Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of BC Lions head coaches/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 not promoted by Dabomb87 18:28, 5 December 2009.

List of BC Lions head coaches

 * Nominator(s): --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 04:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

First ever CFL head coach list FLC nomination, and hopefully my 29th head coaches/managers FL. I'll try to find some secondary sources, rather than the primary sources currently used like CFL, BC Lions, and CHOF websites. Grammar/copy-edit mistakes can be boldly fixed by you, the reviewers. Everything else should be fine.--  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 04:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - I saw that an additional row for Adam Rita is added for sorting purpose. I don't think this is a good idea because it confuses readers. I wonder if there is FL precedent for this.— Chris! c / t 04:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's confusing and odd. We should not be confusing the text just to make the software work. I suggest choosing one of the two methods and deleting the other: list each term separately or combine the two stints into a total stats for his time with the Lions. Double Blue  (talk) 00:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the readers wouldn't be confused, as there is a note that indicates that the column is for their own sorting purposes. There is no FL precedent for this, but how about color the column light gray, to indicate that the column is for sorting purposes? --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 01:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Even with the note or the color, it is still extremely odd to have another row showing the sum of the numbers of 2 other rows. I'd say remove it as people can easy add the numbers up themselves.— Chris! c / t 03:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Made another section. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:31, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Still not sure if this is a good idea, but I will wait for others to comment first.— Chris! c / t 20:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There is precedent for the separate table, though I don't like it. I think that readers can do math, so I don't think it's necessary. KV5  ( Talk  •  Phils ) 02:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Rlendog also used a section of managers with multiple tenures on his MLB managers FLs (ie. List of New York Yankees managers), but ehh...Removed section. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 05:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose - On a sentence level the prose is acceptable, but overall it doesn't flow well.
 * The opening sentence is a bit boring, and doesn't indicate at all what the article is about. If I didn't know better, I'd assume this was some duplicate of another page.
 * The name “Lions” was based on a two similar mountain peaks that can be seen north of Vancouver. - Seems really out-of-place and irrelevant to the article.
 * The first paragraph seems like a few random facts were organized into a block of text.
 * To answer the first four comments, the first paragraph is an introduction to the BC Lions, in case people don't know who are the BC Lions. I kind of agree with your fourth comment, though is there any way of having a better introduction? --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The Lions' first head coach and general manager was Annis Stukus, who coached the team for two WIFU seasons; the Annis Stukus Trophy is named after him. - Last part is off-topic.
 * Annis Stukus Trophy is for the best CFL head coach of the season. Now explained on article. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Dave Skrien, who coached the Lions for seven seasons in the 1960s, has coached the Lions to two... - "Coached the Lions" twice in a row.
 * Fixed. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Excluding the previous mentioned, no other coach has won the Annis Stukus Trophy with the Lions, and Dave Ritchie and Steve Buratto are the only other head coaches to have coached the Lions to a Grey Cup championship, in 1994 and 2000 respectively. - Previous what mentioned? Doesn't seem like good grammar.
 * Fixed. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but this isn't ready yet.
 * It is ready, but just has a few minors that need to be fixed, that's all. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

– Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 03:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Support. My issues have been addressed and I feel the editor has made a substantial effort in resolving the issues of other editors.—NMajdan &bull;talk 20:52, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments – To start, I feel that I must say something about the nomination statement. You may feel that it saves time for reviewers to make copy-editing changes, but they should feel no obligation to fix a page that they haven't worked on. The nominator should be the fixer, unless a reviewer graciously offers copy-editing services. Look at it this way: it will help you avoid similar errors in the future, saving time for everyone involved.
 * I tell reviewers to copy-edit the article for me, as I barely have any time to do anything these days, plus I copy-edited myself twice already.


 * "In their 56-year history, the team have appeared in nine Grey Cup finals, and have won five Grey Cup championships." Second use of Grey Cup is a redundancy and those words can be safely chopped.
 * Fixed. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * "who coached until the Lions first CFL season". Apostrophe missing at the end of Lions. Also, it's pretty obvious from this that he was their first CFL coach; not sure the next bit is needed.
 * Fixed. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Now reads "who coached three games into Lions first CFL season." Think this should be "the Lions' first season", as I suggested before.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 20:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It wasn't the Lions first season, it was their first CFL season. If the current revision still doesn't satisfy you, then just DIY. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 05:44, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * "led the team to two consecutive Grey Cup finals in the 1963 and 1964". Faulty grammar.
 * Fixed. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * "Vic Rapp was then hired in the 1977 season, coaching for 96 games until the end of the 1982 season, winning...". Don't like this structure, which has an -ing on top of an -ing. Try "Vic Rapp was then hired in the 1977 season and coached for 96 games until the end of the 1982 season, winning...".
 * Fixed. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Part of the reason why people are criticizing the flow may lie with the third paragraph, which is long compared to the rest of the lead. Try siphoning a couple of sentences to other paragraphs, which may help this feel more flowing.
 * I'll try my best to do that if I have time. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

 Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 22:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Comment - normally I don't criticize the prose because I am not a good writer myself. But paragraph 3 is just poorly written. There are so much repetitions. Instead of cramping every facts into the sentence, please be clear on what you want to say. Also, you shouldn't just tell reviewers to copyedit for you, you just learn to do it yourself. Because in the end, it is going to help you improve.— Chris! c / t 01:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Look above. I'll try to fix the third paragraph sometime this week. Hope I have time for Wikipedia... --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 03:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I kind of fixed the lead, and the flow of the lead, though more improvement on grammar could be possible. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 20:12, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I made some tweaks and believe that the prose have improved. Though before I support, I want others who are better equipped to locate and fix prose problems review this first.— Chris! c / t 23:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Please ask opposers to revisit the FLC and check whether their concerns have been resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:41, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll do that sometime later, if possible on Friday. --  SRE.K.A.L. | L.A.K.ERS ]] 05:44, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Archiving this FLC as unsuccessful. Although the list was improving, there were still outstanding opposes and concerns over the prose, and on a brief runthrough I still easily found errors. I think if the nominator can work with one or two editors over the prose during the next week, the next FLC will be much smoother. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.