Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the Jurchen campaigns against the Song Dynasty/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Hahc21 10:02, 15 September 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]
Timeline of the Jurchen campaigns against the Song Dynasty[edit]
Timeline of the Jurchen campaigns against the Song Dynasty (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): Typing General (talk) 07:12, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because it meets the Featured List criteria. Typing General (talk) 07:12, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Underneath-it-All |
---|
;Comments:
– Underneath-it-All (talk) 18:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – Underneath-it-All (talk) 19:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 15:47, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 16:34, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support - looks good! I'm not sure that the tables need to be sortable if the only thing you can do is flip the date column back and forth- and if they are, I think the links need to be replicated. I.e, Yue Fei is linked in his 1133 instance, but if you flip the table that's no longer the first one in the table, so you'd need to link the rest. I really don't think the flipping is necessary though. Also, Shaoxing Treaty is a redirect- thought I'd mention it since it's the only one you have. --PresN 23:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - very nice list! As PresN hints above, if a table is sortable, then each item needs to be linked on each occurrence. However, I would agree with PresN that having a table that can only be sorted by year (when it's already arranged by year) is a little pointless. Dana boomer (talk) 19:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Quick comment – The Holcombe citation in the reference list has some ugly red text in it. I think it will go away if you remove the hidden access date, but haven't tested out my theory.Giants2008 (Talk) 23:03, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]- Now fixed.--Typing General (talk) 01:19, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.