Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Buchanan Medal


 * 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 18:02, 14 February 2009.

Buchanan Medal
Another Royal Society medal; comments appreciated as always. Ironholds (talk) 17:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments from 
 * Just a friendly notice, refrain from nominating lists of the same subject back to back, considering that there is a lack of reviewers and these noms are by one user. Wait at least for one to be promoted/archive before nominating another one.
 * The Buchanan Medal is awarded by the Royal Society every year "in recognition of distinguished contribution to the medical sciences generally". - if the period is apart of the original quotation, it should be in between the quotation marks.
 * It was created in 1897 to be awarded once every five years, but since 1990 the medal has been awarded every two years instead. - comma after 1990
 * Since it was created it has been awarded 28 times, and unlike other Royal Society medals such as the Royal Medal it has never been awarded to the same individual multiple times. ---> Since its creation, it has been awarded 28 times, and unlike other Royal Society medals such as the Royal Medal, it has never been awarded to the same individual multiple times.
 * As a result of the criteria for the medal most of the winners have been doctors or other medical professionals; an exception was Frederick Warner, an engineer who won the medal in 1982 "for his important role in reducing pollution of the River Thames and of his significant contributions to risk assessment". - comma after medal
 * For the quotes, if the period is apart of the original statement/quotation it needs to be in-between the quotation marks
 * Its not stated in the lead who was the first recipient of the award.
 * Can a footnote be implemented to explain why there was No award in 1994?-- TRU    CO   19:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * All done; I'm afraid it doesn't give any reason why there is no award, it is simply missing a year (or pair of years, rather). I'll stop with the FLs for a while then, heh; I've got other things to do as it happens. Ironholds (talk) 03:04, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Then what you just told me should be integrated into a footnote, because it leaves the reader in question. In addition, can an image be added?-- TRU    CO   22:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The Royal Society building, maybe; there isn't really an option for a picture of something medal-related at the moment because I forgot who the medal is named after and cannot find that info . Reasoning added.
 * An image of the recipient? An image of the award itself? Something related to the Royal Society. For the footnote, it should be something like An explanation as to why no award was given this year is disclosed by the Royal Society.-- TRU    CO   23:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * ..'has not been disclosed'? Ironholds (talk) 23:40, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Ooops, thats what I meant. :)-- TRU    CO   00:24, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * All done. Ironholds (talk) 00:25, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Support - problems fixed to meet WP:WIAFL. TRU    CO   01:27, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't use a three-column reflist, they break on some browsers.
 * Refs 8, 10 and 14 need  added to their citation templates. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:39, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * All (sources and comments) done. Ironholds (talk) 07:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * comment. I think the notes column would look better with the contents centred and the lead split into 2 paragraphs for easier reading.Yobmod (talk) 18:03, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Ironholds (talk) 18:34, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Have you thought of linking the years to "xxx in science" articles. I don't use them, but presumably someone finds them useful, and they ccan be useful places to compare all the awards of one year.Yobmod (talk) 09:21, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments Nothing else. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * but since 1990, the medal has been awarded every two years instead. no need for either the comma or the "instead"
 * unlike other Royal Society medals such as the Royal Medal - link to Royal Medal perhaps?
 * "for his important role in reducing pollution of the River Thames and of his significant contributions to risk assessment" -- a bold quote. I think perhaps a reference is necessary.
 * Because some of the entries have an emdash in the ref column, it appears as if he is they are all completely unreferenced. Perhaps the archive page can be referenced each time instead?
 * All done except the last point; could you clarify "he"? Ironholds (talk) 01:03, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * They idea is that the "general" refs cover those without third-party references; if I reference the general ones for those with missing marks I'll get a horrible blue abcdefghijklmn...so on thing at the references section. Ironholds (talk) 09:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.