Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Venues of the 2010 Winter Olympics/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 The Rambling Man 18:27, 26 December 2009.

Venues of the 2010 Winter Olympics

 * Nominator(s): Geraldk (talk) 14:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

the first in what will hopefully be a number of nominations related to the 2010 Olympic Games. Thanks in advance for reviews, comments, and constructive criticism. Geraldk (talk) 14:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Support Mm40 (talk) Mm40 (talk) 20:57, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * ALT Text, dabs, and external links check out fine. Mm40 (talk) 22:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I also look forward to all that exciting new Olympic content we'll get to work on next year, like Canada's eighth Olympic men's ice hockey medal (but I don't look forward to the Russia/Soviet nationalist debate that will inevitably pop up). Anyway, I realize the actual list won't change much (other than from future tense to past tense), but shouldn't we wait until after the Games pass? The costs and other such figures could potentially in the next 90 days. -- Scorpion 0422  01:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I thought hard about nominating it for just that reason. But according to VANOC, all venues are now complete, so the costs should not change, and the venues have been set for a while. The only thing I think is likely to change is that the article's phrasing will switch to past tense. Geraldk (talk) 02:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment, see proposed move at Talk:List of 2010 Winter Olympics venues based on the interpretation that, due to the large amount of non-list content, the article isn't really a list at all. -M.Nelson (talk) 20:08, 19 November 2009 (UTC)


 * What's the status on the proposed move? Gerald, are you watching? Dabomb87 (talk) 15:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Comment – Whatever the name winds up being, the page is clearly meant as a list and should be eligible for FL status. That said, the cite tag in the lead needs to be addressed promptly. Will take a closer look after this is done.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 22:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Everything looks great except for the one citation needed tag. Reywas92 Talk  22:29, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Everything looks good. Felipe Menegaz 15:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I will abstain until the problem below is resolved. Felipe Menegaz 14:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose – The cite tag is an automatic disqualifier for me. Until that's gone, and the sentence is either cited or removed, I'll be forced to oppose since I don't want to see this promoted with a tag. Honestly, I'm surprised that three reviewers have already supported despite it.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 16:15, 28 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Just as an outside view, that entire paragraph isn't strictly relevant to this list at all. It's nice to have a bunch of background information and all that, to get a more rounded picture than just a plain list, but this may kill two birds with one stone (particularly as Geraldk has not been seen for two weeks) – why don't we remove that sentence (at least) or the paragraph (at most)?  Thoughts? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with TRM. The paragraph does not have any connection to 2010 Olympics venues and should be removed. This info should be moved to 2010 Winter Olympics.— Chris! c / t 21:09, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * On a closer look, I agree that most of that paragraph is not overly important for this topic and would have no problem with removing it. At this point, I'm more concerned that the nominator has been inactive for so long when there is a page move proposal and an active oppose.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 04:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Paragraph moved to 2010 Winter Olympics. Felipe Menegaz 14:50, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Now that the cite tag is gone, here is the review I've been meaning to do for a while. Found only a couple of things in what looks like a solid list:
 * The first paragraph consists of just one sentence, and is rather slim. Is it possible to move some of the content from the second paragraph there for better overall balance?
 * "with the remainder already existing in Vancouver and Whistler." This is what is know as a noun-plus-ing structure, not the best possible. Take a look at the provided link for ideas on how to fix this, and avoid similar issues in the future.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 17:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Only feedback over details. Regards; Felipe Menegaz 14:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by Felipe Menegaz
 * I would like to see a map with the location of the venues on the list. It is very useful and I have not seen in other similar lists. If provided, it should be placed on top of the page, next to the lead, replacing the sidebar and the BC Place picture.
 * I think that this picture is much better than the no-snow ski jump. The Richmond Olympic Oval is one of the symbols of these Games.
 * The BC Place picture should replace the Olympic Village under construction.
 * The External links should be improved since there is only one link (to Commons).
 * I will open a section on WP:OLYMPICS to discuss the removal of these sidebars from Olympic-related articles. They are not very functional, occupying important spaces within the articles. They will be much better in the form of a navbox.
 * Felipe, would you be willing to implement these changes? It appears that our nominator hasn't been sighted on Wikipedia for a month, and since we're close, it'd be a shame to lose out now... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:57, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.