Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Ian Botham/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 Dabomb87 02:31, 22 October 2010.

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Ian Botham

 * Nominator(s):  Harrias  talk 15:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets the FLC criteria. It is based upon existing FL List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Glenn McGrath.  Harrias  talk 15:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments


 * Support The Rambling Man (talk) 22:19, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Ucucha 21:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Courcelles 12:25, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment – Three straight sentences in the first paragraph start with "He". A little more variety would be nice. The first use would be a good place to start, since what comes beforehand isn't directly related to Botham.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 22:11, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Done, have altered the first and third of that sequence.  Harrias  talk 22:25, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Support – Note that I fixed a grammatical issue that likely related to the fix which was made. Other than that now-addressed item, everything looks good.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 20:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * oppose, the table(s) in this article do not meet the requirements of WP:MOS. If you look at WP:Wikitable you'll see that tables are required to use . MOS has changed a lot since then. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1  &#124;  talk2me  18:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the constructive criticism. Oh wait, no, it wasn't that at all.
 * I've looked at WP:MOS and I see nothing that says I have to do this. Although I agree that it is covered in Help:Table.
 * As far as I can tell, I've now fixed it, do you still oppose? If not, wouldn't a comment, rather than an opposition have made more sense initially?
 * Thanks for the civility. Harrias  talk 19:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * yes I'm sorry it should have been comment and I should have linked you to the MOS page at WP:ACCESS. I didnt mean to cause confusion on what is a well written article --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


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