Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Coppa Italia finals/archive3

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The list was withdrawn by Dr Salvus via Pres N 22:34, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of Coppa Italia finals[edit]

I proposed naming this page in FL because it meets all the criteria to be. The prose part is legible and understandable. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria. It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items. The only lack to information is the absence of data about attendance in the earlyest finals, but it is impossible to find information about. All informations are cited from reliable sources. It meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages. And finally it is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.

Numerous criticisms helped me improve this page. I went through all the nomination criteria, the whole page and other FL pages. I think this is the best way to reward the work of all contributors to this page.

Dr_Salvus (talk) 10:49, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the 2nd FL review was closed after this editor chose to withdraw it just 2 days ago. No evidence of a significant article improvement in that time frame. If editors choose to withdraw nominations when they get feedback, they shouldn't be encouraged to just create a new discussion. So much unsourced text, doesn't have a chance of meeting FL criteria. Problems include, but are not limited to:

Nothing in reference column prior to 2003-04
Attendances listed as N/A, which is clearly just missing information, which fails the comprehensiveness criteria of Wikipedia:Featured list criteria
Sorting on Coppa Italia finals table doesn't work properly because of the columns that say the scores on aggregate, and get bundled up together when sorting

All in all, this list needs improvement just like it did a few days ago. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:05, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph2302:

Information on the finals prior to 2004 is cited in the "Almanacco Illustrato del Calcio"
I made an incredible effort to find data on the number of spectators of the older finals. But I found nothing
I don't understand what do you mean in this Sorting on Coppa Italia finals table doesn't work properly because of the columns that say the scores on aggregate, and get bundled up together when sorting sentence Dr_Salvus (talk) 15:23, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph2302:

I've find information about attendance in some finals, but there are from trasfermarkt.com (it is not a reliable source). I believe that is Impossible find the data about attendance in the earlyest finals because Coppa Italia haven't any importance for participating teams. Dr_Salvus (talk) 22:41, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on procedural basis, for three reasons. First, the last FL nomination was closed just two days ago by the nominator's decision. I do not understand why that review was closed and this one was immediately opened. Second, this article has an open peer review that needs to be completed before this nomination is considered. Third, this nomination was created incorrectly (just as the last one was). From the FL nomination procedure: From the FLC template [on the article talk page], click on the red "initiate the nomination" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please leave a post on the FLC talk page for assistance. Since this was not done, this page is not linked to the article talk page (which still shows a redlink), and this page lacks the tools used to analyze FL nominations. While I do not necessarily oppose the nomination based on content, I also agree that there are still issues that need to be addressed, as I noted in the previous FLC. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:07, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RunningTiger123 and Joseph2302: I shouldn't have reopened the discussion. I was wrong. If you want to help me you can do it in the peer review. I will learn from this mistake Dr_Salvus (talk) 10:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WP:FLC director and delegates: The page has not been withdrawn by the bot after several days. Do you know what might be causing this? RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the nominator manually closed the talk page templates (and likely never did it right the first time) and now it's messed up. Manually closing, thanks. --Pres N 22:34, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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