Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Crafoord Prize/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 08:08, 18 July 2009 [1].

Crafoord Prize

Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk) 15:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Featured list candidates/Crafoord Prize/archive1

Another prize list. Based on our rather neat featured topic of Nobel Prize laureate lists, some rather cool markup used for that intricate table (well I think so!), illustrated and referenced. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, good sir, that you currently have five running FLCs. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:11, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. It's not like they're overflowing with unresolved comments! Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comments Weak~~ support

Resolved comments from Crzy cheetah

I don't usually comment on prose, but I have some questions.

- ...polyarthritis (rheumatoid arthritis)" the disease... - Shouldn't there be some punctuation mark between )" and the?
- ...a rotating scheme (astronomy - Could you write this sentence without parentheses?
- ...King of Sweden (who... - Again, could you lose those parentheses?
- ...1982 no women... - comma after 1982?

--Crzy cheetah 03:32, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All addressed, thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:26, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Why are you using the percentages for the columns? I previewed the table without those % and I didn't notice any changes.
  - Well, removing the %'s for me on IE7 with a moderate horizontal resolution (<1600px) results in the nationalities wrapping round, so since it's not causing any problems, I'm going to leave it as is. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Why are you disrespecting Toshio Hirano, the lone red link?
  - No disrepecting, it was red when I found it. I didn't create any of the others. I have, however, now created a stub for Hirano. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Crzy cheetah 02:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs)

General

Dabs, external links check out fine.

Lead

The recipient of the Crafoord Prize is announced each year in mid-January; on Crafoord Day in April, the prize is presented by the King of Sweden who also presents the awards at the December Nobel Prize Award Ceremony. -- presents what awards?
- Reworded. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
the disease from which Holger Crafoord severely suffered in his last years. -- why not just mention his first name?
- Fine, done. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Table

I'll take it that the tables can't be sortable because some entries use row/colspans right?
- Correct. A shame, I know, but while sortability is desriable, it isn't a requirement. I wish there was an easy way (or indeed, any way) of doing it otherwise. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it is a shame. But wikicode is something complex :P--Tru co ₅₀₃ 16:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Tru co ₅₀₃ 16:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Previous issues resolved/clarified; list meets WP:WIAFL.--Tru co ₅₀₃ 16:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comment Images need alternative text per criterion 5b. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:37, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 5b says alt text is used "where necessary". I believe I have added alt text "where necessary" already in this list. Could you be more specific if you think I haven't, based on the fact that the images are simply there to illustrate the people in question? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at File:AltText.PNG. As you can see, images without alt text or captions don't register at all when images are turned off. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Informative indeed. How is your list of FLs to be demoted unless alt text is added getting on? I imagine there are hundreds...(!) In the meantime, I'll add alt text to every single image. I'll be doing that from now on, just in case...... I'll let you know when I'm finished. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To your first point, I wouldn't do that. To your second point, cheers. I'll be back with a proper review later. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm done. I think alt text seems like a very good idea and the more lists I create with "just images" (i.e. images without captions), the more I should use it. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. One thing: we shouldn't actually specify in the alt text that this image is, in fact, an image. So you can remove "An image of" from the alt text. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But if it doesn't show up at all when not using captions (like the image you directed me to, above), how does someone know there should be an image there and not just text? Or should I go back and do some more homework? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:37, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the reader will gather from the context that images are being described. Also, the images are under the "Image" column, so I think it's fine. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

"Administered by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences" "Administered by" makes me think of medicine or shots. Perhaps "Awarded by" or "Presented by"?
- Well, technically the administration of the prize is by the Royal Swedish Academy. The prize is presented by the King of Sweden...
"research in the disciplines of astronomy and mathematics; geosciences; and biosciences, with particular emphasis on ecology and polyarthritis (rheumatoid arthritis)", the disease from which Holger severely suffered in his last years. "
- Okay. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"In polyarthritis, a Crafoord Prize is only awarded when a special committee decides substantial progress in the field has been made."-->A Crafoord Prize is only awarded for polyarthritis when a special committee decides that substantial progress in the field has been made.
- Okay. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Crafoord Day" No link?
- No, not really. I suspect any stub would end up being a redirect to this page.The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"by the King of Sweden" Comma after here.
- Gotcha. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"The inaugural winners Vladimir Arnold and Louis Nirenberg were"-->The inaugural winners, Vladimir Arnold and Louis Nirenberg, were
- Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Since its inception in 1982, no women have been awarded the prize." I'm confused, because you said that the award was established in 1980.
- Okay, the award was founded in 1980, first awarded in 1982. I can see the confusion. I'll rephrase. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PUNC, periods outside the quotation marks in the rationales. By the way, what was the verdict on using quoted rationales in these lists? Dabomb87 (talk) 21:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Punc'ed. And no verdict as such. Not that I'm aware of, at least. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The Notes don't need to have A. B. C. when it automatically makes the letters as backlinks. Reywas92 ^Talk 03:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues from Rambo's Revenge (talk · contribs)

Mild oppose

The reason of the oppose is that although we've had no conclusion on the rationale discussion, initial reaction by MRG seemed against it and that it was unnecessary. As such, is it not possible to paraphrase these rationales?
"is intended to promote international basic research in the disciplines of astronomy and mathematics; geosciences; andbiosciences, with particular emphasis on ecology and polyarthritis (rheumatoid arthritis)" looking at the source this quote has been refactored without it being noted in the quote. For example the addition of in the disciplines "of", geosciences; "and"biosciences - you are also missing a space there. It might be better to keep caps and simple remove the bullet points "is intended to promote international basic research in the disciplines: Astronomy and Mathematics, Geosciences, Biosciences, with particular emphasis on ecology, and Polyarthritis (rheumatoid arthritis)." (I have added one comma after ecology, but I think that makes the category splits clearer).

Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rationales rephrased now. Is that better? And also attended to your second point. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:34, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Better yes, but I don't think it is perfect. I don't know how seriously to take this rationale thing, but judging from what I've seen MRG say in the past some of this paraphrasing either needs rewording or should have quotes again. If you look at the diff it illustrates those that have just had one word changed. See Signpost on adapting sources. Basically I've no problem with the couple of word ones, e.g. Studies of the interstellar medium. However, the longer ones like Developing and applying isotope geological analysis methods for climate study during the Quaternary period are still very close to the source (and actually without quotes may be called plagirism). I realise this argument may seem circular but it is not. Ideally reduce all redundancy where possible (as in paraphrase down as much as you can). If in some cases you can't accurately portray the rationale without extensively quoting the source then a short quote would be okay. I'd like to see a firm resolution to this problem, but to completely avoid any problems I think you must quote sparingly and paraphrase (as Signpost describes) wherever possible. I hope you can see where I'm coming from, and don't just think I'm being arsey for no reason. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 00:15, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've now trimmed further. These are now bare facts and I believe they cannot be copyright infringements. If they are still a problem, and we can't "quote" from the source directly as I did originally, then I am not sure I will be able to satisfy your concerns. It's a shame we haven't got a definitive answer on this as the list has now lost a great deal of its original information, and possibly for no reason. Is it any better now? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is better. I'm also really wish we'd had a definateive answer but I notice the Rumford Prize is being held up by this, and this is just the course of action I thought needed taking to avoid any of these concerns. Of course, if there was a definatetive decision that the use of full rationale's is acceptable feel free to reinstate and use them in future (but I fear this will not be the case). Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images

File:Alain Connes in 2004.jpg, see my nomination for deletion to see my problems with this image.
All the others checked out fine, or I managed to verify.

Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious image removed. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:43, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.