Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of US Open Men's Singles champions/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 The Rambling Man 15:50, 6 October 2009.

List of US Open Men's Singles champions

 * Nominator(s): Bluedogtn (talk)


 * Note:All TW-RF on this page is bluedogtnBLuEDOg Tn 04:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list per the discussion on WT:FLC. Cheetah  (talk)  02:06, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I read the opening intro and all is correct to my inspection of this list, and it has illustrated the diffrences in the start till 1911 in the way the tournament was won and played.TW-RF (talk) 20:52, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Support (but too many exclamation points ;) Mm40 (talk) 22:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:36, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Someone did it already. Mm40 (talk) 22:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Procedural comment - If TW-RF is addressing these changes (even if it's from IP) he should be put as nominator and his support should be struck (as nominators support is presumed).  Rambo's Revenge   (talk)   23:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I took away my support and left my comment, which is legit. Thanks for pointing that out. TW-RF —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.240.44.215 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

 Oppose 
 * Please read by capped comment at Featured list candidates/List of Wimbledon Gentlemen's Singles champions/archive1 about how this scoring presentation for tie-breaks is ambiguous. Don Lope and TRM both agreed that we should neglect the "commonly used" format in favour of a unambigous one.
 * I went in addressed the tie-breaks issues in it to match Wimbledon. TW-RF —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.240.44.215 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll come back an re-review this after tomorrows final has been played and everything's been updated.  Rambo's Revenge   (talk)   23:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

 Rambo's Revenge   (talk)   21:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 *  Support . All issues resolved.  Rambo's Revenge   (talk)   21:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Support – Meets FL standards after the fixes, though I will admit to being confused over the multiple accounts thing.  Giants2008  ( 17–14 ) 20:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Support - I think once all the other points are addressed this will be of the required standard. Spiderone  08:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Support - I assume all the things mentioned above are fixed.  Aaroncrick  ( talk ) 05:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I will be following this about every other day, which I will still keep up this but not daily about three times a week. BLuEDOg TN  20:59, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

*Comment In the ALTs some times you mention the image is black and white and other times you don't. Could u either mention this every time or indicate it in some way... --Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 09:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support The list underwent massive and great fixes, definitely FL quality now. Staxringold talkcontribs 01:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Per WP:ALT, phrases about the provenance of the image (such as "black and white picture of") should be omitted. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed, support good list, meets FL criteria.--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 13:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.