Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of number-one singles from the 1970s (UK)/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 14:51, 2 July 2010.

List of number-one singles from the 1970s (UK)

 * Nominator(s): Rambo's Revenge (talk)  10:41, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because over the past month it has been extensively re-written from this to its present form. The expansion started when I was background reading for (recent FL) List of Record Mirror number-one singles and I just got a bit too involved so here I am again. Rambo's Revenge (talk)  10:41, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Support. Oppose A few problems need to be resolved:


 * Thanks, for your comments. Much appreciated. Rambo's Revenge (talk)  16:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - the images need to be placed better. On my monitor I have to scroll down through nearly three screens' worth of blank white space with images at the right before I get to the first table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Out of interest what resolution are you running and do you the same problem with this? The table is obviously a bit too wide for your monitor but I cannot tell by how much. I've forced some wrapping which has taken quite a bit off the width but I don't know if it is enough for you. Unfortunately this is also one of the adverse affects that increasing thumbnail sizes would have. Can you let me know if it is better now or, roughly, how much is left to go. Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk)</b>  16:58, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * On the 2000s list I only get a small whitespace before the 2009 table, the rest is OK. On this list the whitespace is now down to about 2.5 screens' worth.  Apparently (someone more knowledgable than me tells me) my resolution is 1280 x 1024 pixels, hope that means something :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:04, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay I've reduced the image sizes. Is it any better? I must say this problem suprises me as the table wraps on my computer until the window is very thin. Do you have quite a narrow monitor? <b style="color:#E32636;">Rambo's Revenge</b> <b style="color:#FFA500;">(talk)</b>  17:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * My monitor's approximately 34cm wide. Is that narrow?  I don't know..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:48, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you measuring diagonally? If so, that would be about 13 inches, which is pretty narrow. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, side to side -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:57, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, in that case it seems your monitor is smaller than any of those listed at viewable image size. See this for an idea of the sizes people mostly use. <b style="color:#E32636;">Rambo's Revenge</b> <b style="color:#FFA500;">(talk)</b>  07:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's 17" diagonally. Blame work, they gave it to me :-)  But if I've got some sort of freaky-weird non-standard monitor and it displays OK on all normal ones then I guess I support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Support. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 02:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Support The Rambling Man (talk) 18:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


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