Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of UEFA European Football Championship finals/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 Giants2008 19:10, 15 January 2012.

List of UEFA European Football Championship finals

 * Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk) 10:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because we have a parallel featured list for the World Cup and I thought it would be nice to get this featured and then onto the mainpage in time for the final of Euro 2012. As ever, thanks to reviewers for the time and energy. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Support - I believe this list meets all the criteria laid out at WP:WIAFL. There are no glaring omissions, it covers the topic completely. The MOS is well-observed, the prose is well-written and the lead adequately covers the topic and the following lists. – PeeJay 13:06, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and thank you for your tidy up too! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Support – Nice job. — Lemonade51 (talk) 15:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Support Great job, NapHit (talk) 19:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Comments: — Parutakupiu (talk) 21:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "The tournament takes place every four years;..." – In my opinion, this looks a bit lost, out of place. Would be better contextualized if it was the end of the first sentence ("... in 1960 and which takes place every four years. It is...") or the beginning of the second ("in 1960. Taking place every four years, it is contested by the men's...").
 * If this list is modeled after the World Cup finals list, it would be interesting to also mention in the lead the number of teams that reached the final, that won, etc.
 * Is there any compeling reason for the table listing the finals having width-defined columns? Just asking...
 * Thanks for your comments! I'm about to head to bed, so if you don't mind I'll address them early tomorrow.  They're all reasonable; (1) I'll look at a rephrase. (2) the WC list doesn't actually seem to cite those stats (so I didn't try to do it) and (3) no, I'll see what happens if I ditch the width-definition, shouldn't be a big issue.  Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:38, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * (Take your time!) Another comment: the "Key" section is not important or big enough to be a section per se. It could perfectly be tucked into the area between the heading and the table in the "List of finals" section. Parutakupiu (talk) 23:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Parutakupiu, I think between me and PeeJay2K3, we've addressed your comments, cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I still have that column width issue. Could you test reducing the widths, to erase most of the blank space in the cells? Also, I've taken the liberty to make a few copyedits, to the lead mostly; see if you agree with my changes. Btw, the new history section is a wonderufl addition. Parutakupiu (talk) 02:06, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I've now unforced all col widths, so it should be okay, hopefully on your monitor? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thumbs up! I have a couple of other suggestions, but I don't want to become annoying and the way the list is is already deserving of my Support. Parutakupiu (talk) 17:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I don't mind if you have more suggestions to make. This won't be promoted for at least a week or so, I have time!  The Rambling Man (talk) 18:00, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It's really minor but I think could make the main table look neater: (1) make key symbols superscript relative to the score (here, I'd suggest replacing "^" with a bigger one (e.g. "§"); (2) place the note tags in the same line (remove breaks). At the end of it, every row would have the same height and the table would look more homogenous. Parutakupiu (talk) 18:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * See what you think of what I've done now. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Ha! Excellent, just what I envisioned. That's it. Nothing more to be addressed. Great work. Parutakupiu (talk) 18:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for your ongoing interest and support. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:27, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Support All comments resolved, thanks for dealing with them all (not just mine) so promptly and co-operatively. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:58, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


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