, would be considered unreliable. This skyscraperpage source even mentions that its height information, which is referenced in the article, is unconfirmed
• At least one reference name is invoked but never defined
• There is considerable source-to-text integrity/original research EDIT: its not necessarily original research per WP:OR, but it is at the very least not properly cited and also could be WP:SYNTH issues, as many facts, while likely true, are not mentioned in their sources (just a brief look gives "Tallest building in Greater Los Angeles outside of Los Angeles", "tallest building 1907-1911", and "Tallest building completed in Los Angeles in the 2010s until the Wilshire Grand Center." as facts not mentioned in their sources).
• There are numerous formatting/Manual of Style issues
• EDITED TO ADD: with the exception of one sentence ("More high-rise clusters are found throughout Greater Los Angeles, including in Glendale, Irvine, and Long Beach.") the lead only discusses the city of Los Angeles, but many of the buildings listed are not in the city. The list actually seems more like List of tallest buildings in Los Angeles County, but the lead does not reflect this

Gb321 (talk) 05:38, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

• Delist. All of that unsourced information makes this unsuitable for Featured List standard unless someone undertakes an improvement. Bgsu98 (Talk) 05:49, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

@Gb321 Regarding what you said about the lead and ask that you look at the state of the page two years ago, when it was much worse and still featured. In addition, Wikipedia has policies where you don't need to cite facts if they are obvious or self-evident, and "Tallest building completed in Los Angeles in the 2010s until the Wilshire Grand Center." is one of those (although I agree that note should be removed).

Hi @LivinAWestLife, thanks for your comments. WP:NOTCITE states that self-evident facts are facts "that the average adult recognizes as true." Paris is the capital of France is a self-evident fact. The average adult would have no idea what the tallest buildings in Los Angeles are without looking up their heights, meaning they are not self-evident.

WP:BURDEN states that "all content must be verifiable. A fact or claim is "verifiable" if a reliable source that supports it could be cited..." No sources support the claims I flagged. The sources only mention the height of the individual building, meaning these superlatives statements would require sourcing every building but even that would be WP:SYNTH, which states "do not combine different parts of one source to state or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by that source." I think sourcing a list of tallest buildings would be adequate for some of the simpler superlative statements if one can be found. Gb321 (talk) 03:09, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Please list any more MoS issues since you claim there are so many.

If I was going to spend the time it would take to do this, I would just fix them. I already did (somewhat) with the lead. If someone wants to keep this article as a featured list, they can consult the MoS and fix any issues until there is a consensus there aren't any. Right now, I believe a consensus would conclude that there are too many MoS issues in this article for it to be a featured list Gb321 (talk) 03:09, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

LivinAWestLife (talk) 15:22, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

List of Latvian submissions for the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film

Notified: Example user, Example WikiProject

I am nominating this for featured list removal because there are numerous unsourced statements, which is unacceptable for a Featured List. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:30, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings in Bellevue, Washington

Notified: WikiProject Skyscrapers

Sadly a lot of these list of tallest buildings have not aged well, this one was nominated almost 20 years ago (!). Here are some issues which range from minor to major:

• Alt-text missing from every single picture
• Notes section needs to be completely redone. Consider the Grade I listed buildings in Oxford note section for what modern featured list notes should be. Currently, it is quite random. One lists the date of topping out, but not for any others. One says "To be leased by amazon" with no date, nor period. Citation is from 2024?
• Much outdated wording "This lists ranks...". Notes in the subheading lead, which belong in notes, not in the lead (which is meant to describe the table contents).
• Tallest under construction appears to be years out of date, with no expected year of completion.
• What does the "skyline ranked 3rd" mean? What are the criteria for ranking?
• Number of high rises in the lead do not match table.
• Inconsistent naming. Is the tallest building called Amazon Sonic, or just Sonic?
• Could use a map, like some of the other featured list of tallest buildings.
• Statement in lead "lead to a new round of development in 2024" is not backed up by the table.
• Sort is completely broken for year of completion.
• There might be duplicates in main table and under construction table, but I'm not sure.
• Timeline of tallest buildings could use a little lead to explain the history.
• Citations seem outdated, and user-generated content, number 6 has no reference at all!
• Images of skyline are 19 and 11 years out of date, so miss many of the buildings in the list itself

Mattximus (talk) 16:33, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Delist unless someone undertakes the necessary improvements. Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:07, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Delist; the list of issues is convincing. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:00, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

List of WWE 2K Games video games

Notified: WikiProject Professional wrestling, WikiProject Video games

This list has numerous unsourced statements. How up-to-date is this anyway? Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:42, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

@Bgsu98 I can easily fix those unsource statement issues. I already looked through the article and mostly everrything is up to date. Nothing else that should be changed; Monathephantom (talk) 04:13, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Certainly on the content front, this appears to all be up to date. WWE 2k27 is in development but doesn't have a release date. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 20:58, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

That being said, at a glance a lot of the ref links appear to be dead. I've manually fixed a few and run the IABot, but it might be worth a deeper dive just in case it's missed any considering how many it marked. I am also not sure what exactly needs sourcing and what doesn't as I'm not too familiar with VG FLs ("Arcade style game replacing WWE 2K21 due to the negative reviews and low sales WWE 2K20 received." strikes me as needing a source, as does the Benoit section)/RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 21:14, 18 August 2026 (UTC)

NB: It's worth pointing out that this appears to be the version reviewed for FLC, 18 years ago. As such everything from Smackdown vs Raw 2010 hasn't been audited.