Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of cities in Arizona/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 not promoted by User:The Rambling Man 07:09, 7 July 2008.

List of cities in Arizona
My first time nominating a featured anything, so let's not be too rough :) I've worked on revamping this list over the last few weeks and feel that it's up to a pretty good standard.  As a note, I am still in the process of locating appropriately licensed photos of a few more cities to include, as well as better ones for a few of the entries I'm not thrilled with.  Also, for the sake of full disclosure, the whole list will change (in terms of population figures) when the Census releases new estimates (likely in the next week or so) but the structure of the article will remain unchanged.  Shereth 17:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments


 * "Economic Development. City of Maricopa." – is missing an accessdate
 * For the footnotes, they appear to be "d[›]"; change them to "[d]" instead.
 * Remove the "Click on the double triangles at the top of a column to sort the table by that column.", primarily because this feature is not available on all devices that this content is seen on – such as when you print it :)
 * Dashes in "1 - Phoenix, capital of Arizona" need to be em dashes, per WP:DASH.
 * The years in "Municipal incorporation in Arizona" should be unlinked per MOS:UNLINKYEARS.

Gary King ( talk ) 17:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Requested changes completed. Shereth 18:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Support I have no concerns about this list. Good work on the article!--Dem393 (talk) 21:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you provide a more engaging first sentence instead of "The following table is a list of incorporated places in Arizona". Articles don't begin with "The following is an article about blue iguanas" and lists shouldn't either. See WP:LS
 * Lead needs expanding; it's not big enough in relation to the rest of the page
 * "in spite of being" → "despite being"
 * Check spacing between words and footnote links in the table. "Yuma[d]" vs "Yavapai [b]"
 * Sort order for Area needs addressing: 106.7 sq mi follows 10.7 sq mi, and many many more
 * Note D should be before the table in a "Key" section. Note also that you will need a text marker for those with black/white screens. See List of Indianapolis Colts head coaches as an example
 * "CDP" should be written in full on its first use, with "(CDP)" immediately after
 * You should include the article in the navboxes that are used on the page
 * Why no mention in the lead that Pheonix is the fifth most populated city in the country, or that it's the most populated state capital in the US? Or that Arizona is the 16th most populated state, or that as of 2007, the Phoenix Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) was the thirteenth largest in the United States, with an estimated population of 4,179,427? Or that Arizona has nine cities amongst the most populous incorporated places in the United States?
 * The images don't identify the cities very well. Skyline pictures would work well here, such as Image:PhoenixDowntown.jpg or "Image:Phoenix.skyline.750pix.jpg, rather than an image of a building which could be anywhere.
 * I will address these issues as soon as I get a chance. One issue that I have with some of the images is either the city does not have much of an identifying skyline and the best that can be done is to pick something of a local landmark.  There's also an issue of availability in terms of photos with acceptable licenses - I am doing my best to provide photos that work well, but with some cities (newer Phoenix suburbs in particular) there is just a lack of a skyline to begin with - they're kind of boring cities :) Shereth 05:43, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ All of the above issues (except for the last) have been taken care of. The most sensible way to get the article included in the navboxes was to move it over the redirect that used to be at List of cities in Arizona - which is more consistent with other such articles, anyway.  I hope that's not too bothersome in terms of disrupting the nomination page here.  As far as the image issue is concerned, I still hope to modify some of the images to something a little more interesting, but again, a number of these cities will have no "skyline" to speak of and finding something more identifying than a local landmark building may prove difficult. Sher</b><b style="color:#6060BF;">eth</b> 16:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Skylines was just one idea. Pictures shouldn't be there just to picture-fy the article, they should be there to add extra information. A skyline for instance would show how populated a place might be because if there's a lot of buildings, there's more than likely a lot of people. Any images, not necessarily skylines, which would be able to show something to do with population would work, instead of a random building. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This is going to be short and sweet. Too many pictures, and the See also section is useless.  There is a huge amount of white space that isn't needed.  I would suggest removing photos that add little to the article, and either adding more to the see also section or just getting rid of it and placing the portal box somewhere else. <font face="Harlow Solid Italic"><font size="2px" color="teal"> « Gonzo fan2007  (talk ♦ contribs) @  '' 07:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ I spent a while trying to find more relevant photos but came up empty, particularly in terms of ones that are free. I've gone ahead and removed all of the non-skyline type pictures. <b style="color:#0000FF;">Sher</b><b style="color:#6060BF;">eth</b> 16:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The images should not have defined widths such as " |width=200px " except for the first image, which should be 300px or larger. <font face="Harlow Solid Italic"><font size="2px" color="teal"> « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @  '' 18:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Not ready for FL status yet. Partial comments: --Orlady (talk) 17:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Although the title is now simply "list of cities" (a good change, IMHO), the focus of the article is still population. Since this is a list of cities, I'd expect the default sort to be alphabetical order, not population at the 2006 estimate. Also, I'd expect the text in the lead to place less emphasis on population than it currently does.
 * WP:MOS says that in article text, numbers less than ten should be rendered as words, not as numerals.
 * That lead section currently starts out as follows (emphasis added -- see below): "The state of Arizona, the 16th most populous state in the United States, is home to 90 incorporated cities and towns, which include 9 of the most populated places in the country. Phoenix, the largest city in the state, is also the primary city in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area, the 13th largest metropolitan area in the US with an estimated population of 4,179,427 as of 2007. Arizona is also home to 2 of the top 10 fastest growing large cities in the country according to 2006 Census estimates." I've used italics to emphasize two things that are overdone: (1) the locution "is home to" and (2) population statistics. Why not start the article off with "There are 90 incorporated cities and towns in the U.S. state of Arizona"?

Oppose -- Now the scope is all about population, but is not indicated in the title. As Orlady says, there is too much emphasis on population now that the article isn't titled that, and absolutely nothing in the lead about area. Why is it titled only "List of cities in Arizona", when towns are also included. We have a Featured list titled "List of cities and towns in Tennessee" - this should do the same. WP:FL says any bold text should appear in the opening sentence in the first paragraph, not the second. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:45, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * "9"—MOS breach. Spell out. There are other one-digit figures, too.
 * "are not included despite being significant communities in their own right as they do not have official populations"—not good prose.
 * En dashes for ranges in the piped external links.
 * I agree with Matthew about the scope/title. TONY   (talk)  08:29, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.