Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/IWGP Heavyweight Championship/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal 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 kept by Sephiroth BCR 22:47, 9 May 2009 [1].

IWGP Heavyweight Championship

edit
Notified WP Professional Wrestling and Marck

I'm nominating this list for FLRC because it does not meet the following criteria:

  • Prose - The prose does not flow well, IMO, and should be expanded much further.
  • Lead - Same as above, as the only prose is the lead. The lead needs much more expansion.
  • Comprehensiveness - There are a few blank boxes in the notes section that should be filled in.
  • Structure - The list is not sortable, it should be.
  • Visual appeal - There is none, whatsoever. An image at least, would be helpful.

This list certainly does not display the right qualities to be called "Wikipedia's best work" so unless changes are made, it should be removal as a Featured list. iMatthew // talk // 23:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments don't give much direction. Can you point out specific problems with the flow of the prose? What more would you like to see added to the lead section? Please also keep in mind that there might not be anything to say about some title changes, in which cases blank boxes can't really be filled in. I have also added two free-use images. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I'll take this step by step. First off is the lead. It needs to be expanded further. iMatthew // talk // 02:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick reply. As I asked before, though, what would you like to see added to the lead section? GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove The articles fails most of the criteria, multiple polocies, and some of the MoS of WP:PW. Would explain further, but can't at the moment.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!) 02:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep All the problems I have with the list have been fixed. It meets criteria in my eyes. It should stay an FL IMO.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!) 17:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please keep in mind that an FLRC begins with discussion and is not simply a vote. There's no reason to remove it before trying to work on it. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah I know, I'm going to discuss. I'm just giving my stand point on it at the moment. I'm not sure the sources are reliable at the moment either. Never been that sure on Strong Spirit. The lead needs more information on the belt and pro wrestling in general.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!) 02:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • One thing that can be done is adding the days held section, and adding the template that counts the days.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!) 07:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well I've been asked on the X Title's FLC if it should even been slipt off from the belt. If the title history was broke off into another article, then this belt would have much less information.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!) 02:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • See the WHC, info just needs to be found and descriptive details, despite their lengths. See the WHC got to GA. I think its a good idea to split it to coincide with other lists.--Best, ₮RUCӨ 02:30, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is what I said, not in those words. This is a Japanese championship, most of those articles are stub to C class articles. I doubt we could find enough reliable information for this championship.--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!) 02:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Never say never. But I was just throwing that out there.--Best, ₮RUCӨ 02:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I see that Scorpion0422's big concern was the use of a questionable source. I have addressed this concern by providing general sources (a book source from a reliable publisher, and the official title history from NJPW's website). I chose to leave the Strong Style Spirit references in, as they are no longer citing contentious material. I believe that the champions and dates could have been open to questioning, so that is resolved. The name of the tour on which the title change took place is not contentious material, however, so I believe that the current references can stand. GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see reliable sources under the general section - Strong Style is sourced for the details and the general sources clarify the overall info such as who, when and where. I don't see a problem with that. The table should be updated to look like the current version of the title tables with length of reign, sortable etc. It can easily be fixed by someone. As for "Blank notes", not everything NEEDS a note so I don't see that as a problem, it's definitly not a "Featured List" requirement. Look at more recent wrestling title FLs for leads & intros etc. While yes it's not quite as good as the latest FLs it can easily be fixed and could have been achieved without going straight for removal. I mean didn't ANYONE think to ask for improvements before going straight for removal? I thought that was the recommended way to do it? I will begin working on updating the table format. MPJ-DK (talk) 08:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notifying the relevant projects and editors and giving them a chance to fix things before initiating an FLRC is, indeed, the recommended way to do it. I know I caught hell a while back for only notifying the projects and then waiting 8 days, as I hadn't left messages on the individual editors' talk pages. GaryColemanFan (talk) 16:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well I did the table update, it's now in line with recent FLs and FLCs AND sorts. WP:PW may want to consider removing the "individual Reign by length" section as it's redundant now that you can sort on the length of the reigns. MPJ-DK (talk) 16:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC) PS - I'd say improve the lead and it's an easy keep. MPJ-DK (talk) 16:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Question - Now that MPJ-DK has added a column for "days held", can we (please) get rid of the "length of individual reigns" table"? It now adds absolutlely nothing to the article. GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I already removed it. If you could, will you add somemore info about the championship's history if you can to the lead?--WillC---Joe's gonna kill you!!!) 17:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I strongly recommend seeking another image to avoid using the break template because its leaves a huge break between the lead and the next section.--Best, ₮RUCӨ 14:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that I have not had much activity in this despite opening it, and that's because of how busy I've been. Sorry about that, though I've seen a lot of work done through discussion amongst yourselves. Its getting better, and hopefully in a day or two I can make some final comments and we can keep this thing. ;) iMatthew // talk // 18:04, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Something's wrong with the formatting of reference 1. I think the parenthetical page number is the culprit. Giants2008 (17-14) 21:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed this, as well as a few other ones that had the same problem. Nikki♥311 00:55, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Every Strong Style Spirit reference is dead
  • There is a large gap of blank space between the lead/infobox and the table of contents.
  • The sortable function for #, Days held, and Date are not working correctly.
  • Key and List of champions tables should be separated into two subsections.
  • The SSP external link is broken, like the rest.
  • Surely there is a template that could be added?
  • Add a link to the professional wrestling portal (in the external links section)
  • See also section can be removed. Nothing there that is directly relevant to the title.
  • I'd like to see more expansion on to a history section.

 iMatthew :  Chat  11:52, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorting fixed for date and number columns; portal link added. GaryColemanFan (talk) 16:58, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure what you're saying with "key and list of champions..." The blank space has been reduced considerably. The Strong Style Spirit site is making some changes, so it says the pages will be back soon. "See also" section removed. GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This two-sentence conclusion caused me some concern: "At 489 days, Shinya Hashimato is currently the longest in the championship's history. Overall, There have been a total of 22 recognized champions who have had a combined 50 official reigns." No subject in the first sentence, and faulty capitalization in the second, along with a wordy "a total of". Also, the note for reign 12 has an excess comma. Giants2008 (17-14) 00:10, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remove - Sorry, but I can't in good conscience support keeping this featured when more than half of the references are to a unreliable website that is currently down. Even if the site comes back up, it doesn't make it conform to our policies and guidelines. For that reason alone, I recommend that the list be demoted, at least until better sources are used. Giants2008 (17-14) 23:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question - Would it help if those sources were simply removed? The list is fully sourced without them, as the Almanac and the IWGP website cover all of the title changes. The extra sources are essentially filler. I'm not sure why filler sources from a website with unproven reliability would lead to demotion, but I'm up for just ditching the Strong Style Spirit references if that's all it takes to end this FLRC. GaryColemanFan (talk) 01:38, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As long as all of the notes and such are covered by the general references, yes it would. I'd drop my oppose if that was done. Giants2008 (17-14) 23:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Struck above, as the references from the site in question were removed. Depending on how one feels about Wrestling-Titles.com and TitleHistories.com, this is heading toward keep territory. Giants2008 (17-14) 20:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's this doing exposed in the lead? "Tastumi Fujinami currently holds the most reigns at 5, At 489 days, Shinya Hashimoto is currently ... ", Apart from the obvious, there's at at, a comma probably required after "reigns", and a spelled-out 5, especially since it's near the big number that must be spelled out. MOS is strict about inbuilt rapid obsolescence: "currently"?
  • "Wrestlers are portrayed as either villains or fan favorites as they followed a series of tension-building events, which culminated in a wrestling match or series of matches for the championship." Is that a "because" as or a "while" as? It's hard to know. "events that". The sentence is almost too long.
  • The lead is slender, so if this survives with its star, can the editors beef up the interest-factor of the lead? It's supposed to be bit special, not a humdrum intro. Tony (talk) 09:05, 29 April 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.luquay.com/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_removal_candidates/IWGP_Heavyweight_Championship/archive1&oldid=1210740641"