Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of UEFA Champions League hat-tricks/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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC).

List of UEFA Champions League hat-tricks

 * Nominator(s): Atlantis77177 (talk) 02:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that it is well written with accurate points covering the matter discussed. Every point of record mentioned in the list has citations to back them up. I look forward to the comments to know the reviews. Shout-out to all the great editors who worked on this article before me and have done such a great job on it... Atlantis77177 (talk) 02:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments by ChrisTheDude

 * "more than any other players" => "more than any other player"
 * "with a further 11 players have each scored" => "with a further 11 players having each scored"
 * Most of the players who have each scored hat-tricks for two or more different clubs are being mentioned for the first time so should be referred to by their full name (not just surname) and wikilinked
 * Same with the players who have scored hat-tricks in two consecutive seasons
 * BATE and Mbappe overlinked in lead
 * PSG are mentioned four times in the lead without ever being wikilinked
 * "in 9 minutes" => "in nine minutes"
 * Most of the image captions don't need references as they simply repeat stuff that is sourced in the lead or can be deduced from the table, but "Erling Haaland became the second teenager to score a hat-trick on his Champions League debut." needs a source
 * I would add to the key (or just as text above the table) that the "result" column shows the player's team's score first, as this might not be obvious to everyone
 * Player column sorts based on the flag/nationality. It should sort based on the player's name, specifically the surname
 * Same with the for/against columns - these should sort based on the club name
 * Ref column does not need to be sortable
 * Result column would look better centred
 * That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:54, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I have tried my best to sort all the issues. But i was unable to sort three of them -
 * 1) I was unable to center-allign the scores.
 * 2) I was unable to change the sorting layout of the table with the name of the player rather than the name of the player's nation.
 * 3) I was unable to remove the sort ability of refs section alone.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 11:26, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

- the ref column seems OK, so I guess you figured that one out. For the scores, you will need to add the centre alignment before the score, so for example this:


 * !scope="row"| Juul Ellerman


 * PSV Eindhoven || Žalgiris ||align=center| 6–0 || 1992-9-16 ||

....and for the sorting you will need to use a hidden sort key, for example this:


 * !scope="row" data-sort-value="Ellerman"| Juul Ellerman


 * PSV Eindhoven || Žalgiris ||align=center| 6–0 || 1992-9-16 ||

Hope that helps!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The score is centered. But the sort key doesn't seem to work. Could you help me with the article.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 11:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This was the issue - that shouldn't have been in the table header code. The two actual rows which you have updated now sort correctly, so just do the same for the others -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:52, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

I tried your way. But it didn't work. Maybe it was my misunderstanding. I am sorry. Do help. Also wished to add that the player name was not centralized by me. It was done by another editor. I hope it is okay to you. --Atlantis77177 (talk) 12:51, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Just do what I did with this edit for each row. You should not have "scope=col" on each row -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Done. The players sort properly now. I hope that the club sorting wouldn't be a problem. I could turn it off. (Sorting for clubs)--Atlantis77177 (talk) 15:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, thinking about it the teams should sort based on name too...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

 * Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting + caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting + instead.
 * This duplicates what ChrisTheDude is saying above, just with more words: tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes on the "primary" cell of each row, lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. So, each column cell needs !scope=col, and does not need anything about "class" or "row". Similarly, the primary (or first) cell of each row needs !scope=row, and nothing about "class" or "col".
 * Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. -- Pres N  13:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I hope your concerns are sorted now.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for disturbing. I just wanted to know about the process that follows this discussion. I hope that i have solved the issues you guys pointed out. So what next? Just a humble question? Have a good day.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 10:06, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * In general, FLCs stay open until they get enough agreement that they should be promoted, as determined by the FL director/delegates. I just did an accessibility review, so I'm not supporting or opposing. ChrisTheDude has yet to return to this, but you just pinged them so they should see that. Other than that, you'll need to wait for more reviewers or find some yourself- good ways to do that include reviewing other nominations with a note that you have one open, or asking at a Wikiproject. -- Pres N  14:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I was waiting for my comment dated 3 October to be addressed - the nominator has not actioned that...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:14, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Comment by Nehme1499
Hi, just a minor comment regarding the lead. Per MOS:LEADLENGTH,. This article has 8 paragraphs. I'd probably suggest moving the eight paragraphs to a separate section (maybe "History", or something of the sort), and then summarize those paragraphs into maximum four in the lead. Nehme1499 12:32, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

I hope that it looks better now.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 17:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Much better! Ideally, the lead shouldn't have sources, as it already summarizes (soured) statements in the body. Nehme1499 09:28, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I have removed all unnecessary citations in the lead. Hope your concerns in the articles are sorted now. Greetings.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 15:43, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I still see a couple of citations. Nehme1499 17:10, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Surely these policies don't apply to a stand alone list? i.e. you mention the lead being eight paragraphs, but there is no mention of ideal length mentioned here. The article seemingly intentionally has little prose in the article main, and therefore moving random statistics into a new section is just completely arbitrary. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:46, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Problem sorted I guess.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 12:44, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I apologize for disturbing you again, but this discussion page has been dead for a month. Just wanted to know how things are going forward.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 18:48, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Just waiting for my comment dated 3 October about club name sorting to be actioned...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

This nomination has been open for months without any supports, even after a reviewer came back. I'm going to close it, with no prejudice against it being renominated at a later date. -- Pres N  22:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)


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