Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Carolina Panthers seasons


 * 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 18:58, 3 April 2008.

Carolina Panthers seasons
I added to the lede to conform to other FL articles such as Green Bay Packers seasons. Everything else looks FL ok.  P G  Pirate  14:25, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support as nom.  P G  Pirate  13:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment, ✅ definitely needs more thorough citations. I don't necessarily think everything needs footnotes but at least if sections use a certain source you should make that clear. I am sure some of the other lists have good examples of that. gren グレン 02:42, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * ✅ There is an empty "Footnotes" section.
 * In use now.

-- Matthew | talk | Contribs 07:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Each statement in the lead should be referenced, as they aren't covered later in the list, like they would be in an article.
 * ✅ Where are the Carolina Panthers based? NC, or SC, for example? City would be good, too.
 * ✅ "season-by-season", not "season–by–season".
 * ✅ What are expansion teams?
 * ✅ "The franchise has two Division Championships and one Conference Championship" - Wins, appearances, or losses?
 * ✅ "The club has never experience a continuous winning season" → "The club has never experienced consecutive winning seasons"
 * ✅ "After that hard fought victory": WP:Peacock
 * ✅ Charlotte, North Carolina → Charlotte, North Carolina
 * I always thought the way do it was.
 * Oh. Well I don't know then. I can't find anything in the MOS, actually, but TRM should be able to give a definitive answer—he seems to know the Manual inside out. -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 20:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think the MOS deals with this. I'd prefer not to see commas in wikilinks so I'd have kept it as it was.... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * reverted back.  P G  Pirate  13:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ St. Louis, Missouri → St. Louis, Missouri
 * ✅ Philadelphia, Pennsylvania → Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
 * ✅ I may have missed it, but what is a Wild Card Berth?

1 more
 * ✅ Is it "franchise", "club" or "team"? Each is used indiscriminately throughout the Lead, and it really should be one or the other. -- Matthew | <span class="plainlinks" talk |Contribs 20:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I tired to use more than one word to break up the repetitive nature of using one name. I am guessing you want the article to stick to one term? -  P  G  Pirate  16:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think two at the most. I still don't understand American football, and I don't understand why they're a "franchise", when every definition of the term that I know would go against it. Anyway, "franchise" is the official term, so I would continue to use that, and then I think "team" is used more frequently, colloquially, than "club", which always sounds British to me, so I would remove "club". -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 20:56, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ Lose the current season and bullet piont at the top. Buc (talk) 07:42, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Green Bay Packers seasons, Chicago Bears seasons, etc etc have this; all are FLs.
 * San Diego Chargers seasons Buc (talk) 20:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I still see the current season. Buc (talk) 13:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Per this page, the proper format, in a nutshell, should mirror Chicago Bears seasons. That page has the current 2008 year listed.  P  G  Pirate  13:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I see no current season on that format. Buc (talk) 14:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I do not see what you are talking about.  P G  Pirate  12:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The format page you linked to. Buc (talk) 20:12, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I am lost to where you see this on the Carolina Panthers article.  P  G  Pirate  01:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What Buc is saying is that since the list starts out with "This is a list of seasons completed by the Carolina Panthers" that the table itself should not have the "2008" row until the Panthers finish the 2008 season. I feel this logic is flawed, as all the team season lists were updated throughout the 2007 season, and going with this logic the 2007 season should not have been added until the season ended.  Also, it seems pretty bad form if Wikipedia cant stay updated, as our whole selling point here is that we are not a paper encyclopedia and can be updated instantly.  With all that said, I changed the lead in Green Bay Packers seasons to reflect this, so that we can stay with precedent and place the next season in the table even though it hasnt been completed.  Feel free to make this change if you feel it solves the problem.  « Gonzo fan2007  (talk ♦ contribs) 19:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I totally agree with everything you said. It's seems silly not to have the current season. However my argument is in fact based on what was told when trying to get San Diego Chargers seasons and Leeds United A.F.C. seasons to FL status. That baically FL should not have to constently updated. Don't agree with it myself but that's the rule. Buc (talk) 10:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well it boils down to stability. If a team plays forty or fifty games a season then it means a list relating to said team would need to be updated once every, say, five days.  That makes the list inherently unstable.  And I've heard it all before, the "we promise to keep it up to date" line.  It never works out that way.  Making the list constrained to the last completed season makes it solid, factually correct and doesn't rely on weekly updates.  The Rambling Man (talk) 15:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I totally understand with football seasons, as I am a Gunner but still seem to miss some of the matches (granted Im in America) due to the fact that there are so many cups and tournaments that the club participates in. But with American football seasons, there is only 17 weeks in a season, with each team playing 16 games and only playing on 4 different days the whole season (90% of these games are played on Sunday, with one game on Monday, and later in the season a few games on thursday and saturday).  Also, as in Green Bay Packers seasons, there is a warning at the top stating what day the list is updated to.  That said, if consensus is to remove it (and consensus should be reached at WP:NFL, not here) then so be it.  Also, the argument that a FL should not be updated constantly is faulty, as List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people is being constantly updated.  I actually believe that WP:LGBT has a collaboration going to keep the list updated, but I could be wrong.  I feel that readers going to a season list want to see every season, including the current season.  A list is made for ease of search-ability for the readers, and I believe that making the list complete for the reader trumps all concerns about stability.  « Gonzo fan2007  (talk ♦ contribs) 19:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose right now... A few things to check out. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Don't link in the bold lead per WP:LEAD
 * It is done in Chicago Bears seasons, which is the "template"...
 * ✅ (NFL) should be placed after the first use of the expanded version.
 * ✅ Remove "present" season, stick with completed seasons per all the discussion above.
 * ✅ "The franchise..." vs "Their best..." - discretionary plurals? Be consistent.
 * Good Catch
 * ✅ 9–yard, just check you're using a hyphen here, not an en-dash or otherwise.
 * Curious to why an endash is not needed.
 * Manual of style says hyphen in this case. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought endash was used, guess I need to read WP:DASH again.
 * ✅ "The teams’ worse season" - worst season? And does team=franchise?
 * I did not change anything when it comes to "team" and "franchise". I am going on the assumtion that people will know its the same. Should it change?
 * ✅ Citations should order numerically, so not [4][2].
 * ✅ Why small font in the key? It adds nothing and prejudices against people with visualisation difficulties.
 * ✅ "Postseason Results" - "results" will be fine, not a proper noun and we're not talking German!
 * Whats wrong with Germans?:)
 * Why is season column bold?
 * I do not see where to make it un-bold. The coding isnt the normal  
 * Yes, that's very odd. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Should anything else be done?
 * ✅ Awards should be specifically referenced.
 * ✅ You have a 2008 season row (which should go) but your totals only add accumulate to end of 2007. If you keep the 2008 season, the totals will be confusing.  If you don't add in the 2008 season to the totals, what's the point in it being there?
 * Just a note (and I may be misunderstanding you here), the 2008 NFL season has not started yet, thus there are no totals for that season. The season doesnt start til like August.
 * Yeah, so why have the row at all? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Chicago Bears seasons has is, which again is the template.....
 * See below, the template you're all working to is full of errors. It needs a lot of work.  And regardless of that template, what's the logic of an empty row for four months?  The Rambling Man (talk) 08:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Why are some but not all of the totals in italics?
 * ✅ Ref [2] needs  sorting out.
 * There's a slow migration to a single References section with Specific and General as sub-headings. Worth considering.


 * This nom says to me that we need to find some consistency in the NFL season articles, both with the current season and a few other things. Buc (talk) 20:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I would concur. If you have a style guide, such as WikiProject National Football League/Team seasons list format, at least make sure it meets WP:MOS - currently there are problems with that example with WP:CITE, WP:DASH, inconsistent terminology, overcapitalisation, blank cells and so on.  The Rambling Man (talk) 15:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * ✅ In the opening sentence you have "list of seasons completed", but in the table you include 2008. If the bolded lead is correct, then 2008 should be omitted, because it is not a completed season; however, if your style guide expects 2008 to be included, then the opening sentence should be changed.
 * ✅ "...from 1995 to 2007" would be one less thing to update each year if you said "from 1995 to the end of the latest completed season".
 * ✅ "The Panthers have played over two hundred games in a total of 13 seasons". You need an "as of" date, perhaps "As of the end of the 2007 season..."
 * ✅ "every winning season has precluded and proceeded a losing season". Neither precluded nor proceeded mean what you're using them to mean; suggest something like "has both followed and preceded".
 * The bold season column is because it's preceded by a ! in the table markup. If you want it unbolded, replace the ! with a pipe | character, though I'd leave it, personally.
 * I like the bolded as well, but The Rambling Man advised again it....
 * Actually, I simply asked why it was bold, I didn't advise either way. Usually bold text is significant in some sense.  I just didn't see the significance and so wondered if I had missed something... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oopes, misread it. :)  P G  Pirate  17:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree with the reviewers above that there's a problem with the season list style guide running counter to WP:MOS, though you're right to choose WP:MOS where there's a conflict. Struway2 (talk) 10:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

More comments -- ṃ• α• Ł• ṭ• ʰ• Ə• Щ•  @ 18:30, 27 March, 2008
 * ✅ Move the "For complete team history..." to a See also section
 * ✅ Still some references missing for my liking: The bit re Superbowl
 * ✅ "best year was the 2003 NFL season. The team won the NFC South division for the first time in franchise history. The Panthers had five wins compared to one loss in division play." I'm guessing the second 2 sentences relate to the 2003 season, but they're stubby.
 * ✅ Actually, that entire para seems full of stubby sentences, and is also a little WP:Trivial for my liking
 * ✅ Wikilink "Wild Card Berth" or otherwise explain
 * ✅ Per WP:CS those listed under "References" should be under a "Further reading" section
 * ✅ JT-SW.com appears to be a WP:FANSITE and the hickosports link doesn't work


 * ✅ Comment: Is there a reason that the table of contents is down at the bottom? I'd throw it back up at the top, but I'm not exactly sure how that's done. JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's because the table has no section header, so appears as part of the Lead. Either a section header needs adding, or at worst, the code "" . -- ṃ• α• Ł<big style="color:#090">• ṭ<big style="color:#090">• ʰ<big style="color:#090">• Ə<big style="color:#090">• Щ<big style="color:#090">•   @  14:17, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Added section head to force TOC to appear right after the lede -  P G  Pirate  15:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Support Nominator has addressed all the comments and concerns to make this far better than it was when first nominated. -- <small style="background:#fff;border:#4682b4 1px solid;color:#000;padding:0px 3px 1px 4px;white-space:nowrap">ṃ<big style="color:#090">• α<big style="color:#090">• Ł<big style="color:#090">• ṭ<big style="color:#090">• ʰ<big style="color:#090">• Ə<big style="color:#090">• Щ<big style="color:#090">•   @  19:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support, I still don't see what the source for the "official records of the NFL" is (I suppose the links to NFL.com below?) but it seems neither of the other featured lists mentioned in this article make it any more explicit. Beyond that great improvement. gren グレン 13:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support (assuming you deal with the references/further reading comment below.) I'm impressed by the efforts made by the nominator to get this list to comply with the FL criteria.
 * There's still a bit of confusion about references/further reading; what WP:CS actually says, is that
 * "All items used as sources in the article must be listed in the "References" or "Notes" section, and are usually not included in "Further reading" or "External links". However, if an item used as a reference covers the topic beyond the scope of the article, and has significant usefulness beyond verification of the article, you may want to include it [under Further reading or External links as appropriate] as well."
 * So, if any of the Further reading links are used as sources for your article, those links must go in a References section; if you think any would be of interest to the general reader, then leave those ones in the Further reading section as well. And it would be helpful to specifically reference "official NFL records" (just above the table) to the NFL standings link, if that's where the data comes from.
 * good work, well done. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I changed the header from Futher reading to References. Also

NFL.com - History - Yearly Standings. National Football League Official website. Retrieved on January 28, 2008. references the official NFL records. Does this need to be inline cited, or is this OK? Thanks,  P G  Pirate  17:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I probably would inline-cite it, if only to avoid confusion as shown by gren above. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Support but please revise your "template" for these season lists so it complies with WP:MOS or we'll be going over old ground again and again. All the best.  The Rambling Man (talk) 15:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.