Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/United States presidential elections in Connecticut/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) 00:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC).

United States presidential elections in Connecticut

 * Nominator(s): 金色黎明 (talk) 12:41, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I have rewrited all of list, and added a lot of content following the format of other Featured Lists 金色黎明 (talk) 12:41, 4 July 2023 (UTC)


 * On the default width of the new Vector skin, the side bars can't be next to the three columns of "Key for parties". This results in a lot of whitespace (and also columns that are wider than my screen). Not sure how to fix it, but would be nice to have less whitespace:) Dajasj (talk) 10:01, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Done. The sidebar is unnecessary, I have delete it. 金色黎明 (talk) 05:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments by RunningTiger123
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:22, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * For citations, use the date format common in the United States per MOS:DATETIES: for instance, "June 28, 2023" instead of "28 June 2023".
 * "since American Revolution" → "since the American Revolution"
 * "Since 1988" – Connecticut voted for Bush in 1988, so it should be "Since 1992"
 * Also, you shift from discussing the Federalist Party to the elections in the last 30 years, and you seem to imply that there was a single shift that occurred, skipping over 150 years of history and several key shifts in between.
 * "for the Democratic candidates who are liberalism" – doesn't make sense
 * "1788-89" → "1788–89" (use en dash instead of hyphen; occurs once in footnote and once in section heading)
 * "Federalist party" → "Federalist Party"
 * "As a part of ... from 1796 to 1816." – this sentence is a comma splice
 * "And before 1820..." – don't start a sentence with "And"
 * "However, Connecticut had not voted for the Federalist party since 1820." – misleading: the Federalists essentially collapsed as a party around that time, so of course Connecticut didn't vote for them
 * "Runner-up (nationally)" – shouldn't this just be "Runner-up"? (occurs in two tables)
 * Martin Van Buren should sort by "Van Buren", not "Buren" (occurs three times)
 * In 1976, Ford's vote total needs a comma


 * Thanks for your advice, I have corrected all of them and expand the content about its political evolution. 金色黎明 (talk) 06:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

More comments: — RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Two dates still need to be fixed (in refs. 6 and 7)
 * "connecticut was lean to the anti-Jackson candidates" → "Connecticut leaned towards the anti-Jackson candidates"
 * Capitalize "Civil War"
 * "was the stronghold of Republican" → "was a Republican stronghold"
 * Don't use s" after "Connecticut Republican Party"
 * "Except Eisenhower and Reagan obtained landslide victory across the country in 1956 and 1984 respectively." – poor grammar, but it's probably better to remove the line entirely instead of fixing it
 * "in presidential election from 1796 to 1816" → "in presidential elections from 1796 to 1816"


 * Thanksfor your advice, I've correct all of them 金色黎明 (talk) 05:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Support – RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * "As part of the Thirteen Colonies, Connecticut has participated" => "One of the original Thirteen Colonies, Connecticut has participated"
 * "Since the Civil War, Connecticut was" => "Following the Civil War, Connecticut was"
 * "until it was dominated by Republicans after 1896.[5] From 1896 to 1932, Connecticut was a Republican stronghold" - any way to combine these two bits, which essentially say the same thing?
 * "its advantage was no longer as significant as it was then" => "its advantage was no longer as significant as it had previously been"
 * Notes A and C are not complete sentences so don't need full stops -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your attention and pertinent advice. I've corrected the article according to your suggestion. 金色黎明 (talk) 10:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

No spotcheck needed, will focus on formatting/reliability. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC) , that's all from me, nice work on. The color usage in the tables is very visually appealing. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Source review from MyCatIsAChonk
 * Unrelated to sourcing, but watch for false titles in the lead- I'm looking at During this period, Connecticut Republican Party leader J. Henry Roraback built up...
 * Replace Britannica sources (refs 1 and 2) with other sources (see WP:BRITANNICA)- there's certainly many American history textbooks that support the first sentence
 * ✅--金色黎明 (talk) 14:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * All citations must use the same casing (title case or sentence case) in their titles, per MOS:CONFORMTITLE
 * ✅--金色黎明 (talk) 22:51, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ref 3 needs page numbers. To be consistent with other citations, I'd suggest putting the citation under "Works cited" and using sfns (that is, unless both uses of it are on the same page)
 * ✅--金色黎明 (talk) 14:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Refs 30 and 31: quotes in quotes should use apostrophes
 * ✅--金色黎明 (talk) 14:54, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Either wikilink all publishers/works or wikilink none for consistency
 * ✅--金色黎明 (talk) 15:00, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ref 57: I don't think citing 12 pages from a book is verifiable. There's definitely a source somewhere that makes the generalized statement you;re trying to support with all those pages.
 * ✅: Changed--金色黎明 (talk) 23:13, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * What is ref 174 supporting? The page just seems to have lots of documents about the 2023 special elections.
 * ✅:Renewed--金色黎明 (talk) 14:47, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Under "Works cited": why do the last two sources have LCCN and OL numbers, but the first doesn't?
 * ✅--金色黎明 (talk) 14:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your advices, I have corrected all of them--金色黎明 (talk) 23:19, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @金色黎明: History.com must be replaced, it is not reliable per WP:RSPHISTORY MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 16:03, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅--金色黎明 (talk) 02:59, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Support - MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:27, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Support – Cannot find anything wrong with the list EnthusiastWorld37 (talk) 20:28, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Promoting. -- Pres N  15:18, 18 September 2023 (UTC)


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