Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Governors of Maryland/Archive1

List of Governors of Maryland
(Yes, another Maryland list) Now improved with references! The best list of obscure historical politicians from a minor American state that money can buy. Seriously, though - good list - glad to make any suggested improvements. Geraldk 15:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The first picture I checked (the last in the article) has copyright issues. Rmhermen 16:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 *  Oppose 
 * Most images used as FU for the last 30 years are probably going to be deleted at some points. Such prominent individuals most likely have PD portraits somewhere.
 * At least one is outright challenged
 * Color coding is not clear enough (the blue and green are too similar on flat screens)
 * It's also ambiguous: the same party is given different colors, and "no party" candidates are given in at least 3 colors
 * An actual color chart at the top of the "Governors under Statehood" section is probably a good idea.
 * The Maryland seal image also need a proper FU statement. U.S. seals are trademarks, and not subject to the time limits of copyright.
 * Circeus 17:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, there aren't any fair use images created within the last 30 years used in that particular article. The only one was added very recently, and I have just deleted it as RFU.  In addition, the only other fair use images are for three governors in the mid 20th Century for which I could not find any free use images, and who are deceased. --Tom (talk - email) 22:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I think I've fixed most of the color issues, including the mislabeling and the blue/green issue. FYI, I believe the same shades of blue and green appear in List of Presidents of Venezuela, which is FL, and which might need to be corrected as well if this is a problem. Added color key. Also, not sure if the seal image has appropriate rationale now, so please check and let me know. Sorry for the delay in responding - was out of town. Geraldk 21:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I've reverted the color changes. Too similar?  These colors are the standard used in Wikipedia for U.S. political parties, so it sounds like there may be a problem with the settings on Circeus's monitor.  Also, as an LCD monitor owner myself (which I assume is the "flat screen"), these colors stand out perfectly fine.  I'd suggest adjusting your contract, brightness, or other settings if these look alike. --Tom (talk - email) 04:22, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * But I added the key back in, since it's useful. Geraldk 04:37, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Please don't strike my arguments. I can do it myself. Circeus 18:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Support I tentatively changed the color key. Feel free to revert. Circeus 18:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Key looks great. Geraldk 20:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The original was taken from the List of Chicago Landmarks (which I later also converted), but then I remembered about legend, although I wasn't sure if it included a bordering option. Turnedout there was one, making the color more visible. Circeus 23:12, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose (for now) due to the presence of redlinks (as per WP:WIAFL 1a(1) "group of existing articles"). These are all for per-statehood governors, and I am prepared to belive they aren't notable enough to justify articles. If this is the case, then their names shoudl be de-linked. If they are notable, they then they must have an article (even if it's just a stub) for this to become a FL. Also, the references should be a sperate section to the notes. (You may find it useful to use &lt;ref&gt; tages). That aside, this is a sound list, and I will be happy to support once these issues have been addressed. Tom pw (talk) (review) 20:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I had dropped the redlinks earlier, and User:Tom put them back in, saying that redlinks are OK because these guys are notable. I assume he meant that they could, and should at some point, have their own articles. That aside, my reading of WP:WIAFL, based on the phrase "for example" is that a collection of existing articles is merely one reason to have a list, and not a definitive requirement, and I would think this list, with the redlinks, would fit in under !a(3). Geraldk 23:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)