Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates/Contest

What should the second list be?
I've been debating with myself over what the second list should be. Some ideas I've had are:


 * One from any topic, but something in a subject in which you have not previously nominated a GA, FA, FL, FT or are a member of a related wikiproject.
 * A Former Featured List
 * A Former Featured List Candidate (but one you did not nominate)
 * A list in one of the non-Top 5, but not Bottom 15 topics.

Any ideas? -- Scorpion0422 15:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * IMO, I like the first choice. We're already focusing on the underrepresented topics with one of the lists, so leave the other one and keep the choices open. — sephiroth bcr  ( converse ) 02:53, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * What is the first option supposed to accomplish? Hope that the nominators will spread their interest even more? I think it is a bit overstretched, and that the positive aspects -while neat- are not going to be that useful. Nergaal (talk) 23:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Under-represented topics
So are the "Under-represented topics" the only topics we can choose from? And which of the topics did you not include? Both questions are toward Scorpion0422. --  K. Annoyomous 24  [c] 03:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You must pick three lists from three different topics:
 * One from an under-represented topic from this list. However, similar to the previous contest, no more than three people can work on the same topic. This rule only applies to this list.
 * One from any topic, but something in a subject in which you have not previously nominated a GA, FA, FL, FT or are a member of a related wikiproject.
 * One from any topic at all.
 * -- Scorpion0422 03:05, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

When to begin
I am not sure when to begin. Can I begin now or I have to wait till the tenth.?— Chris!  c t 23:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You can begin whenever you like. You just can not submit FLCs until the tenth. -- Scorpion0422 23:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

A few questions
I have two questions that I'm curious about.


 * 1) Are we allowed to have one of our lists get a peer review, if another is already a FLC?
 * 2) For the proposed awards, what are th qualifications for Best list and Best trio of lists?

Thanks -- Mr.crabby   (Talk)   19:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I thought we are allowed to do number 1. That is what I am doing right now.— Chris!  c t 19:27, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm also peer reviewing another list from my FLC contest nominations. The rules didn't exactly say that you may not peer review other lists when there is already an FLC. --  SRE.K.A nnoyomous .L. 24 [c] 19:29, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm hoping we can, but I thought I should make sure before I get started. -- Mr.crabby   (Talk)   19:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that the rules don't say this isn't allowed; I don't see any problem in it, anyways. If a formal Peer Review wasn't open, then surely people would still ask for input from others? I think it's fine. Gary King ( talk ) 19:35, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks! -- Mr.crabby   (Talk)   19:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Second round
Note to the four users with promoted FLs, you can now start submitting FLCs for round 2. -- Scorpion0422 18:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

meah
it would be interested to see what percentage of the lists that got promoted during this contest are debatable FLs with the new changes in order to skew future contests in a more truly productive direction. Nergaal (talk) 08:54, 9 May 2009 (UTC)