Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Florida birds

List of Florida birds
This follows the format of previous lists, is well illustrated and referenced. Although I added a few images, this is mostly the work of Aerobird. Dsmdgold 02:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, though it would be nice to have a footnote on the disputed status of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (the AOU might accept its rediscovery, but the ABA has decided not to change its status from Extinct). --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 10:00, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, great work. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 11:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, if we're allowed to support one's own pages. ;-) - Aerobird 21:08, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose The pictures make HUGE gaps in the text. This makes it very hard to read.  This needs a picture reformatting for sure.  Tobyk777 03:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * This interesting, because there are no gaps when I look at the article.  What browser and operating system are you using? Do you see the same type of gaps when you look at List of North American birds and List of Oklahoma birds?  On the Florida list, do all of the images cause gaps? If not, which ones do and which ones don't? I am starting my "work week" so I may have limited time to address this problem until Monday, but if you can be more specific about these gaps, I will try to see what I can do about them. Dsmdgold 11:39, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * For the record, on IE6, 800x600, Monobook skin, I get smallish gaps with the Great Cormorant, Black Vulture and Loggerhead Shrike. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 12:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I get no gaps at all with Firefox at 1024x768. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 13:33, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * What browser are you guys using? More than half this article is blank space.  Every signle pic makes at least 7-8 lines of blank.  Tobyk777 05:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, the north America list is fine. the oklahoma one has gaps too, but they're not even close to as bad as here.  Tobyk777 05:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * At home I use Firefox and get no gaps. At work, I use Explorer and get the gaps mentioned by OpenTopped Bus. It seems to the problem described by OpenTopped Bus comes when a vertically oriented image is attached to a "short" family and is followed by closely by another image in the next family.  I've tweaked some of those images by making them smaller and, when possible, moving the images in the next family farther down.  Does this help.  Again, if I knew what browser, OS, and skin you are using, then I might be able to replicate your problem and address it. Dsmdgold 14:09, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * On my Win95/IE5.0 Jurassic Puter, the pics are too deep on some of the shorter families, and cause "gaps" on the family below; the "150px" picture setting doesn't help. (This is why originally I left some families "unillustrated".) - Aerobird 02:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Moving left. At this point, I'm not sure what should be done. I think that Aerobird is correct in that including pictures with short families will cause gaps for some users. The only two possibilites it seems to me are either live with the gaps, as is being done on the Oklahoma list, or not illustrate every family. Right now, it is my goal to have at least one picture for every family, except those that are only represented by extinct, extirpated, accidental, casual or hypothetical species. (I'm not meeting that goal because some familes lack good photographs anywhere on wikimedia.) However if it is community consensus that gaps are a big enough problem, then I can live with that also.  Either way, I'd like it settled, as I have a few more of these lists planned. Dsmdgold 19:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Support - looks fine to me (just like the other bird lists). -- ALoan (Talk) 11:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * For the third time today: please format references in reference style and not as external links :) Renata 12:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've reformatted the references some, if this isn't what you have in mind can you please point me at the style sheet that shows how you want online references formatted? Dsmdgold 14:11, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That's good now. Reference style is just giving the full title, author/organization who created the page and any other info that is available on the page. Thanks, and good luck on your conspiracy ;) Renata 23:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Support Another fine effort from the ornithologists. Durova 06:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral. While it is a fine work, there is too much on that page. Perhaps it should be split into a few smaller articles. I wouldn't want to read or look at the whole thing at once. → &ensp; J  @  red &ensp; talk  +  ubx &ensp; 22:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)