Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Nintendo GameCube games

List of Nintendo GameCube games
Nominating and such.--SeizureDog 12:08, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose Content is good, but I have issues with linking and presentation
 * First section does not align with the others (fixed)
 * For some reason, 3 flags spill on the second line systematically for me.
 * I'm not convinced the links in the "year" column are necessary (a good search-and-replace can take care of that easily).
 * Way too much linking of the developer and publisher columns. At beast each company can be linked once per section.
 * Consider making the tables sortable.
 * Maybe add compactTOC at the beginning of each section?
 * Circeus 02:58, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment Wouldn't this list be more useful if the games were in chronological order? Now it doesn't differ much from a category. --Mika1h 21:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * "First section does not align with the others" I don't see this problem. Explain or screenshot?
 * On flags: Again, not seeing this problem myself.
 * I an see why it happens (the invisible flag is not actually the same size b/c it lacks the border), but I'm not sure why it happens on Firefox only. Using the same cell size as the Nintendo 64 list would solve that problem.
 * On links in the year column: Manual_of_Style_(links) says to link dates (though it doesn't matter so much for years alone I guess). In any case, this doesn't hurt anything by having them.
 * "dates" here means stuff like December 28 2005, specifically not years, including "years in". That's an application of Only make links that are relevant to the context (+ software constraints forcing links for full dates): it's not majorly useful to link to these articles from a general list (the only good place would probably be the infobox for the game).
 * "Way too much linking of the developer and publisher columns": Disagree. A person navigating the list will likely be searching for specific entries, which upon finding will want to look directly to the right for a link. Forcing users to search for the first instance of the company is a pointless hassle. I don't see how having everything linked poses a problem whatsoever.
 * I see no justification whatsoever to for having 2 links to Nintendo in the first entry of the list, 2 links each to EA Canada and EA Sports in the first, 5-members section, then 3 links to THQ next to each others in the beginning of the A's, then 6 links to Acclaim Entertainment and so on... I can see a case for one link per section, but absolutely not for systematic linking.
 * On being sortable: never made a table sortable. I'm not comfortable doing the scripting for it. I'm fine with someone else doing it though.
 * I meant the individual tables, not combining the whole thing.
 * On compact TOC: If the list is made sortable, then sections will have to be removed. So it's one format or the other.
 * See above.
 * If the content is fine, then I don't see why you're being so nitpicky over layout. It's honestly the most frustrating thing about the FL process, as every couple of months the accepted layout format is changed (this was especially problematic for TV episode lists). What I did with List of Virtual Boy games was different from how I had to do List of Nintendo 64 games which is different from how you want me to fix this list. Featured list criteria only states that the list has to be "well-constructed", not that presentation has to be perfect (which is frankly an opinionated subject anyways). It gets the information it needs to accross, that should be all that matters.--SeizureDog 04:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Indented table fixed, there was some vandalism in there that bumped it over for some people. --PresN 17:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I am "being so nitpicky over layout" because duh! the featured lists are supposed to be our best lists (regardless of what the criteria says exactly, if no one at FLC believes the list is "well constructed", it's simply not gonna pass). People are being nitpicky over prose and such minor issues in FAs (FA criterion: "'Well written' means that the prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard."), there's absolutely no reason for FLs to get a preferential treatment just because they look easier to do. Also, I am not concerned with criterion 1 at allm I'm concerned with criterion 2. "It complies with the standards set out in the manual of style", because I believe (my main reason to oppose) that it is overlinked. If I had commented o the nomination for the Nintendo 64 games list, I would most likely have made a similar comment, but that list's linking standard are not what we are discussing right now. (I wouldn't mind going over the other list and fixing the linking myself, actually, but I'm trying to restrict such edits b/c I've hit flak over them recently).  Circeus 00:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The MOS guideline is clearly written in relation to prose. Overlinkage is bad in prose as it mades the article harder to read and lessens the importance of the linking itself (only important words need to be linked). Here, the linkage neither makes the list hard to read nor does it link unimportant terms. Remember, MOS are just guidelines, not rules. As it says itself, "it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception." I think this list can allow for such an exception.--SeizureDog 00:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I completely fail to see how the guideline being written for prose can invalidate its usefulness for a list. Quite the contrary from prose, making everything linked dilutes the informative usefulness of links by making it much harder to discern new from already mentioned companies. (whereas in prose distant links might warrant linking, which is why I'm saying a link per section is okay with me) Circeus 20:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think so. Alphabetical listing is, on the contrary, the most natural listing one would expect. I'd definitely expect a list by year to be a separate entity, since it could include differing information (e.g. a completely different of cross-referencing "years in videogames" articles). A listing by year would be at "List of Nintendo GameCube games by release date" or "by year". Circeus 02:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)