Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2006 NCAA Division I FBS football rankings/archive1

2006 NCAA Division I FBS football rankings
This article is a continuation (and an improvement) on the 2005 NCAA Division I FBS football rankings article which is also a Featured List. This article shows the dynamics in ratings throughout a the 2006 college football season. It has been checked for accuracy; it is informative and well sourced.↔NMajdan &bull;talk 18:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - great list. Solid criteria.  Complete, accurate, and well-sourced.  Note: I have made small contributions to the lead and some wikilinking. Johntex\talk 19:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. Overall this is an excellent list, and somewhat an improvement over the previous. I can recommend some fixes:
 * The first sentence doesn't really explain the article's subject, instead it should be: 2006 NCAA Division I-BS (Bowl Subdivision) football rankings is...
 * All sentences which begin with "that", "this", "it" should be merged with the previous (e.g. and is.., which is..).
 * I fixed all but one, because I couldn't figure out how to also include it with the previous sentence that also used a that/this/it. -- MECU ≈ talk 01:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * "Sports" doesn't need to be linked.
 * As the 2006 football season progressed, rankings are updated weekly - Grammar.
 * The legend/indicators need to precede the list, preferably on the right of the lead in this case.
 * How does it look now?↔NMajdan &bull;talk
 * External links shouldn't appear within the article's context. Instead, move the Michigan blog link to an external links section.  Michaelas10   (Talk)   21:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * mgoblog is already in the citation, so I just removed the external jump.↔NMajdan &bull;talk
 * I've made a few formatting changes to the article.  Michaelas10   (Talk)   21:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments, I have made some of the changes you requested and will make the others as soon as I can, unless somebody beats me to it.↔NMajdan &bull;talk 22:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment it stretches the page, dunno if that counts but can it be remedied? -- Howard  the   Duck  17:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That is built in; we prefer it that way. Trying to get such a wide table onto a normal screen would make it look much worse, in my opinion. I've seen that table conformed to a 1024x768 monitor (which I use) and it was not pretty. I would be very much against any suggestion to limiting this to screen width.↔NMajdan &bull;talk 18:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I was going to say to divide it into monthly sections but you wouldn't see Florida's from #7 to #1 that dramtically. 02:35, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Conditional support - The last 3 weeks of the USA Today poll and the BlogPoll don't have teams' records listed, that needs to be added like all the previous weeks have. VegaDark 21:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Done.↔NMajdan &bull;talk 14:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support though I am one of the major contributors to this list, it doesn't seem that I am precluded from supporting since the nomination also counts as a support and that user is also a major contributor. If I am wrong, please forgive me and simply ignore my support and let me know nicely how wrong I am. -- MECU ≈ talk 22:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)