Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of North American birds

List of North American birds
I've been aware of this list for some time and believe it meets the requirements. Filiocht | Blarneyman 13:09, May 18, 2005 (UTC)


 * Support Object - this is an excellent example of the list genre, but it needs references (presumably the "External links" will suffice, though, although something on paper would be good too). -- ALoan (Talk) 08:36, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I have changes External links to References. Although online, these seem very reliable. Filiocht | Blarneyman 09:08, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fine - a paper reference or two would also be good, though. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:29, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * As the primary contributor to the list, I can verify that these two online lists were my references. Paper editions of both exist, if you really need paper. Support btw. Dsmdgold 13:59, May 19, 2005 (UTC)


 * Object, Comment, downgraded to comment, as I don't feel comfortable going all the way to object while we're still discussing this. I realize the following reason isn't from the criteria, but considering it's only a few days old, that should be okay. This isn't really a strong objection, but I don't think any list that's made up of (by my guess) as many as a quarter red links can qualify. After all, the main purposeof a list (since there's not much text) is to point readers to articles, right? Look at the list of popes and list of British monarchs for good axamples of fully blue-linked lists. --Dmcdevit 00:58, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * A good question arises. I do not feel that a qualifying list has to have no red links, but what is an acceptable minimum. Let's take this to the talk page. Filiocht | Blarneyman 07:29, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I am quite impressed how many links in that list are not red - someone has been very busy. As I said on the talk, I think a list (or any article) containing redlinks encourages readers to become editors and add something. All the headings, and the explanatory text, are blue-linked:  do we have to object because there is no article on the White-tailed Tropicbird or Le Conte's Thrasher? -- ALoan (Talk) 10:51, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Personally I think a good list is even more useful in fields where there are lot of articles missing. - User:Docu
 * I agree heartily here, especially if the list is accurate and the elements are properly named. I agree, I am particularly impressed that so many have an article at all. I hope most are more than one sentence. As for a vote, I'll stay neutral, but I think a list that has a bit more information on each element, like the Cultural references list and the list of Pope's is much more something worthy of being featured, than just one split into categories and with scientific names. - Taxman Talk 04:28, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - I've got no problem at all with the number of red links. OpenToppedBus 15:52, May 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - it would be nice to see some more pictures toward the bottom of the page... they just seem to stop about half way down. Any good warbler pictures out there?  The red links to me aren't a problem.  But don't shoot too low on list quality - people are going to be skeptical about "featured lists", so the lists that get featured ought to be simply awesome.  This one is on its way, but I think more pictures would improve it. --Spangineer &#8734; 11:08, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * I've added a couple more pictures further down the page. OpenToppedBus - Talk 11:22, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * I added a couple yesterday. Filiocht | Blarneyman 11:26, May 27, 2005 (UTC) And a couple more today. Filiocht | Blarneyman 12:28, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks great. Support --Spangineer &#8734; 17:44, May 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * Object - Great list but, (1) both references listed give "file not found" messages, and (2) I think there should be more pictures. Comment: the red links are fine. Paul August &#9742; 12:44, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the links. More photos have been added since yesterday and more will. Filiocht | Blarneyman 13:22, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, I changed the second reference to warn that it was a PDF download. Looking forward to more pictures. Perhaps a couple could be in the toc section as well. Paul August &#9742; 13:44, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * I have added 13 more images, including one by the toc. Filiocht | Blarneyman 13:51, May 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * Support. Ok, I still think the toc could use a couple more images. But great work Filiocht! Paul August &#9742; 20:40, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. I think redlinks are an issue, but this list doesn't have all that many.  If the entire list, or close to it, was redlinks, I'd object. Tuf-Kat 22:34, May 27, 2005 (UTC)