Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Connecticut Huskies bowl games/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 Dabomb87 23:41, 17 September 2010.

List of Connecticut Huskies bowl games

 * Nominator(s): –Grondemar 20:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I believe this list of Connecticut Huskies bowl games meets the featured list criteria. Please review and concur if you agree.

This list is intended to be the capstone to a future Connecticut Huskies bowl game featured topic, similar to the (now-demoted) Virginia Tech Hokies bowl game featured topic. Right now only one of the bowl game articles, 2009 International Bowl, is of featured quality; I plan to improve the other three bowl game articles following working on this list. –Grondemar 20:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Comment (to the reviewers) - 10 entries rule? -- K. Annoyomous   (talk)   00:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If you have sufficient prose, the 10 entry rule does not apply. And it is also irrelevant whether all bowl games could be at List of college bowl games, because having them in one place would be bad and it's divided after teams (because that is what the reviewer want) and to hell with what the MoS of WP:LIST says. But if he can't vigorously argue his case, then of course it will probably fail. But note we have precedent for letting this stuff pass so luckily we don't have to think about, unless we want to change precedent in which case someone will say "standard changes", and then Grondemar will have to file an RfC for this criteria, and it will likely end in no consensus and that's just though luck buddy! Sandman888 (talk) Latest PR 08:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * My understanding of criterion 3b of the featured list criteria is that a featured list cannot reasonably be included as part of another article. In this case, the article in question would not be List of college bowl games, which is a list of bowl game series rather than specific annual games, but rather Connecticut Huskies football, the main article for the Connecticut Huskies football program.  I would agree it would be reasonable to include the summary table of games in the main program article; in fact, it is already there.  What would be undue weight would be to include the individual game capsules.  In my mind this list meets that aspect of the criteria as the game capsules could not reasonably be included in the main program article.  I also note two other things: first, that since UConn will in all likelihood be invited to a bowl game every year they have a winning season, this list will continue to grow over time; and second, I don't see any specific mention of a "10 entry" rule in the featured list criteria.  I am unfamiliar if this is considered to be an unwritten, colloquial standard, however. –Grondemar 09:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The 10-entry rule is not a rule, but in the past the FL community has considered lists with fewer than 10 entries to be "too short" for FL status. However, I encourage reviewers to consider each list individually instead of applying a robotic "standard" to all FLCs. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:33, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Was just wanting some feedback on whether or not this "violates" that "rule". It certainly doesn't violate any FL criteria, so let the reviewing go on! -- K. Annoyomous   (talk)   22:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Support I don't have any 3b concerns because of the level of detail presented here; this would be out of balance on the team's main article. All other issues resolved. (Still, next time, lose to the Gamecocks.) Courcelles 16:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! (If it's any consolation, I'll be rooting for the Gamecocks to take the SEC East this year.  If they're ever going to do it, this will be the year.) –Grondemar 16:53, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Regarding 3b, I believe that this list could reasonably be included as part of a related article (Connecticut Huskies football). The table already is included in Connecticut Huskies football and the information in this list could be merged into that section of the article where only the table exists now. NThomas (talk) 18:00, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Connecticut Huskies football is currently 1658 words of readable prose. List of Connecticut Huskies bowl games has 1417 words of readable prose.  Even if the history section (which is most of the readable prose of the article) is doubled in size, it would be unreasonable to have a third of that article taken up by bowl game summaries.  Including the full details of this list article in the main team article would be undue weight on a very narrow aspect of the history of the Connecticut Huskies football team. –Grondemar 01:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * 3.b is such a joke. You have article like List of New York Yankees no-hitters (B) and List of Major League Baseball no-hitters (A), where B is a complete subset of A. The same goes for the current Watford POY and previous similar lists. The reason why they're allowed? Due to extensive prose written and effort on behalf of nominator. But what is the purpose of lists you ask? it's to make it easy for people to navigate in different wikipedia articles. Therefore they shouldn't be this hybrid of lists and articles just to avoid 3.b failure, but whatever. Sandman888 (talk) 20:51, 31 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Support I didn't find anything at fault. Sandman888 (talk) 07:57, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose on a second thought, I genuinely believe that extra prose does not make a list meet 3b. The games are all linked so there's no need to c&p a summary of each into a list and then create a spin-off list. Following that logic I could equally split any list of football players into 20 sub-lists by adding prose from the relevant players articles. Perhaps 3b should just be deleted since it doesn't work. Sandman888 (talk) 20:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 3.b changed for the better. However I'm still confused if you can oppose on 3.b or it should be taken to AfD? See the current FLRC on mergers. Sandman888 (talk) 07:34, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The structure of the game capsules follows the summary style guideline, where the parent article (the bowl game list) links to each of the games while providing a summary of each of the games, beyond what one could get from a single table, in the game capsules section. This is a similar structure to what is done in individual college football season articles&mdash;2005 Texas Longhorns football team is an example of a featured article with this kind of structure (along with other sections which aren't applicable to a list of bowl games).  –Grondemar 05:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Support – Meets FL standards. Note that I'm supporting this one and the Texas Tech list. No one ever said that all FLs in a genre must look the same.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 21:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


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