Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

Source spot-check - pass

Will do. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 04:15, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

This table lists 2 random passages from throughout the article (6.3% of 32 total passages). These passages contain 2 inline citations (2.0% of 101 in the article). Reference numbers refer to this revision. Generated with the Veracity user script. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 04:15, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

@OpalYosutebito: Source spot-check is all good. I currently have a nomination for "Señorita" up; you may leave comments there if you wish RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 04:19, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

I might look into it this week. It's currently late in my area :) - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 04:22, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "It is based on the third part in the series, Stardust Crusaders." - "part" is a bit vague as it could in theory just mean a single episode. Maybe "It is based on the third story arc in the series, Stardust Crusaders."
• "On December 18, 1998,[4] Capcom released a fighting game in arcades,[5] which was also adapted from Stardust Crusaders.[6] The game was titled JoJo's Bizarre Adventure" => "On December 18, 1998,[4] Capcom released a fighting game in arcades,[5] also adapted from Stardust Crusaders,[6] entitled JoJo's Bizarre Adventure" (reads a bit more succinctly)
• "The same developer and publisher would later release" => "The same developer and publisher later released"
• Think that's all I got - nice work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

  I'll edit in the morning. It's really early in my area. As always, thanks for the feedback! :D - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 08:37, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

  @ChrisTheDude done :D - OpalYosutebito 『talk』 『articles I want to eat』 16:01, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:06, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Dank

• Well, I've got to say something to earn my paycheck, but there's very little to complain about. I'll go with this: "only one of the ten [acts] went on to achieve a second number one". That raises a question (which one?) that's answered 8 sentences later: Blondie. Writing styles have of course changed over the years, and it's not at all uncommon these days in many kinds of writing to see questions posed implicitly in one place and answered in another place ... but, even in 2026, that tends to be an unusual style on en.wikipedia. You can leave it like it is, or consider moving the (implied) question down to where the answer is, or dropping the question, or moving the answer up.

@Dank: - I just took the first reference to "only one number one" out.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:30, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

I like it, and I like these lists. Keep 'em coming! - Dank (push to talk) 18:42, 23 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. 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.
• Support, provisional on what I assume will be a clean source review. - Dank (push to talk) 16:12, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

Source spot-check - pass

Will do. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 03:59, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

This table lists 1 random passages from throughout the article (5.3% of 19 total passages). These passages contain 1 inline citations (4.5% of 22 in the article). Reference numbers refer to this revision. Generated with the Veracity user script. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 03:59, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Source spot-check is all good. I currently have a nomination for "Señorita" up; you may leave comments there if you wish RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 04:01, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

Gonzo_fan2007

• The Bee Gees' chart domination ended at the end of the 1970s, the duplication of the word "end" could probably be avoided. Maybe "conclusion" or "close", or something similar.
• Following on with this sentence, {:tq|The Bee Gees' chart domination ended at the end of the 1970s, however, following the decline in popularity of the disco genre with which they had become strongly associated: they never achieved another number one after 1979 and indeed all of their subsequent singles missed the top 10 with the sole exception of 1989's "One".}} is a run-on sentence. I am also not convinced the colon is being used optimally here. I would recommend the colon become a period.
• position for three further weeks in the new year "further" sounds clunky here. I think just a simple "more" sounds best

That's all I got. As always, nice work ChrisTheDude. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:23, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: - all done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:46, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Support keep up the good work! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:02, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments

My only comment is that it might be worth adding a few words to expand "The 2002 Nebelhorn Trophy was used to test the new ISU Judging System, designed in reaction to the scandal at the 2002 Winter Olympics" to "The 2002 Nebelhorn Trophy was used to test the new ISU Judging System, designed in reaction to a scandal concerning [whatever] at the 2002 Winter Olympics". Other than that I have nothing to add - great work as ever!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:05, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

@FLC director and delegates: Please close this. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:30, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

I agree that it would be worth it to briefly note the reasoning for the switch from 6.0 to code of points just for general accessibility, either a word to say it was a scandal about judging or that the point system aims to be more objective. Everything else looks great to me. Honeycombing (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• All the tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
• The "Peak chart positions" cell in every table needs to have the colgroup scope
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
• The infobox image needs alt-text.
• Many of the refs are missing archive links.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:00, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

All the tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead.
 Done

The infobox image needs alt-text.
 Done

Many of the refs are missing archive links.
I can't archive cause that wmcloud.org is down, cause from serious PHP error. VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 19:03, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• "The list does not include material performed by former members of Joy Division that was recorded as New Order (formed by the surviving members of the band after the death of singer Ian Curtis) or related side projects." - I don't think this is needed as nobody would realistically expect this article to include that stuff
• "Joy Division was formed in 1976 by Bernard Sumner and Peter Hook after attending a June 1976 Sex Pistols concert.[" => "Joy Division was formed in 1976 by Bernard Sumner and Peter Hook after they attended a June 1976 Sex Pistols concert.["
• " It entered the national charts of New Zealand[4], United Kingdom[5]," etc - refs should be after punctuation, not before
• "Italia[11], Portugal[12], Spain and Switzerland" - the country is not called "Italia" in English
• "and British Phonographic Industry" => "and the British Phonographic Industry"
• "charting in New Zealand[20], United Kingdom[21], Austria[22]," etc - same comments as before about ref placing and "Italia"
• " they later recruited Stephen Morris's girlfriend" - no contaxt as to who Morris is
• The live albums table is almost completely unsourced
• Non-charting compilation albums need sourcing
• In the EPs table, An Ideal for Living needs sourcing as it isn't covered by the refs in the chart columns
• Non-charting singles need sourcing
• Video albums table is mostly unsourced
• Other appearances table is completely unsourced
• That's what I got. Quite a lot of sourcing issues I am afraid -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

"The list does not include material performed by former members of Joy Division that was recorded as New Order (formed by the surviving members of the band after the death of singer Ian Curtis) or related side projects." - I don't think this is needed as nobody would realistically expect this article to include that stuff
I agree with you, I removed it

It entered the national charts of New Zealand[4], United Kingdom[5]," etc - refs should be after punctuation, not before
We don't need to add references to the intro, as we have it in the tables. See Crystal Castles discography for example.

"Italia[11], Portugal[12], Spain and Switzerland" - the country is not called "Italia" in English
Fixed

"charting in New Zealand[20], United Kingdom[21], Austria[22]," etc - same comments as before about ref placing and "Italia"
Same comment, see Crystal Castles discography for example. Again, I removed references,

they later recruited Stephen Morris's girlfriend" - no contaxt as to who Morris is
The Morris is Stephen Morris. I changed the text for "recruited Gillian Gilbert as keyboardist and second guitarist".

About unsourced tables, I can't find sources for it. VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 19:16, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

If substantial amounts of material genuinely can't be sourced then unfortunately the article is not going to reach FL status. I find it very hard to believe, though, that (for such an acclaimed band) no sources exist to confirm that (for example) they released a live album called "Preston 28 February 1980" (which even has its own article)..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:47, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

Source spot-check - pass

Will do. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 04:03, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

This table lists 1 random passages from throughout the article (25.0% of 4 total passages). These passages contain 2 inline citations (40.0% of 5 in the article). Reference numbers refer to this revision. Generated with the Veracity user script. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 04:03, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

@VitorFriboquen: Source spot-check is all good. I currently have a nomination for "Señorita" up; you may leave comments there if you wish RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 03:53, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

@Vitorperrut555: Correct ping. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 03:54, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• The Listokin "interim" row doesn't sort correctly. If you sort on any other column and then try to sort on the "no." column, the interim row jumps to the top. You need to use a hidden sort template to make it sort as if it had a value of 17.5 in that column
• Talking of Listokin......as there only ever seems to have been one interim dean, it's probably worth elaborating slightly in the lead on the departure of Gerken, which I presume was unexpected......?
• The "term start" column also doesn't sort correctly. The rows with full dates sort as if they were earlier than 1873
• Same for the "term end" column
• Not really sure what "class" means, and the tooltip doesn't really help. I presume this is either the year they first went to Yale or the year they graduated, but I am unsure which......
• See also section should be before refs, not after
• That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:28, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98

• Your tables have column scopes, but they are missing the row scopes. See MOS:DTAB for more information. Also, there really is no reason to have the References columns sortable. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:02, 13 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Generalissima

This is a good list, but the lede is really lacking; it needs both more citations and more context on who Adams is and what sort of works he created. See, for example, FLs such as William Gibson bibliography, Edgar Allan Poe bibliography, or Arthur Conan Doyle bibliography. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 23:25, 13 October 2026 (UTC)

I concur. Four sentences is seriously insufficient for an FL. If the lead can be expanded singificantly, I will revisit and do a full review -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:27, 14 October 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. !First published in becomes !scope=col | First published in. 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. |"A Christmas Fairly Story" becomes !scope=row | "A Christmas Fairly Story" (on its own line).
• The references column in each table needs to be unsortable.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:06, 14 October 2026 (UTC)

Shwabb1

I will leave a full review later, but before that, double check the number of tentative sites per UNESCO. I would not recommend entirely relying on the individual country lists on Wikipedia as they may be outdated. For example, 69 Indian tentative sites are listed here while there are currently 78; Uzbekistan has 29, not 37, etc. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 11:53, 14 October 2026 (UTC)

On it. Please don't start your review until I ping you. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:59, 14 October 2026 (UTC)

• @Shwabb1: The extra ones from Uzbekistan were a part of Silk Roads Sites in Uzbekistan: I've removed them. There were also a few other missing ones besides the ones that you pointed out. Please feel free to start your review now. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:57, 14 October 2026 (UTC)

Continuing...

• Per https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/stat, there are 315 WHS in Asia and the Pacific (314 + Le Corbusier, same issue as in your previous FL so a similar footnote needs to be added)
• Uzbekistan added another tentative site recently. Also, the source lists 516 tentative sites in total rather than 510 – are there five more sites missing from this list?
• Regarding the flag of Afghanistan, I wonder whether it would be more fitting to use the pre-Taliban flag (of the Islamic Republic rather than of the Islamic Emirate) as the current regime is not recognized by the UN, and the old flag is the one shown on the UNESCO website. Not sure what's the Wikipedia policy on this.
• "Ancient Water Towns South of the Yangtze River" should be "The Ancient Waterfront Towns in the South of Yangtze River". I'm only doing a spot check of the site names.
• "Cook Islands/Maldives does not have any sites" → "Cook Islands/Maldives do not have any sites"
• "Timor Leste has no sites" missing hyphen in Timor-Leste
• Several instances of spaces between site names and references need to be fixed
• Per MOS:DASHVAR, spaced out en dashes need to be preceded by a non-breaking space
• Some references follow an incorrect style (e.g., ref 312 lists the author as "Centre, UNESCO World Heritage" and the website as "UNESCO World Heritage Centre", when there should be no author and the latter should be indicated as the publisher). I would use the same style for all references as the country FLs do.
• The maps and the flag icons are the only images; no issues with these. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 14:53, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

Brief comment

• "Asia and the Pacific is one of the five regions defined by UNESCO, alongside Africa, the Arab States, Europe and North America, and Latin America and the Caribbean"

The mentioned designations have their own lists. Could you please link them? Otherwise the prose and linking seems good.

@JaneFootball: Made sense, done. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:28, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

Support JaneFootball (talk) 14:32, 23 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)

Pass :) Arconning (talk) 12:19, 13 October 2026 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• Yvonne Elliman should sort by last name.
• The "Number-one artists" table is missing col scopes
• I didn't see any problems with the prose. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:40, 13 October 2026 (UTC)
  • @MPGuy2824: - fixed! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:50, 13 October 2026 (UTC)

    Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:56, 13 October 2026 (UTC)

Dank

• "... Barry Gibb, one of the three brothers that comprised the group. "Stayin' Alive" was displaced from the top spot by "(Love Is) Thicker Than Water" by Andy Gibb, the younger brother of the Bee Gees": Accurate, but I think it's a little hard to follow. I recommend picking whatever fix works for you ... if it were me, I'd mention and link Barry, Maurice and Robin ... that way, when you introduce a fourth brother, it's clear that he's the fourth brother. I'd also mention that Andy never joined the group, but his brothers helped launch his American and international career by writing and performing with him. (Probably no need to mention his early career in Australia.)
• 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. You've already got an image-license review.
• 6. It is stable.
• Support, provisional on what I assume will be a clean source review, and assuming some kind of fiddling with the text I mentioned. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 16:31, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
  • @Dank: - see what you think..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:56, 17 October 2026 (UTC)
    • Looks good. - Dank (push to talk) 18:12, 17 October 2026 (UTC)

Support from 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)

Comments

• "Both singles reached number 77 and number 58 on the Billboard Hot 100" - they didn't both reach both those positions, so this should be simply "The singles reached number 77 and number 58 on the Billboard Hot 100"
• "One month later, The band announced" - no reason for capital T
• "My Chemical Romance later reunited in 2019" - "later" is redundant as it was obviously later
• Think that's all I got - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
  • @ChrisTheDude: Should be all addressed! Gavetheman555 (talk) 09:59, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:19, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

Source spot-check - pass

Will do. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 04:04, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

This table lists 2 random passages from throughout the article (5.6% of 36 total passages). These passages contain 2 inline citations (2.0% of 99 in the article). Reference numbers refer to this revision. Generated with the Veracity user script. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 04:04, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

@Gavetheman555 and NegativeMP1: Source spot-check is all good. I currently have a nomination for "Señorita" up; you may leave comments there if you wish RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 03:48, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• The "Peak chart positions" cells in each of the tables need to have the colgroup scope. The cells under those US, GER, etc) need to have the col scope. Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
  • Done, if i screwed up please let me know. Gavetheman555 (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
• wikilink "platinum" in the lead
  • Done Gavetheman555 (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
• "have been certified" seems ambiguous. Please clarify
  • Done Gavetheman555 (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
• Wikilink "catalogue album chart". Is Catalog Albums the right link?
  • Changed to "Catalog" as i am pretty sure it is ment to be "Catalog" and not "Catalogue", as the Billboard page itself lists it as Catalog. Gavetheman555 (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
• The refs to billboard.com that I checked point to some sort of homepage. Text searching for the particular song/album there yields no results. e.g. ref 36, 68, 69
  • They appear normal for me, should something still be done about it? Gavetheman555 (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:01, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
  • @MPGuy2824: All comments have been addressed! Gavetheman555 (talk) 16:04, 26 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)

MPGuy2824

• There is an overlap in the dates for Kurgan cemetery "Kuliab-mohyla". In fact the first range is a subset of the second range.
• The coordinates column should be made unsortable in each table.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:12, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824 fixed the coordinates column. Regarding the dates, I generally write them exactly as they are indicated on the register, unless they are obviously incorrect. Maybe there was a reason for this dating, but it is difficult to say for sure as the register never explains the dates (or other inconsistencies, for that matter). Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 15:00, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

  Yeah, quite weird that they don't explain anything. Even a couple of sentence of prose would be so useful.

• Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:12, 26 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)

  User:ChrisTheDude, I have added more context about football in Palestine and I had added the sortname template yesterday JaneFootball (talk) 12:25, 16 October 2026 (UTC)

• Looks good, but I think "Matches date back to the 1953 Pan Arab Games.[11] The team's first international match played was an 8–1 defeat away to Egypt in 1953." could be condensed to "Palestine's first international match played was an 8–1 defeat to Egypt in the 1953 Pan Arab Games." -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:36, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

  Good idea, I have shortened it per your suggestion JaneFootball (talk) 13:33, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:22, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

MPGuy2824

• The key table also needs row and col scopes for the header cells. Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
• All images, including the one in the infobox should have alt-text.
• "PFA's neglect of Arab interests"
• "was an 8–1 defeat away" : "away defeat" sounds better to me, but please check other football FLs.
• Wikilink FIFA when it is first used.
• Wikilink "friendly".
• Run iabot on the list when it is back up.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:40, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824: I made your proscribed additions JaneFootball (talk) 14:05, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

  Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:09, 23 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)

Promoting. --PresN 16:34, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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)

MPGuy2824

• Alt-text is missing for some images outside of the tables, e.g. biological classification, Marsupialia distribution and Afrosoricida. I trust you'll check the rest too.

• Added, though biological classification is a templated imagemap, so the sub-images have alts

• I think a link to List of recently extinct mammals is warranted at the end of the lead.

• Done

• See if you want to rephrase "All extinct families, genera, or species listed alongside extant species went extinct after 1500 CE, and are indicated by a dagger symbol "†"." as "Any families, genera, or species that went extinct after 1500 CE are indicated by a dagger symbol "†"". -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:28, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

• That changes the meaning a bit- families/genera/species that went extinct before 1500 are not present in the list at all, so I'd rather keep it as-is.

@MPGuy2824: Replied inline, thanks for reviewing! --PresN 00:32, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

The sentence still seems slightly off. If you can remove the phrase "alongside extant species", it might be better. It doesn't seem important to the sentence and is slowing down the flow of reading.

Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:29, 24 October 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)

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 (on its own line). If the cell spans multiple columns with a colspan, then use !scope=colgroup instead. I noticed these were missing in the "Promotional singles" table, but check the rest as well.
• The "Peak chart positions" cell of every table needs to have the colgroup scope if it span multiple column header cells.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
• The infobox image needs alt-text.
• I didn't see any problems with the prose.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:03, 23 October 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824: Sorry about the wait, I was on vacation when this review was published. I'll try to address this in the next couple of days. Do be aware this will be my first time trying to make a table more accessible. λ NegativeMP1 02:34, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Source spot-check

This table lists 2 random passages from throughout the article (6.7% of 30 total passages). These passages contain 4 inline citations (8.0% of 50 in the article). Reference numbers refer to this revision. Generated with the Veracity user script. Gavetheman555 (talk) 18:02, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

Source review passed, happy to support :) Gavetheman555 (talk) 18:08, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

Image review - pass

• File:Gerard Way, Southampton Guildhall (16208494349).jpg - CC BY 2.0

Image review passed. RedShellMomentum^{talk that talk to me} 02:48, 26 October 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)

• All images should be good (mostly own work, uploaded from Flickr, or public domain). The only one that raises some doubts is File:Haw Creek Preserve State Park at Russel Landing.jpg, as the bottom of the source says "© 2026 Flagler County" but Commons:Template:PD-FLGov claims that it is in public domain regardless (though it includes a note that the original author may still claim copyright). I am not familiar with the peculiarities of the US copyright law so I'm not 100% sure whether this picture is OK – I am assuming that it is probably fine. Would be great if you could confirm that it is in public domain, or otherwise replace it with another image just in case.
• Also, I do not have anything against describing Shoal River Headwaters State Park as the newest or the most recent unit, as it will likely remain as such for a while, and this fact is mentioned in the lead as well. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 13:38, 13 October 2026 (UTC)

  Hi @Shwabb1, The Public Domain for FLGov does apply to that image you brought up but I double checked that photo and its not actually from the park. I found another image from the Florida Park Service (Which also falls under PD-FLGov) that's actually from the park.

  Also, I have addressed all of your concerns now. I appreciate your work in reviewing this list, I know it wasn't exactly a quick thing to do. If you have any more concerns, I'll get right to addressing them! If you have no more concerns, do I have your support? 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 15:50, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

  Support on prose and pass image review. If you have the time and interest, I would appreciate a review of my FLC at Monuments of national significance in Zaporizhzhia Oblast. Shwabb1 ⟨taco⟩ 08:43, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

Dank

• "Combines a coquina-boulder", "Coquina ruins of the largest antebellum": since coquina is linked elsewhere in the table, it needs to be linked here too. Or, you could define the word in a "Key" section, and then there's no need to link it in the table. - Dank (push to talk) 03:08, 18 October 2026 (UTC)
• Welcome to FLC!
• Probably more people than not would be tacking on a period/full stop in the last column whenever there's a verb that suggests a sentence ... personally, I don't think it's worth worrying about.
• Just a warning that I cut-and-paste the text in a way that omits the links.
• "developed by the Bulow family from 1821 and destroyed during the Second Seminole War in 1836": If the following is correct, then this is what I recommend: "developed by the Bulow family from 1821 to 1836, when it was destroyed during the Second Seminole War". Explanations of this (or anything else) on request ... there's a story here, but people usually don't want the story. - Dank (push to talk) 03:16, 18 October 2026 (UTC)
• If anything I'm saying seems odd or makes you uncomfortable, let me know. What I'm trying to do here ... copyediting for someone for the first time that I haven't worked with before ... is hard.
• Link in the table, or link more consistently, or define in a Key section: cypress dome, gopher tortoise, hammock (ecology). FWIW, "cracker farmstead" and "cracker homestead" aren't well-known terms (see for instance Google ngrams); you might want to explain or reword. ("cracker" and "Florida cracker" are better-known, and they may be useful marketing, but it's a good idea to think about whether the terms are inherently ambiguous in a list like this one. If you're happy with the term, it's above my pay grade to object. If you keep it, you might want to define it in a Key section. But there's nothing ambiguous about various derivative terms, such as Florida Cracker Horse.)
• "protecting 84 protected": meh.
• I see that "first-magnitude spring" appears in the lead ... that's good enough that the term doesn't need a link in the table ... but it does need a link in the lead (probably to Spring_(hydrology)#Classification).
• "State of Florida": state of Florida
• Link in the table, or link more consistently, or define in a Key section: NRHP, longleaf pine, second-magnitude spring, US-1, broadleaf nodding cap orchid (link it to Triphora (plant)), dark-sky-quality location, Emerald Coast, hydric hammock
• "NRHP-listed 2018": NRHP-listed in 2018
• "famous for summer inner-tube floats": Above my pay grade. Every scholar thinks what they're interested in is important, and that the highlighted parts of what they study ought to be considered famous ... if they didn't think that, they wouldn't be studying it. It's not clear how many readers would apply the word "famous" to inner-tube floats, but it's not for me to decide what's famous and what's not.
• "that ranked #1 among U.S. swimming holes in a 2007 USA Today reader poll": several things strike me, but some of this isn't my call (per the point before this one): #1 -> number one; how do you know when something is or isn't a "swimming hole", and don't get me started on reader polls.
• "to see mermaids perform": Not sure what to do with this one. Some would add the word "cosplay". A link to mermaiding might or might not be useful.
• "name of the park though, Alafia River State Park": name of the park; Alafia River State Park
• "80 citizen support organizations, the parks' local "Friends" groups,": personally, I'd just go with "80 citizen support organizations", unless there's some specific link that explains what a "friends group" is (in which case, go with their spelling).
• "the National Gold Medal ...": The National Recreation and Park Association's National Gold Medal ... - Dank (push to talk) 15:22, 18 October 2026 (UTC)
• Overall: the list is attractive and informative. Lists like these are hard as hell to do; it's an underappreciated art. I'm not an expert (and I'm not doing a source review) so I can't speak to how accurate this all is, but it has the feel of someone who knows what they're talking about, and knows how to represent it to a general readership.
• 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, though different people have different preferences on how to handle the many constraints governing that last column. 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 see you already have a review of image sources.
• 6. It is stable. - Dank (push to talk) 15:29, 18 October 2026 (UTC)

  Hi @Dank, I appreciate you taking the time to welcome me to FLC and your overall comment there; I found that pretty encouraging. In terms of the fixes you mentioned, you will see that they have all been addressed and corrected. For the judgement calls, I ended up taking out the USA Today poll, the Weeki Wachee claim, and threw in links for the term Florida cracker. Some of these things sound so common to me at this point I forget they're foreign to other folks =D Again, thank you for your time and your comments on this review. 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 15:31, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support, provisional on what I assume will be a clean source review.
• Sure thing, happy to help ... and I'll be putting up a new tree list at FLC soon, maybe you'll have time to give me some thoughts on that. Btw, there's a new typo at "hardwood hamremaining ... endangeredmocks". - Dank (push to talk) 16:14, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedian12512

I'll do a source check. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:28, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

As of 17:31, 20 October 2026 (UTC), this article has 251 citations. I will check 15 of them, amounting to around 1 for every 17. This may take a few days, so please ping my usual account if I'm not done and haven't edited this for 24 hours. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:31, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 143 (https://www.floridastateparks.org/parks-and-trails/lake-louisa-state-park, supporting "Encompasses six named lakes within the Green Swamp basin, part of the aquifer recharge zone that feeds the headwaters of five major central Florida rivers"), it doesn't support all of it. I assume it's within the subpages. Mind using those directly instead? Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:33, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 155 (https://www.floridastateparks.org/parks-and-trails/madira-bickel-mound-state-archaeological-site, supporting "Preserves the Madira Bickel Mound, a Native American temple mound occupied from the Weeden Island period through the Safety Harbor culture; the first archaeological site designated by the state of Florida"), I can't find anything about the Safety Harbor culture, nor the Weeden Island period. I assume it's within the subpages. Mind using those directly instead? Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:37, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 60, (https://www.floridastateparks.org/parks-and-trails/constitution-convention-museum-state-park, supporting "Museum on the site of the former town of St. Joseph commemorating Florida's first Constitutional Convention (1838–1839), which drafted the constitution admitting Florida to statehood"), it all shows up fine. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:39, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 23 (https://floridadep.gov/sites/default/files/07-06-2016_Anastasia_AP.pdf, supporting "Site of the Old Spanish Coquina Quarries, an NRHP-listed archaeological district where coquina stone was mined to build the Castillo de San Marcos in St. Augustine beginning in 1672"), can you give a page number? It's 158 pages long. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:42, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 170 (https://floridadep.gov/sites/default/files/O%27Leno%20River%20Rise%20-%20Park%20Chapter.pdf, supporting "Marks the point where the Santa Fe River re-surfaces from its 3-mile (4.8 km) underground course through O'Leno State Park, one of Florida's most extensive sinking-river systems"), can you provide a page number? It's 107 pages long. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:43, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 200 (https://www.floridastateparks.org/parks-and-trails/skyway-fishing-pier-state-park, supporting "Repurposes the surviving approaches of the original 1954 Sunshine Skyway Bridge (partially destroyed in a 1980 ship collision) as the world's longest fishing pier, spanning Tampa Bay"), I can't find anything about what has been said. I assume it's within the subpages. Mind using those directly instead? Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:46, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 247 (https://floridadep.gov/sites/default/files/Suwannee%20River%20Wilderness%20Trail%20-%20Trail%20Chapter_1.pdf, supporting "Paddling trail on the Suwannee River between White Springs and the Gulf of Mexico, made up of primitive river camps and access points spaced roughly a day's paddle apart"), you should add a page number. I can verify everything except "spaced roughly a day apart" without the page number. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:51, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 241 (https://www.floridastateparks.org/parks-and-trails/nature-coast-state-trail, supporting length of trail), it shows up all fine. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:56, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 250 (https://www.floridastateparks.org/parks-and-trails/withlacoochee-state-trail, supporting length), it shows up all fine. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:56, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 145 (https://www.floridastateparks.org/parks-and-trails/lake-talquin-state-park, supporting "Sits on Lake Talquin, a reservoir formed in 1927 by the damming of the Ochlockonee River; the sandhill and hardwood-hammock uplands host gopher tortoise and southern flying squirrel populations"), I can only verify that it's near Lake Talquin. I assume it's within the subpages. Mind using those directly instead? Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 17:59, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 123 (https://www.floridastateparks.org/parks-and-trails/ichetucknee-trace, supporting "Undeveloped tract along the dry paleodrainage of the Ichetucknee River, acquired under the Florida Forever program to safeguard the springshed of neighboring Ichetucknee Springs State Park; open by prior arrangement only"), I get a 404, and the WBM can't find anything for it. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 18:02, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 2 (Nelson, David J. (2019). How the New Deal Built Florida Tourism: The Civilian Conservation Corps and State Parks. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. pp. 63–65. ISBN 978-0-8130-5631-9, supporting "Established in 1935"), I request a quote from the book. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 19:02, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 56 (https://floridadep.gov/sites/default/files/CBPS_Appoved_Plan_WithMaps_EE20150722.pdf, supporting "Protects the Little Cockroach Key shell mound and the Cockroach Key Shell Midden, which with nearby Big Cockroach Mound may mark the northernmost extent of the Glades culture, generally found no farther north than Collier County"), can you provide a page number? It's 138 pages long. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 19:04, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 245 (https://www.floridastateparks.org/parks-and-trails/palatka-st-augustine-state-trail, supporting length), it shows up all fine. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 19:08, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

For 247 (https://floridadep.gov/sites/default/files/Suwannee%20River%20Wilderness%20Trail%20-%20Trail%20Chapter_1.pdf, supporting length), you should add a page number. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 19:08, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

Oppose. Unfortunately, there are many sourcing problems, including lack of page numbers, and information not appearing (though presumably in subpages). Of the 15 I checked, only 4 are fully supporting, and one I need a quote. This gives an overall accuracy of 1/3, meaning there are around 169 sources that need improvement. Of the fully supporting parts, 3 were on length of trails, which I weighted a bit more heavily than it should have been. While there were only 11 such citations, I used 4 of them instead of less than 1 that should have been checked on average.

There is the limitation of me skipping parts supported by two citations, for the sake of my time. Although may have increased accuracy, they are also prone to OR and SYNTH, so I don't consider that as much of a limitation. However, I will review some of those if someone disagrees with that logic.

Pinging @Shwabb1 and @Dank for any thoughts, along with @Operator 16 as nom. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 19:22, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

@Wikipedian12512(alt) Thanks for the thorough check. You're right that the park-page cits only point to the main page and arent as detailed as they probably ought to be. I'm going through every row to redo each citation to exact page numbers. I'll go through and trim anything not directly supported while im there. I've been through these UMP's a lot now so this shouldn't be too bad. 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 19:59, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

Okay. If you think you can finish them, I’ll strike my vote, but going through all the citations and fixing likely over 200 might take a while. Sorry if I made too quick a judgement. Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 23:11, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

I think I can finish these actually. I had taken note of the pages these came from my first go through so I'm going back through and adding them then double checking the Notable Features themselves. Also for Nelson 2019, I'm waiting on my Library to get the book again so I'll keep you posted on that. 🌴Operator 16 (talk) 17:19, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

Gotcha. Cheers, _{In solidarity}User:Wikipedian12512(alt) (Talking is fine | contribs) 21:19, 21 October 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 <br/> 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)

• All images have appropriate licenses and verifiable sources (except for "own works").
• Image review passed. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:25, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

Dank

• I was asked on my talk page to give a prose review; here it is.
• I don't object to the word "process", but you might want to replace it because I'm not sure how many readers will understand the word. (And it's possible one of the writers didn't understand the word: I see "The trunk has one finger-like processing".) If you keep the word, then link it to process (anatomy), either once somewhere before the table or once in every row of the table where it's used.
• "to 1.6 to 2 m": I'm not sure whether you're saying that adult (male?) tusks range from 1.6 to 2 m, or that they generally grow as long as 1.6 m, or up to 2 m in some individuals. The problem I think is the ambiguity in "to ... to ...".
• "a length of about 25 cm (9.8 in)": missing a period/full stop at the end.
• "keratin": link it.
• "ossicone": link it (twice).
• Some people care (and WP:MOS cares) about consistency in use of the Oxford comma; this article isn't consistent. Personally, I think there are more important things to worry about, but you might want to scan the article again to see what I'm talking about. (For instance, "Indian rhino, greater one-horned rhinoceros or great Indian rhinoceros"; search for ", and" to see the ones with Oxford commas.)
• "decreases the degree at which these herbivores reproduce": decreases the rate of reproduction
• "extant megaherbivores perform": megaherbivores perform. The first "extant", in "Extant megaherbivores are", is fine since it helps to define the scope of the list.
• "As time progresses, it is thought that the situation will only worsen": This feels ambiguous to me. It wouldn't hurt anything to drop the sentence, but something specific might also work. - Dank (push to talk) 19:31, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

  @Dank: Implemented all your suggestions. Wolverine X-eye (talk) 21:24, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

• Supporting on prose, provisional on a clean source review. Well done. I changed "processing" to "process"; if I got that wrong, feel free to revert. - Dank (push to talk) 21:39, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 16:34, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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)

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 16:12, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Huh, I will get to editing soon, sorry for that. Tone 17:27, 26 October 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)

MPGuy2824

• Please improve the alt text of the map per MOS:ALTMAP.
• The scope for the "Land area" cell should be colgroup and I don't think it needs a data-sort-type.
• "the Congress of Sonora enacted a municipal reorganization including Law Number 68 which disolved" to "the Congress of Sonora enacted Law Number 68, which included a municipal reorganization that dissolved"
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:33, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

• Thank you for the reivew MPGuy2824! I've completed all suggestions. Mattximus (talk) 17:14, 24 October 2026 (UTC)

  My interpretation of MOS:ALTMAP is to say what you'd want a blind people to know about the map. So something like "Sonora is located in the northwest of Mexico".

  The colgroup wasn't done properly but I fixed that. Please check for the same issue in the previous FLs of this series.

  Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:51, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

Gonzo_fan2007

• and the 2nd largest by land area spanning 179,354.7 square kilometres (69,249.2 sq mi)., add a comma after "area"
• They may also assist the state and federal governments in education, emergency fire and medical services, environmental protection and maintenance of monuments and historical landmarks. because you have so many ands, I recommend using semi-colons: They may also assist the state and federal governments in education; emergency fire and medical services; environmental protection; and maintenance of monuments and historical landmarks.
• while the smallest is Ónavas with 365 residents. add a comma before "with"
• The largest municipality by land area is also Hermosillo which spans 15,724.30 km2 (6,071.19 sq mi), and the smallest is San Felipe de Jesús with 151.30 km2 (58.42 sq mi). need a comma after "Hermosillo" and after "Jesus"
• The captions of the photos should be written consistently and I recommend as complete sentences. The first and third caption are not complete sentences, while the second is.
• The justification of the text in the table is confusing. I generally stick to one (like centered) or something consistent like text being left justified and numbers being right justified. Right now text is left, center, and right justified in the table. Please be consistent.

That's what I got Mattximus. Thanks, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:21, 26 October 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)

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 16:10, 26 October 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)

  fixed! I didn't know this was possible until now. thanks Gb321 (talk) 21:11, 12 October 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. ! Listed Name becomes !scope=col | Listed Name (on its own line).
• 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. | [[Hollywood Pantages Theatre|Pantages Theater]] becomes !scope=row | Listed Name (on its own line).
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
• There are 63 contributing buildings in this district (acccording to the lead), but only 59 are mentioned in the table. Please clarify somehow (possibly in a footnote) why this is so.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:23, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824: the 63 vs 59 discrepancy appears to be a mistake from one of the sources. I went to the primary source National Register document and counted the contributing properties; it is 59. The source that says 63 is a city document, it does not explain where the 63 comes from so I can only conclude that it is incorrect. I'm going to correct the number to 59 and delete that source entirely from the list. Nice catch.

  I'll get to the other items you mentioned soon.

  Gb321 (talk) 15:47, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

  added row and column scopes Gb321 (talk) 16:10, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

  I fixed one small issue and now i can Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:37, 21 October 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)

MPGuy2824

• I think winner/recipient of a particular award is the artist and they win it for a particular album. e.g. I'd rewrite "The first Grand Prix was presented in 2009 to Shifon Shugi by the indie rock band Sōtaisei Riron," to "The first Grand Prix was presented in 2009 to the indie rock band Sōtaisei Riron for Shifon Shugi," The entire second paragraph of the lead needs tweaking to fix this.
• In the "Artists with most nominations" and "Hall of Fame" tables, since all the row header cells span multiple rows, their scope should be rowgroup.
• (please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:04, 20 October 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824: Thanks for the comments! I don't know if the "entire second paragraph" needed tweaking; some sentences were already phrased as you suggested, but I may be misunderstanding your comment. Please take a look and see if I've done this right. I've also changed the scope to rowgroup on the tables you mentioned. IanTEB (talk) 05:26, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

  Looks ok now. Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:54, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 16:34, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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)

Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 16:34, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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)

MPGuy2824

• Fixed 2 small issues with scopes and didn't find any issue with the prose.
• Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:51, 13 October 2026 (UTC)

Honeycombing

• Support, especially on comprehensiveness. Well cited both on the lists and the prose. Lead is great. Didn't find any issues. Honeycombing (talk) 20:23, 26 October 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)

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)

• 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)

• 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 User: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)

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)

Gonzo_fan2007

• The season officially began on May 15 in the Eastern Pacific proper (east of 140°W) and June 1 in the Central Pacific (140°W to the IDL), and ended on November 30 in both areas. to avoid having three phrases separated by two ands, I recommend changing the second , and with ; it.
• This is historically the period during which most tropical cyclogenesis occurs in these respective areas. just my preference, so take it or leave it, but I prefer the set-up Historically, the is is the period
• no storms became major hurricanes[4] by reaching Category 3 or higher the citation breaks up the reading of the sentence (I literally paused as reading it). Any reason not to just put it at the end of the sentence? It's not a very controversial statement.
• basin, though Hurricane Jimena attained its I would prefer although instead of though here.
• time stamp is acceptable, but I believe timestamp is preferred lately, especially in terms of technical data.
• NHC is used in the lead but not defined at its first use.

That's all I got. Nice work Dylan620! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 19:16, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks Gonzo fan2007 :) I think I've gotten everything! Dylan620 (please ping • talk • edits) 19:45, 26 October 2026 (UTC)

Support, nice work! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:01, 26 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)

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)

Comments

• "The Packers have survived as the NFL's last small-town team largely due in part to continued support of the local community" - there's a "the" missing before "continued" and also "largely in part" seems self-contradictory. It was either largely or in part but not both
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "unlike other NFL teams, the Packers are owned by Green Bay Packers, Inc." - I don't think anyone would realistically expect any other NFL team to be owned by Green Bay Packers, Inc. This needs to be something like "like other NFL teams, the Packers are owned by a [whatever type of organisation it is], namely Green Bay Packers, Inc."
  • Reworded. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "funding raised [...] have helped " - singular/plural disagreement
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• I don't think Lambeau needs to be linked twice in the first two entries in the timeline
• "with their only loss a being a controversial 6–0 game" - there is a stray extra "a" in there
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "February 28: Judgement was made against Packers" => "February 28: Judgement was made against the Packers"
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "After an unsuccessful appeal of the judgement against the team by Packers' lawyer Gerald Francis Clifford, " => "After an unsuccessful appeal of the judgement against the team by the Packers' lawyer Gerald Francis Clifford, "
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "the Packers began playing some homes games in Milwaukee" - there is a stray extra s on home
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "where Packers' players ride local kids' bicycles" - there should be no ' on Packers and I think "kids" is a little informal
  • Fixed. Changed to "children". « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• Lambeau Field is linked in two consecutive items in 1965, which I don't think is necessary
  • See below. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• Dozens and dozens more links to Lambeau Field later on, which again I don't think are needed
  • See below. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "As part of the AFL–NFL merger, the make-up of the National Football Conference (NFC) and American Football Conference (AFC) were finalized" => "As part of the AFL–NFL merger, the make-ups of the National Football Conference (NFC) and American Football Conference (AFC) were finalized"" (or "As part of the AFL–NFL merger, the make-up of the National Football Conference (NFC) and American Football Conference (AFC) was finalized")
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• John Jones is linked three times in 2007. This is definitely overlinking
  • See below. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "The Packers fifth stock drive began" => "The Packers' fifth stock drive began"
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "Packers' players moved into their new team area" => "Packers players moved into their new team area" or "The Packers' players moved into their new team area"
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "the movie included a cameo by five Packers' players" => "the movie included a cameo by five Packers players"
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• " Due to the Covid-19 pandemic" - COVID should be in uppercase
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "the Packers' selected quarterback Jordan Love" => "the Packers selected quarterback Jordan Love"
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "The Packers announced that due to the Covid-19 pandemic" - as above
  • Fixed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• "Titletown District" is linked twice in 2021, more overlinking
  • See below. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
• That's what I got. I think the overlinking needs addressing. I appreciate that WP:OLINK does not prohibit re-linking something if it hasn't been mentioned for a long time, but we definitely don't need 50 separate links to Lambeau Field in the article..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
  • Thanks ChrisTheDude, I appreciate the thorough review! I have fixed all of your comments except the ones regarding linking, which I wanted to group into one comment down here. This was my first "timeline" list, so I kind of treated each individual entry as it's own row of a table, and since you can't sort things, I tried to link each item, even if it had been repeated before. I really don't have a strong opinion either way, just want to be consistent. Do you think I should remove duplicate links in each decade, so for example Lambeau Field would be linked just once in each decade, but any subsequent mention in that decade section wouldn't be linked? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
    • Support - fair point -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:01, 25 October 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)

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)

Comments

• I would try to avoid having a bold link on Emperor's Cup if possible
• "In the face of Japan's colonial era," -> During Japan's colonial era... I'd also specify when that era was
• "Of all finals, fifteen have ended in a draw after 90 minutes,: -> Fifteen finals have ended in a draw after 90 minutes
• "The team that have been crowned champions the most is Keio University with nine cups whereas it is Sanfrecce Hiroshima who have lost the most finals (12)." Split these into to sentences, like this: The team that have been crowned champions the most is Keio University with nine cups. Sanfrecce Hiroshima have lost the most finals (12).
• "Since the professionalization of Japanese football in 1992, Kashima Antlers have held the title five times." are you trying to say that they have won the most since professionalization?
• ref 1 to 8 need to match the date formatting on the remaining references
• Ref 5, you need to add the author and the published date

That's it from me. If you have time, would you consider reviewing this list? NapHit (talk) 12:45, 16 October 2026 (UTC)

@NapHit,  Done. Wikipediæ philosophia (talk) 21:16, 16 October 2026 (UTC)

Happy to support now my concerns have been addressed. NapHit (talk) 09:59, 17 October 2026 (UTC)

Comments

• Sources in Japanese and Korean should have a translated title
• Where are the citations for the lettered notes?
• Would appreciate seeing more secondary or independent sources; I suspect newspaper coverage would include the attendances of the pre-2005 finals.
• The JFA citations (11 through 31) are missing dates that can be found in the metadata for these PDF link.
• Both of the performances tables need to have an inline citation somewhere, whether in the column headers or a note outside the table itself.
• The Japanese translations and romanizations should be moved to a separate note per MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV. I would also try to condense things and move the common name (Emperor's Cup) and general format first before mentioning the official and branded names.
• The year links should include "final" or "edition" to prevent an WP:EASTEREGG scenario.
• Link to Japanese archipelago for "Japanese islands" perhaps?
• "The team that have been crowned champions the most is Keio University with nine cups" reads awkwardly. Maybe begin the sentence with Keio University as the clear subject?
• The two sentences about Sanfrecce's record could be merged and may not need parenthesis for the numerical values.
• Perhaps the shortened history of the tournament (popularity with universities, professionalization) could be moved to the second and third paragraphs to keep the history together.

That's all I have for now. If possible, I would appreciate feedback at this long-stalled nomination. SounderBruce 04:17, 17 October 2026 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know how to retrieve information from Japanese newspapers. It's not my language. Wikipediæ philosophia (talk) 18:09, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

RSSSF seems to have pretty good coverage of the early 2000s finals in the individual season entry pages, and there's sources that can be used from Japanese Wikipedia. SounderBruce 21:04, 19 October 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)

MPGuy28224

• 2 images are missing alt-texts: Cururo en el Parque natural Gómez Carreño.jpg and Cremnomys cutchicus crop.JPG
• No issues with the prose. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:44, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

  @MPGuy2824: Fixed, thank you for reviewing! --PresN 12:31, 25 October 2026 (UTC)

  Support on prose and accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:32, 25 October 2026 (UTC)