Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Marshals of the First French Empire/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 archived by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 20 September 2021 (UTC).

List of Marshals of the First French Empire

 * Nominator(s): BasedMises Mont Pelerin 00:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I have worked extensively on this list. I brought it from having 0 sources and no table, with no images, to having enough to qualify. I strongly suggest that you drop as many suggestions as possible below. Thank you! BasedMises Mont Pelerin 00:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * "The rank was used sporadically" - later on you specifically state that it wasn't a rank...........?
 * Corrected


 * "In total, 26 men have been awarded" - this should be "In total, 26 men were awarded" given that the award is long defunct
 * Done


 * "The most recent promotions to field marshal came in 1815" - first mention of "field marshal" - how does that relate to the role being discussed?
 * Done
 * "when Napoleon promoted Grouchy" - use Grouchy's full name and wikilink them both
 * Done


 * "Some, including Poniatowski, served in foreign armies" - can't see any reason to only use his surname here given that he's not been mentioned before
 * Done


 * "One Marshal, and one future non-Napoleonic Marshal was present at the Battle of Vitoria" - assuming this refers to two different men, then the comma shouldn't be there and it should be "were present", not "was present"
 * Removed the "Non-Napoleonic Marshal"


 * I would merge the existing background section into the lead as both are pretty short and they don't duplicate each other
 * Battle of Waterloo wikilinked twice in consecutive sentences - only the first one needs to be linked
 * Done


 * In the paragraph starting "Marmont, born in 1774", you should use their full names, not just their surnames, as they haven't been mentioned before.
 * Done


 * Name column in the table should sort based on surname, not forename
 * Done


 * That's what I got on a first pass..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @ChrisTheDude I have corrected your initial concerns. Thank you for bringing them up. BasedMises Mont Pelerin 21:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - the table doesn't seem to be sortable any more, just wondering why that functionality was removed......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I must've accidentally removed it. BasedMises Mont Pelerin 18:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * If you add it back, make sure that the names are set to sort based on surname rather than forename.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:31, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @ I just came across this nomination, and I have made the table sortable, and fixed the sorting. Please let me know if there is anything else to be addressed.  Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:28, 12 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)
 * The table needs a caption, e.g. at the top of the table code add "|+ " or, if that caption would duplicate a nearby header, you can make it only for screen reader software like "|+ ". Captions allow screen reader software to jump to tables by name.
 * Done


 * Column headers need to be marked with colscopes, e.g. "!Name" should be "!scope=col| Name". Colscopes and Rowscopes (below) allow screen reader software to properly read out tables verbally.
 * Done


 * The primary cell of each row should be marked with rowscopes, e.g. "|style="background:#e3d9ff;"| Louis-Alexandre Berthier†" should be "!scope=row style="background:#e3d9ff;"| Louis-Alexandre Berthier†"
 * Done


 * Images need alt text, which can just be e.g. "painting of Louis-Alexandre Berthier"; if it's not present, screen reader software instead reads out the file name. -- Pres N  14:49, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Done


 * Okay. I will get right to fixing that. Thank you. BasedMises Mont Pelerin 15:25, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Comments from HAl

 * The lead is too short. I would recommend merging the background text into it and then expanding it further.
 * Could you make the table sortable?
 * For the citations with pages ranges, it should be "pp." not "p.". (I think)


 * Thanks for the comments. On Wikipedia it should be p. not pp. though (normally I write pp). I'll get right to fixing those problems. BasedMises Mont Pelerin 23:16, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It's generally "p." for a single page, "pp." for multiple pages. That said, Wikipedia does not have a site-wide style for citations, so it's whatever you want as long as it's consistent. -- Pres N  21:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

That's all for now. ~ HAL  333  18:13, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @ I think all your concerns have been addressed, and I made the table sortable. Please let me know of any other concerns.  Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:30, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * are you still working on this list? -- Pres N  21:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes. BasedMises Mont Pelerin 22:42, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Source review – Pass
Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 20:04, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Version reviewed:


 * Formatting
 * The standard is "pp." for page ranges and "–" rather than hyphens ( - ), but this is not required, only the de facto standard
 * Be consistent on whether you include locations for publishers
 * I would avoid linking "London" in the sources, seems nothing more than WP:Overlinking


 * Reliability
 * Are the Headley refs even needed? It seems less than ideal to include a 150+ year old source, especially when Pattinson seemingly already covers the information?


 * Verifiability
 * No issues Aza24 (talk) 20:14, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @ I have addressed all your concerns. I agree that Headley refs aren't necessarily needed when the same this can be verified by relatively new sources. Do let me know if there is anything else to do.  Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:35, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks good, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 04:47, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Question What's the difference between this article and Marshal of the Empire? Aren't they covering the same ground? Hawkeye7  (discuss)  01:27, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 21:23, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.