Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of National Treasures of Japan (castles)/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 16:01, 21 February 2010.

List of National Treasures of Japan (castles)

 * Nominator(s): bamse (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

This is another list of the series of lists of National Treasures of Japan. It uses the same structure as the already featured shrine, painting and sculpture lists. I tried to incorporate comments from previous FLCs. I could not decide where to put the last paragraph of the lead. If you think it is better at the start, it could be easily changed. bamse (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment *No problems reported with dab links, alt text, or external links. Well done. TomStar81 (Talk) 13:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree. This is very nice work, bamse. Very well done, indeed. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:36, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * This does indeed address most of the issues raised in previous FLCs. Nice work! I'm close to supporting, but the statistics table doesn't really make sense. When there are hundreds of items it's understandable to create a table, and state that there are some discrepancies, briefly explaining them. But when there are 8 castles and 13 structures I think it would be easier to just cover this as prose. The other extremely minor thing I saw was that [nb 2] comes before [nb 1] in the usage section. WFCforLife (talk) 06:53, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Replaced the small table with: The eight national treasures are distributed over four castles as follows: Himeji Castle has five national treasure structures; Hikone Castle, Inuyama Castle and Matsumoto Castle each have one national treasure. Also swapped nb 1 and nb 2. bamse (talk) 07:33, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Short but sweet, covers the topic very nicely. WFCforLife (talk) 07:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Support all my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Support: Another well made list. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:05, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Looks like a nice list. I do have a couple of comments though but nothing to cause me to withhold my support.
 * I wonder if the bit about "This list is complete and up-to-date as of January 2, 2010" is really necessary
 * It is not really necessary. I basically put it there to remind myself of the date I last checked its completeness. The Agency for Cultural Affairs gets together about four times per year to decide about the designation of new national treasures. In the 21st century there were each year between one and five new national treasures designated in one of the 13 categories. So the number of national treasures is growing slowly. Just checked: the castle list is still up-to-date as of today. If it is confusing, I could remove the template. bamse (talk) 23:20, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If it's there to remind yourself, you could just put in a hidden HTML comment like so: Dabomb87 (talk) 23:50, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Did that. bamse (talk) 00:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, consider doing that on the other National Treasure lists (including those that have been promoted to FL) as well. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:23, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. bamse (talk) 12:12, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There are a couple places where it says things like 1600 to 1615 and I think it shoudl be an endash instead a to.
 * I disagree; spelling out "to" and "through" in prose seems better than dashes. At the least, there is no good reason to change the style. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Theres a couple places with hyphens and should be endashes, such as one-storied and up-to-date.

--Kumioko (talk) 22:46, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No, the hyphens are correct there. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok fair enough --Kumioko (talk) 22:51, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


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