Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of cities in Luhansk Oblast/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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC).

List of cities in Luhansk Oblast

 * Nominator(s): Dan the Animator 04:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Given my current FLN List of cities in Donetsk Oblast is effectively ready and will likely be promoted in the next day or two, I'm going to go ahead and start this one. Most of the list content is copied over from the stuff I created at the Donetsk Oblast list, which was already reviewed during that article's FLN, so I'm guessing there won't be any major issues to resolve with this one. In any case tho, excited to get this one through and continue the series! Cheers, Dan the Animator 04:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Comments from Steelkamp
 * Do the raions cover the whole oblast or just part of the oblast? This should be explicitly mentioned in the second paragraph.
 * Fixed? Yup, I reworded it to say The eight raions that make up the oblast are Alchevsk... and Svatove raion but let me know if additional rewording is needed.


 * "War in Donbas" should be changed to "war in Donbas".
 * Fixed


 * Holubivka and Pervomaisk are disambiguation links.
 * Fixed


 * I don't think linking City in the table is necessary as it's an everyday word as per MOS:OVERLINK.
 * Removed link


 * The space before reference 15 should be removed as per MOS:REFSPACE.
 * Fixed


 * Why is Luhansk in italics in the table?
 * Luhansk is the oblast capital so I though I'd put some distinguishing feature on it similar to how other list of cities articles put an asterisk on capitals. If it helps tho, I don't mind taking it out... I didn't really expect it to be an issue.
 * It's just that without a key, readers might not know why Luhansk is italicised. Also, as per MOS:TABLEKEY, I don't think italics is considered accessible. A symbol is needed instead and a key used. Given that Luhansk is already mentioned as the capital in the lead, you could just do away with italicising/using a symbol in the table altogether. Otherwise, a key and symbol are needed.
 * Fixed I just took it out.

Steelkamp (talk) 05:21, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Steelkamp thanks for the edits and reply! Let me know if there's anything else left to do. Dan the Animator 04:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support. Steelkamp (talk) 04:48, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Comments
In addition to the above.....
 * Can't see any reason for the former names of cities to be in italics
 * Removed italics


 * None of the image captions are complete sentences, so they should not have full stops.
 * Fixed


 * Most of the image captions contains facts (eg "Popasna, a major railway city heavily damaged during the invasion") which are not mentioned anywhere else in the articles, so these will need to be sourced -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:36, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Added sources
 * I think that should fix most of it. As a side-note, I'll be applying any applicable suggestions here to my other FLN List of cities in Donetsk Oblast. Let me know if there's anything else I can do and thanks for the help! :) Dan the Animator 17:35, 12 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:57, 12 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Maybe it's my browser, but there is no black line between the header and the first row (as is between all other rows).
 * The table looks alright on my end (I'm using the desktop version on a Dell laptop) so could be your browser?


 * I believe the columns with numbers should be aligned to the right, so it is visually easier to compare the numbers.
 * I aligned the two population columns and the pop. change column to the right but it leaves excessive whitespace imo. I'll leave it on for now so you can take a look but if its alright I think its actually easier to compare the numbers with center-alignment since there's less space separating them (alternatively, if there's a way to decrease the width of the columns to get rid of at least some of the empty space, that would also work for me).


 * The images are great on desktop, but on mobile, it is simply more to scroll past before I get to the table (which is the most important thing in this list ofc). So I would recommend limiting the number of images (maybe only in the introduction).
 * Fixed? I didn't remove any images since I really think five images is fine (also there's no space in the intro/lead so that's not feasible) but I added in a link on the top of the images in the list section that mobile users can click to skip (jump to) the table directly, bypassing the images. Also tested it myself on mobile and it works fine! This type of link is usually used on other similar types of list articles too with images so this should solve the issue but let me know if there's anything else to do!


 * It think the table should make clear that the Ukrainian links point to another Wikipedia language version.
 * Fixed? I don't disagree but I can't figure out a good way to do this. I changed the title of the column to "Name (in Ukrainian Wikipedia)" but is this be too ambiguous? (e.g., some users might be unsure whether the name is actually displayed in the Ukrainian language or if the Ukrainian names are correct (since Wikipedia, in any language, is not WP:RS)). Interested to hear your thoughts about this!


 * The Commonscat template can be moved to See also, to minimize whitespace.
 * Fixed I just moved to the External links section instead in-line with how a lot of other articles do it.

Dajasj (talk) 20:57, 16 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the suggestions Dajasj! Let me know if there's anything else I can do with the article (also fyi I'll also be applying any suggestions here to my other FLN List of cities in Donetsk Oblast. Cheers, Dan the Animator 01:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the replies!
 * I am now on another laptop, and there is no issue with the top line any more, so it was my problem...
 * No worries! Good thing it fixed itself! ;)
 * The column could be "Name in Ukrainian (Link to Ukrainian Wikipedia). It is a bit long, but that's not a big issue because other column names are also long.
 * After careful consideration and testing out a few different things, and also realizing that apparently there's an English Wikipedia page about the Ukrainian Wikipedia, I settled with: Name (on Ukrainian Wikipedia). My thoughts behind this: the link to Ukrainian Wikipedia says in its first line in the lead that it is a "Ukrainian-language...online encyclopedia" and its already implied that the name is in Ukrainian since its coming from the Ukrainian Wikipedia so the "in Ukrainian" part is redundant imo; the blue highlighting that Wikipedia projects use to indicate links to other pages already implies that the links go to the Ukrainian Wikipedia and the word "on" is sufficient for this too I think. Let me know if this title is alright with you but just to let you know, I feel strongly that this is the best choice after thinking about it quite a bit the past few days.
 * Aligning to the right looks perfect on my current screen and on mobile. You could set a "width" to these columns, so there is a max width to these columns on wider screens (where it tries to write "Population" on one line). That should limit the whitespace. Dajasj (talk) 06:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dajasj! After testing out the width parameter markup, turns out its better just to keep it as-is with the right alignment and no additional markup.
 * And I think that should covers everything! Let me know if there's anything else I can do/if the article's alright now and thanks again for all the suggestions! :) Dan the Animator 04:31, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey its been a few days now so please let me know if there's still anything holding up your support. Hope all's well! Dan the Animator 21:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I support, sorry for my late reply. Regarding Mattximus point below, I won't oppose if the jump link is removed, because I see this often in (featured lists), but multiple images is nevertheless annoying for mobile users (which nowadays is most of our readership). Dajasj (talk) 08:48, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Np and sounds good! I'll rmv it based on Mattximus' followup. Thanks for the support!!! :) Dan the Animator 17:05, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Comments
 * Not sure why there is a jump to table link, that can be removed (from both this table, and the one in Donetsk).
 * Earlier in the review, Dajasj suggested removing images due to the need to scroll a bit on mobile. I think the number of images is perfectly fine and works really well on desktop so to address those concerns, I added the jump link. I don't have a strong preference for keeping or removing the jump link so if Dajasj's alright with it, I can take it off.


 * This article is quite good, but the image captions need a bit of work. The cities are not smallest, or largest, as the areas are not given. They are the most populous, or have the smallest population, or some other wording.
 * Fixed


 * Citation for 2001 census broken for me.
 * Fixed? applied the same changes I made with the Donetsk list so if that one's alright now then this should be fine too.


 * That's it, looks good otherwise. Mattximus (talk) 15:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks Mattximus!!! :D Let me know if there's anything else I can do! Dan the Animator 16:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Comments from CMD Hello, a few comments and questions:
 * The moving back and forth in chronology in the lead is a bit jarring (2022, 1977, 2020, 2014, 2022, 2016). Not suggesting strict chronology is needed, but I do think a bit more would be beneficial.
 * While I don't full disagree, after trying a lot of different rewordings and restructurings, I think its best to keep the arrangement mostly as-is. I did switch out the 2022 estimates with 2001 census stats per below so hopefully that helps a bit but for the rest of the lead, I think its important and more helpful for the reader to keep it organized topically/thematically (e.g. keep the sentences about military occupation from 2014 and 2022 next to each other rather than divide them with the admin. reform from 2020). With the current order, it really helps save on words while still being specific/detailed on which cities were occupied by separatists (if the admin reform is moved after, it becomes necessary to either say vaguely "most cities in the south of the oblast" or list out each city occupied individually, which is not ideal imo). Also, whatever ordering is decided here should likely be applied more or less to all the other oblasts lists so best also to take a look at those articles (like my other current FLN for List of cities in Donetsk Oblast) and consider those lists too. I'm definitely open to any ideas/changes about this tho if its decided and wouldn't be fully against the needed changes for this (I just don't think making these changes are ideal for now).


 * Unclear from the lead if the "cities of regional significance" are part of the 37 count, and the exactly relationship between city settlements and raions.
 * Fixed? I expanded/reworded the lead a bit with more clarifying details and specifics so let me know if its more clear now.


 * Probably helpful to include in the lead an explanation that the 2001 census is both the most recent and only census in independent Ukraine, although given both the Oblast and the lead stretch further into the past, is there a reason older censuses could not be included? (It would for example, give context to the 1977 change.)
 * Fixed added that bit about the 2001 census into the lead and switched out the 2022 estimates with the census numbers to make it flow better (I don't think this switch should be a huge issue tho since the 2022 estimates are still on the list anyways and many sources opt to use the 2001 stats, like WashPo apparently and the UN and others).
 * About including older censuses, I based my limiting it to two on my thorough checking of other similar FLs (an earlier reviewer Mattximus's userpage is especially helpful for this (not linking here so not to bother them)), which almost all have only two population columns, the Ukrainian language versions of these lists, most of which are already featured content and also use two pop. columns, and the recent successful FL for List of cities in New Brunswick where it wasn't an issue. I'm open to adding additional statistics if there's a compelling reason for it but I think having three pop. columns would possibly mess up the pop. change column and wouldn't be too helpful anyways (about the 1977 change for Almazna, its city status was given solely because of its importance to the local mining industry, not its population (and this is already suggested in the lead since Almazna has less than 10k ppl and falls into the "economic significance" sort of cities)). Also, I think the 2022 estimates, even if they're estimates, are still really helpful and shouldn't be replaced or considered subpar to the census data (in case it helps, this Atlantic Council piece does a great job imo saying why the estimates are alright).


 * Why are the city names being implied as being sourced to Ukrainian Wikipedia (not a reliable source) when the main source for the list gives Ukrainian names?
 * I'm guessing this is referring to the Name (on Ukrainian Wikipedia) column name. Earlier in this review, Dajasj suggested changing the then column title Name (in Ukrainian) to indicate that the Ukrainian names link to the Ukrainian Wikipedia articles. After trying out a few different titles and weighing them, I settled on the current one. Check my reply above in After careful consideration [...] the past few days to see my main reasoning behind choosing this wording and why I think it should be alright. If it helps, I'm open to adding in the 2022 estimates ref next to the column title.

CMD (talk) 04:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks CMD for the suggestions and great to see you here! :) Let me know if there's anything else I can do and what you think about my replies/follow-up edits. Dan the Animator 14:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * pinging in case my earlier reply didn't get through (sorry for the bother!) Dan the Animator 18:29, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the detailed replies. I am unfamiliar with the way other featured lists of this type are done, if it's normal to just list one or two of the most recent then no need to challenge that consensus here. I do think the reference should be duplicated; I don't know if I understand this presentation of interwiki links, but if it is to be used the article needs to be as clear as possible that a wiki is not being used as a source. The city/raion wording is much clearer. What are your thoughts on creating a new paragraph starting from "Following the Donbas war..."?. It doesn't seem related to the first parts of that a paragraph, and at least would reduce the jumping around within paragraphs. CMD (talk) 11:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Duplicated the reference per above but also changed the name again, this time adding a note which hopefully should address your and Dajasj's earlier comments (I brought the column title back to its original but I also added a note which says that the names link to Ukrainian Wikipedia articles). Take a look and let me know if this would work for everyone.
 * For the lead organization, thanks CMD for the suggestion! :) I tried out having it separate but it felt a bit off having four separate paragraphs in the lead (especially for this article's size) so I opted to do some more lead rewording/reorganizing to keep it at three paragraphs. It still has some time jumping within paragraphs (mostly just the middle one where it goes from the 2020 reform to the 2016 renaming) but I think the new ordering's an improvement (for the lead overall now, the chronology from start to finish is roughly 2001, 1977, 1991/2020, 2020, 2016, 2014, 2022, 2016/2020 (I don't think this last one really counts tho since it's referring to earlier parts of the lead)). Let me know if its better or if there's anything else I should do. Dan the Animator 18:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The lead seems improved, a bit more thematically coherent. I still do not really understand the interwiki link usage here, but looking at the MOS I can't actually find much on it, so I don't think it causes an issue with the FLCR. Aside from no alt text on the first map, the FLCR appear met with the changes. Best, CMD (talk) 15:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Source review passed (assuming google translate is not wildly misleading me); promoting. -- Pres N  00:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)


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