Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Nunavut general elections

List of Nunavut general elections
It is useful, comprehensive, factually accurate, stable, uncontroversial and well-constructed; has a concise lead sections and, apropriate headings. It has no TOC due to having only three sections; and has no images as there aren't any that are suitable. (I know that a map of the ridings would be very nice, but all such maps I've come across are Crown Copyright and thus not suitable).

In the list's previous nomination, there were two main objections, which I don't feel I addressed properly at the time:
 * 1) The layout used is not scalable. If you look at User:Tompw/sandbox3, you will find two versions of the table expanded to include future elections. The first shows that the current format can easily include the next two elections (including proposed new boundries) with minimal linebreaks, and would thus last until about the 5th election (~2016). At the bottom of the page you'll find a version with seven elections, but more linebreaks. I should point out that if a MLA is elected more than once, their box will span multiple columns, and thus their name won't have a line break.
 * 2) There's only two elections. Firstly this number will go up. (Don't take my word for it - the Canadian Constituion says so). Secondly, the implication is that he list isn't "useful". However, this list definately brings "together a group of related articles that are likely to be of interest to a user researching that topic" (the topic being Nunavutian elections)

(self-nomination) Tom pw (talk)


 * Oppose. Primarily, it is too short. How many votes did each person get, or what percentage? Were there any other candidates? I'm not sure how useful it is, given the brevity. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 18:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I feel that providing the results of every single riding is too much information for an article which is a list of *elections*. It already provides the results of the election, which for consensus government means who gets elected. (For Yukon, where there are official poltical parties, the results given are the number of seats won.... again, it doesn't provide details of every riding). Tom pw (talk) 18:35, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I still think there should be more information on the elections themselves. Other major candidates, voter turnout, maybe even background information like the age to vote, any addition to the article would be nice, IMO. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 18:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Let's not start recording failed candidates in general elections: too much information. Colin°Talk 21:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Same as before: list of two. What's the rush to be featured? It's neat and tidy but just too small. Sorry. Colin°Talk 21:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose This is not even a list of general elections; it's a list of general election winners. Not at all comprehensive (like Hink said, we don't see vote counts, party affiliations, other candidates, etc.), and as a result, not useful, thereby failing to requirements of WP:WIAFL. -- Kicking222 16:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There are no party affiliations because it isn't a party system. The only way to list the results is to give a list of winners.
 * Weak support - I think it meets WP:FL? regardless of its length. However, to make it look more like a list of elections than a list of winners, let’s put links and key information in the table above the names.  The link to the articles on assemblies could be moved up, and then we can add columns for premier, voter turnout, and the exact date of the election.  --Arctic Gnome 21:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose. It's just not too much of a list when there are only two columns of information. I agree with Colin. However, as for images, the map Image:Nunavut-map.png would work well. It's certainy a good list, just not feature-y yet until there are more elections. For example, List of Harry Potter films cast members wouldn't have really worked if there had been only two movies to show trends in casting. It works much better with five. --Fbv65 e del / ☑t / ☛c || 04:21, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. After seeing your other lists this one falls short. Doesn't really tell you anything.-- Wizardman 15:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support I don't understand the arguments against it. Just because there are few items on the list doesn't inherently make the list useless, and I'm not aware that length is a featured list criteria. Tuf-Kat 16:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The list can't be longer as Nunavut is a new creation. Valentinian T / C 00:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)