Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2017 AFL Women's Rising Star/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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 22:14:14 8 December 2019 (UTC).

2017 AFL Women's Rising Star

 * Nominator(s): – Teratix ₵ 09:30, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Following Allied45's successful FLCs for the 2016 and 2017 AFL Rising Star awards, I'm continuing the trend with the equivalent accolade in the AFL Women's. I have tried to follow a similar format to the previous FLs. The list is a bit shorter than its AFL counterparts but just as comprehensive, and has a high-quality lead image to boot. (This is my first FLC). – Teratix ₵ 09:30, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I'd mention more specifically that 2017 was the AFLW's first season
 * Done. – Teratix ₵ 14:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I appreciate that you have a link to the eligibility section of the main article, but I would also briefly explain the rules here. It would only require one extra sentence and it would help to bulk up the lead, which is quite slender as it stands.
 * I've put in a brief sentence. I'm still looking for sources to clarify some of the details of eligibility. – Teratix ₵ 14:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It's unclear whether suspended players in 2017 couldn't be nominated or were merely ineligible to win. To be safe, I've just said they couldn't win. I've found an example of a player who was suspended during the 2019 season but was still nominated, so I've clarified the criteria in the main article. Hope that's OK? – Teratix ₵ 01:13, 7 November 2019 (UTC)


 * "announced in the AFLW's awards ceremony" - I would say "announced at the AFLW's awards ceremony", but then I am not Australian. Can you confirm that something occurring "in" a ceremony is standard Australian usage?
 * No, this is just a mistake, fixed. – Teratix ₵ 14:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I would avoid the use of "this year", as it's rather confusing language given that "this year" almost always means the year in which the reader is actually reading it. I would replace with "the year", "the season", or simply "2017"
 * Replaced all. – Teratix ₵ 14:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Might be worth mentioning that every club had at least one player nominated?
 * Could you explain why? It seems a bit trivial to me. – Teratix ₵ 14:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, just thought it was mildly interesting, but it's not a deal breaker..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:13, 6 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Can you check the vote totals? The main article says that each of the 10 panel members awards points from 5 down to 1, so the totals should add up to (5+4+3+2+1)*10 = 150, but they actually add up to 153??
 * Looks like a mistake in the source. Mithen is credited with 26 votes in the overall tally but the individual panel members' votes only add to 23. Fixed. – Teratix ₵ 14:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:27, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:24, 7 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Support. Great job . Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 21:36, 13 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Support – Beautiful work ! Thank you for helping expand on my work with these lists. I could not find any issues, and I have taken the liberty to archive all the citations to ensure link rot does not become an issue down the track :) Allied45 (talk) 07:16, 15 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Source review – This article is a pass as far as the sources are concerned. The references are all reliable and well-formatted, and the link-checker tool shows no problems. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 23:23, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 22:14, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.