Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of municipalities in New Brunswick/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 SchroCat via FACBot (talk) 23:34, 2 March 2016 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of municipalities in New Brunswick[edit]

Featured list candidates/List of municipalities in New Brunswick/archive1

Nominator(s): Mattximus (talk) 14:29, 22 December 2015 (UTC) and Hwy43 (talk)[reply]

We are attempting to bring the list of municipalities for every province and territory of Canada to featured status and eventual featured topic. We have created a standardized format and so far promoted Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia, Yukon, Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories. We have also taken suggestions from the previous 8 nominations into account for this nomination. All suggestions welcome and thanks for your input. Mattximus (talk) 14:29, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 03:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments – Sorry this hasn't received much attention until now. Here are a few simple things for you:

The "one third" in the third paragraph of the lead could use a hyphen.
The duplicate Canada 2011 Census links in the Towns, Villages, and Rural communities (x2) sections should be removed.

Hmm not sure what you mean here. Are you saying just leave one of the links, maybe at the end of the paragraphs? Mattximus (talk) 22:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Giants2008 is referring to WP:OVERLINK, which I have just resolved. Hwy43 (talk) 08:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The List of municipalities section title could be shortened to just the last word, as List of is redundant when the name of the article says there's a list.

Can we change it simply to "List" per the explanation in my edit summary? Hwy43 (talk) 08:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A couple photo captions here could use hyphens for "second largest" and "third largest".

Source review – Source reliability looks good, and the links all work according to the link-checker tool (which coughs a little at the sight of XLSX files, from the looks of it). Formattting also looks good ~~for the most part; the only thing I'd change is spelling out the abbreviation in the publisher of ref 2, if it can be spelled out.~~ Giants2008 (Talk) 22:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your review, User:Giants2008, please let us know if there are any other changes needed to gain your support. Mattximus (talk) 22:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, thank you! Hwy43 (talk) 08:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Now that the fixes have been made, I'm satisfied that the list meets the standards set by the others in this series. I'll leave the source review out so the potential closers can see that it was done. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Jacek (Talk) 23:21, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nice list. Only a few issues:

~~First sentence needs comma after Canada~~

Sorry, but no pause is necessary in that location, and therefore a comma is superfluous. Hwy43 (talk) 02:11, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, but of course I'm not going to oppose over a single comma. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 02:14, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~"population of at least ten thousand" "population of fifteen hundred or more" - I think that should be 10,000 and 1,500 (or 10000 and 1500, if you prefer)~~

Changed. Mattximus (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The list looks odd with images hanging in the empty space above the list. I realize it's not easy to find a good place to put them, but it looks strange. Perhaps make a gallery or embed them in the table itself (like I do with my lists)?

This is been an issue that is brought up before. I sympathize with the formatting, but it turns out it only occurs with users who have small screens or low resolution. The problem can be fixed by zooming out just a bit in your browser. The reason we do not make use of the gallery is to be consistent with the other 13 lists which all have the same formatting. I hope this explanation is sufficient justification for our placement choice. Mattximus (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just noticed it only does that on my laptop, not my desktop. No problem. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 23:21, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~"New Brunwsick has 8 cities, 26 towns, 65 villages, 1 regional municipality, and 8 rural communities" - not supported by ref 4. Interestingly, ref 2 claims 7 rural communities, not 8.~~

Great catch, found the official list and changed the number from 8 to 7 (which matches with our list). Mattximus (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This is where the error was introduced. The other errors elsewhere have been fixed. Hwy43 (talk) 02:33, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~"Saint John was the first municipality in what would later become the province of New Brunswick to incorporate, in 1785" - not supported by ref 6 or 7.~~

Another good catch. Made the link specific to the city of Saint John. Mattximus (talk) 21:59, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't realize how awkward this sentence reads. I'm going to fix it. Also, it was the first community in Canada to incorporate as a city. The reference doesn't confirm first "municipality" in New Brunswick, but the fact that it was the first city in Canada therefore infers first "city" in NB. Hwy43 (talk) 02:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 17:30, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. Please let us know if there is anything else that is needed to gain your support. Mattximus (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's good, thanks for the quick response. Nothing stopping me from Supporting now. I'd greatly appreciate it if you checked out this, though. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 23:21, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from PresN (Talk) 22:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doffing my delegate hat to review this list.

"In 1785, Saint John became the first community to incorporate as a city in what would eventually become Canada." - if you mean that it's the first city in Canada, rather than that it's the first city, and also is in Canada, then it may read better as "In 1785, Saint John became the first community in what would eventually become Canada to incorporate as a city."
"with 70,063 as of the 2011 census" - with 70063 whats? 70,063 residents, presumably
"New Brunswick's smallest smallest city by population (7,385) is Campbellton" - since you just said that it takes 10k people to be a city, should explain if it got grandfathered in or lost a lot of population or what.
Same with Hartland in towns.
That's about it! Pretty solid overall. I'll add on a source review tonight or tomorrow. If you found this review helpful, consider optionally reviewing my World Fantasy Convention Award nomination up above. --Pres N 22:41, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! I've made all changes and found the line in the municipal act that states "The inhabitants of the cities and towns in existence on January 1, 1967 continue to be bodies corporate.". I've clarified that in the respective paragraphs. Please let us know if anything else is needed for your support. Mattximus (talk) 21:36, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support, looks good! --Pres N 22:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source review: Pass

Spotchecks: checked sources 6, 11, 13, and 19 - all clean
Formatting: You link Statistics Canada as a publisher in refs 1, 8, and 19, but not 10. On the flip side, you don't link any of the government organizations (like Department of Environment and Local Government (New Brunswick)); presumably this is intentional, but odd. Not a big enough deal to wait to pass the source review, but thought I should mention it. --Pres N 22:31, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support! I went ahead and made the changes you suggested to the links. Mattximus (talk) 01:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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. - – SchroCat (talk) 08:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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