Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Houston Texans Pro Bowl selections/archive2


 * 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 Giants2008 21:15, 11 January 2013.

List of Houston Texans Pro Bowl selections

 * Nominator(s): Buggie111 (talk) 17:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I could go in depth about how the Texans are going to be the best team of the 2010's and such, but all I'll say is that, after what felt like an eternity of adjustments to address points made during the first FLC, I finally think this List meets the FL criteria. But that's your decision. Buggie111 (talk) 17:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

My comments are now capped, but I hope others will offer input here to reassure me that this meets FL standards. Oh, and ref 29 needs a publisher. Giants2008 ( Talk ) 20:04, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comments from  Harrias  talk
 * I don't like the collection of references in the lead for Johnson's appearances: try compressing them into one note, like I did at Herbie Hewett.
 * Slightly confused as to how I'd word it, but will do. Buggie111 (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The player column should sort by surname, not forename.
 * Please help with that, I don't know how to fix that. Buggie111 (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Why aren't center and cornerback linked in the position column, and the 2011 instance of halfback?
 * No explanation of the difference between starter, reserve and alternate is given.
 * The second-half first paragraph appears to do little more than list all the players in the list below, which seems redundant. I appreciate the point of mentioning that Johnson has been invited five times, but to list everyone seems like overkill.
 * "Foster has since been selected one more time, totaling two selections." This sentence jars a little for me: the reader can work out that one selection, plus one selection, makes two selections.
 * In general the prose just doesn't really do much in my opinion. It doesn't really provide much "editorial comment" on the list below, it simply reiterates the information.
 * In the table, the statistics list "xx yards", but to a layperson (like me) that means nothing. Some explanation needs to be provided.
 * Confused as to what I"d write. Buggie111 (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Chris Myers statistics seem very bare: do centers not really do anything? Also, why does this cell use capital letters, unlike the rest of the column?
 * Centers (as well as tackles/guards) sometimes have blocking statistics recorded, but that's subject to the statistician's definition of a "block" and weren't used on either ESPN or NFL.com. Buggie111 (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, the distinction between tackles and solo tackles seems odd to a layperson: is tackling normally done as a group?
 * Tackles can be done as a group (two people coming from either side of a player) or by one player (one person charging head on). The same applies to sacks (half a sack is when two people sack the quarterback at the same time).
 * I don't really understand what a "sack" is from the article linked to (which isn't your problem) but I'm just wondering how someone can have half a "sack"?
 * See the tackles point above. Buggie111 (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 2006 Jerome Mathis column doesn't have a comma in a four digit number for yards.
 * Refs #10, #11, #34, #35 use a different date format to the rest.  Harrias  talk 16:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Buggie111 (talk) 22:30, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I've addressed the majority of your concerns. The end of the sentence regarding Foster was suggested by TBrandley in their sixth comment, so some consensus regarding that should be reached here (I'm in favor of removing). The lede length was a main concern at the previous FLC, where, despite having information from both the Houston Texans and Pro Bowl article (which I rather foolishly simply duplicated onto the list disregarding copyvio rules), both reviewers opposed based on length. I received some help about the lede from Giants2008 in October (see this), so it's probably goign to be discussed here. I'd also like some help regarding the surname sorting. Buggie111 (talk) 22:30, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I was pinged for a return visit on my talk page, but it is unclear why. If the reason was the surname sorting, I suggest taking a look at current candidate Euroscar, which has proper sorting, and seeing how that list formats things. It's not that hard to fix once you know what to do. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 22:07, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It's the lead, my friend. Buggie111 (talk) 22:57, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * In that case, I'm not sure how much help I can be. I do see Harrias' point about the lead being a little plain. Is there anything that could be added saying why the players were selected, or any unique aspects about their Pro Bowl performances? There's a place for first/most recent/most frequent selections, but perhaps some details on those aspects would help to address Harrias' concern. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 18:39, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Meh, not really. Just the amounts of yards/TDs/FF's/INT's they recorded for the most part, except Leach and Myers. Buggie111 (talk) 15:50, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I've added in sortname, but can't seem to get Smith to link to the DE or for the sort options to appear in the table header. Buggie111 (talk) 16:01, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * For the first issue, pipe the full name of the article after the first and last names. It will look like this: Antonio|Smith|Antonio Smith (defensive end). Giants2008  ( Talk ) 00:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Will do. Buggie111 (talk) 00:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll be out of town during the announcement of the 2013 Pro Bowlers, which means I'll only be able to add in info come the 1st. Buggie111 (talk) 00:55, 24 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose, over a month after my initial comments, and the prose section is still very bland. Criteria 2 requires: "Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria."  Harrias  talk 21:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * For Brain Hoyer's sake, there's nothing much to add to it. Dpo you have any ideas? All the football related FL's (see List of Baltimore Ravens first-round picks) have about as detailed of a lead as this one, some focusing even more on the draft than the team. Buggie111 (talk) 21:54, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't have any major suggestions for what to add to it, no. But just as some articles don't have enough content to ever reach Featured article status, there are lists in the same situation. Not everything can be a Featured list, and if there isn't information that provides an engaging lead, then perhaps this is such a case.  Harrias  talk 22:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Support meets the criteria. NapHit (talk) 13:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.