Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of counties in Iowa/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 06:52, 29 August 2008.

List of counties in Iowa
After a bit of a break, another US County list... it has professional prose, a suitable lead, comprehensive (covers all 99 counties), clear structure, good visual appeal and is stable (no edit wars). Tom pw (talk) (review) 11:57, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, in order:
 * I've changed the phraseing on the opening sentence;
 * Good point, I've moved it to the section containing the table;
 * I've changed the heading for the section containing the table to "County information", which I think resolves your comment;
 * I agree, "Former counties" sounds much better, and I've changed things accordingly
 * "llonger" - well spotted :-)... that's changed now
 * Length of lead... this I haven't done anything to address yet. What information do you think should be included in the lead that shouldn't be?
 * Thank-you for your suggestions and comments. Tom pw (talk) (review) 15:50, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * My comments have been addressed against C1, C2 and C5. The lead has also been expanded, I will give me Conditional Support if the prose of the lead is made into 2 paragraphs instead of 4 short ones.-- S R X  00:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Lead is too short for a list of this length. Talk about Iowa, some of the history of the state and its division into counties, the defunct counties, maybe the largest, smallest, most and least populated etc.  Use your imagination but it needs to be much longer.  Plus avoid squashing text between two images per WP:MOS.  If you make the lead longer this shouldn't happen but if you don't you'll need to remove one of the images.
 * ninety-nine->99.
 * Established dates don't need to be wikilinked.
 * Etymology col could do with being left aligned and the red links should be sorted out.
 * I think there's a better link for president of the US than just president. Plus I imagine its capitalised.
 * President should be linked each time (to the relevant page US presidents page) as the table is sortable.
 * "signer" - is that a signatory?
 * "hero" - really? Reads a little WP:PEACOCK else reference him being called a hero.
 * Some of the etymology looks confusing, "Louisa Massey, woman who avenged the death of her brother, or Louisa County, Virginia" probably needs a footnote to explain the etymology in these cases is uncertain and provide suitable references to back that up.
 * Is it really necessary to link Irish? If so then do it all the time.
 * Link Fox (tribe) each time - it's a sortable list.
 * The Rambling Man (talk) 16:22, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for recommendations concerning the lead - I shall work on that. I think having the etymolgy column left-aligned would look out of place, because the rest of the table is centre-aligned. (Also, other similar FLs use the same layout). I take your point about the conufsing eytmolgy, and will work on that as well. The rest of the issues you raised have been addressed. Thanks for the comments :-) Tom pw (talk) (review) 19:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've attempted to deal with the multiple etymolgy issue - feedback would be apreciated. Tom pw (talk) (review) 13:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've expanded the lead... what do you think now? Tom pw (talk) (review) 19:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://www.eskimo.com/~lisanne/ney/wischron.htm
 * Furthr clarify - self-published family history website, that doesn't give its sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.50states.com/statehood.htm (it's also missing a publisher)
 * Unclear who is behind the site and doesn't give its sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.iagenweb.org/state/places/formation.htm (also lacking a publisher)
 * GenWeb sites are maintained by private volunteers and vary greatly in their quality. There are no qualifications for maintaining or updating the information on these sites. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~iahenry/henrycocourthouse.htm (also lacking a publisher)
 * See above about GenWeb sites, same applies to RootsWeb. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.shopiowaonline.com/node/114
 * An online directory of shopping sites isn't the best source for information about a counties history. The page says its information comes from the County itself, why not directly cite the County webpage? Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 5 (Iowa Consolidated..) is lacking a publisher.
 * Current ref 14 is missing a publisher and a page number
 * The following deadlinked and were missing publishers:
 * http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Bancroft.htm
 * http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Cook.htm
 * http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Crocker.htm
 * http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Risley.htm
 * http://www.past2present.org/own/counties/Yell.htm
 * Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * ???? What makes them unreliable? I take your point about publishers/deadlinks though, and will try and get them sorted. Tom pw (talk) (review) 16:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * To further explain on the above, to determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The onus is on you to show they are WP:RS Tompw, so please do that. Cheers.  The Rambling Man (talk) 16:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment—Since "County" is the name of the first column, can you remove that word from every square in the column? Tony   (talk)  09:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Reference [7] after punctuation please.
 * Images in the lead are useless unless you actually click on them. Can you specify a size of thumbnails? I think 250 is the max for the lead.
 * Agree with Tony. No need to repeat the word "county" in the county column.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.