Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2010 Asian Para Games medal table/archive1

Add links
Source: 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 Dabomb87 16:36, 11 August 2011 [1].

2010 Asian Para Games medal table

2010 Asian Para Games medal table (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): — Bill william comptonTalk 16:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC) [reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it is comprehensive (in my opinion) and also fulfills other criteria. Thank you for your time and feedback. — Bill william comptonTalk 16:43, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from —Andrewstalk 01:11, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • " In athletics, bronzes were not awarded" in some events - is there a reason for this?
Because there were only three athletes to participate in many events of the athletics.
  • Why is there a dash in "−82.50 kg event of powerlifting"? Should it be a less than sign (<)?
This is an official way of writing weight category, as per official website of the Games.
  • MOS:COLOUR - do not use color alone to convey information
Mon erreur, it was in color box, but don't know how I forgot to put it after China.

—Andrewstalk 02:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

done
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • "17 world and 82 Asian records were broken...". Try not to have a sentence start with a number like this.
done
  • Same thing for the start of the second paragraph.
done
  • No need for a hyphen in "most successful" in the last sentence of the lead.
done
  • Medal table: En dashes needed in the eight no-bronze events, and another for the "shared silvers" event.
done
  • While on the subject, I doubt they actually shared the medal itself; "two silvers" would be more appropriate.
done
Did you miss Ref8?
I saw ref 8, but it's not clear that that's supposed to be sourcing the table itself. It's citing the first paragraph of Medal table, which is about table conventions more than the table itself. There needs to be some indication that this ref is in fact meant to be sourcing the table. Many ways exist of doing this, but it needs to be done. A table without an apparent source is no good here. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 21:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I've divided references into two (General and Specific). — Bill william comptonTalk 17:12, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from — Legolas (talk2me) 14:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Don't italicize online website names and check the en-dashing of reference titles. Otherwise the list looks fine. I will comment again. — Legolas (talk2me) 11:47, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a template ({{Cite web}}) which italicize the website names, and all the references have been checked for en-dashes. — Bill william comptonTalk 15:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You can actually eradicate it by adding work=''gzapg2010.cn (Official website of the Games)'' in the template, or you can include it within the publisher parameter in case the AWB and other bots come and removes that italicization. — Legolas (talk2me) 18:02, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've no problem in de-italicizing the work parameter, but the documentation of the template implies that it should be italicized.
Legolas, as TRM said it's a moot point, so I've removed "work" parameter. — Bill william comptonTalk 13:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support the promotion of the list now. Nice work Bill, hope to see more of those old Asian Games lists. :) — Legolas (talk2me) 14:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from KV5
Comments from KV5
  • "earned medals at the Games; and athletes" - semicolon should be a comma
done
  • "shot put – F35/36,[11] 400 m – T12,[12] 200 m – T12[13] and 100 m – T12[14]) and the men's discus throw – F51/52/53,[15] long jump – F36,[16] 1500 m – T11[17] and 1500 m – T37" - what on earth do all these abbreviations mean? It's not clear at all to readers who aren't familiar with the subject matter (I'm really not).
 Question: Well, these are the units of classifying the physical disabilities. Wouldn't it be out of scope if I add the details in an article dedicated to medal table only?
Not necessarily, as it's difficult to understand what the medals were awarded for in this case. An explanatory footnote (or multiples thereof) would be sufficient; it doesn't have to be anything in-depth. — KV5 • Talk • 21:36, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
done
 Question: Please specifically mention why it doesn't meet ACCESS? because there are so many medal tables of same type which have FL status, or I'm missing something?
The data tables tutorial (MOS:DTT) explains the new table requirements for meeting WP:ACCESS requirements. The other medal tables were/may have been promoted before these requirements were added to the Manual of Style. At the very least, tables require row headers, scopes, and captions. — KV5 • Talk • 21:35, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Several medal tables were promoted after these "new requirements" (please check promotion log). Like all other medal tables this article also uses {{RankedMedalTable}} which doesn't follow these requirements of ACCESS, also it has full protection, so I'm unable to make any change in the template.
If I had reviewed one of those other lists, my concerns would have been the same. I have not returned to active reviewing until recently. If the template doesn't meet access requirements, that needs to be raised with an admin with template experience. The template not conforming is a MOS issue, and MOS compliance falls under section 5 of the FL criteria. — KV5 • Talk • 11:56, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
done

Hope these comments help. — KV5 • Talk • 23:35, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Should gzapg2010.cn (Official website of the Games) be written as such in the ref formatting? Wouldn't Guangzhou 2010 Asian Para Games be better? —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 16:23, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From the documentation of {{Cite web}} template:
  • work: In most cases this is the name of the website (as usually given in the logo/banner area of the site), otherwise the site's domain name (without the leading "www." part). If the titled item being cited is part of some other larger work, such as a book, periodical or organizational sub-site (e.g., the law school's section of a university's website system), it is usually better to use the name of that more specific work than that of the entire site. Do not italicize; the software will do so automatically.
  • publisher: The name of the entity that publishes (owns or controls) the website. Commonly, this is a government agency, educational institution, or business. For many websites, the author and publisher are the same, and only one needs to be included in the citation; prefer publisher for organizations, author (or first/last) for individuals. Please note that publisher is not the name of the website; that is the work, except in cases where the business name is identical to the site name. For example, the corporation Walmart is the publisher of the website at walmart.com, which is the work.
I hope you will know the answer.
I hope you weren't trying to insult me ;). I think this is one of cases where the business name is identical to the site name. And the banner does say the name of the games, which would be assumed to be the name of the site. But then again, I have no idea why walmart.com would be the "work=". So that means any site research is done from should should have the domain name? —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 13:00, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Believe me, I didn't have any such intention, I apologize if you feel that way. As the issue is contentious, I've removed work parameter. Does it look good to you now? — Bill william comptonTalk 13:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Naw, I didn't mean that in a serious way. As for the italics and parameters, it looks good now. Let me put in some consideration before I put in a vote though. Thanks. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 14:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: My dispute was resolved. Very well developed prose and other FL criteria. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 23:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Questions about the resolution of Killervogel5's comments about MOS:DTT above:
    1. Why is a table caption mandatory in this instance, when the entire article is about the table? It just looks silly to have "Medal table" appear as a caption, which appears in the "Medal table" section of the "2010 Asian Para Games medal table" article. How many times do we have to label the medal table?
    2. Why is a row header necessary? The whole point of {{RankedMedalTable}} is that you can sort by different criteria, so highlighting the "Rank" column with bold text and darker table cell colour is contrary to that. The "Good example of headers structure" in the MOS:DTT tutorial does not utilize row headers, so I don't think they're necessary here.

Note that I have added scope="col" to the column headers ot RankedMedalTable, so the thousands of transclusions of that template will be updated shortly. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:19, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • A response to both. The short answer is that the caption and row-headers are necessary because MOS says so. The longer answers are slightly more complicated. The table caption currently labeling the table as "medal table" is poor; the caption should describe the table's content for a non-sighted reader. A better caption in this case would be "List of participating nations, showing the number of gold, silver, and bronze medals won". The row headers also provide for non-sighted readers, as a screen reader will then read the row in the correct order if the sorting is changed. The table cannot simply be considered in its initial state. The vast majority of FLs use sortable tables; indeed, the criteria state that a featured list is "easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities". Please do not see the headers as a highlight, as they are not. They are an indicator that this is the primary entry in the row. In this case, I actually believe that the country is the primary entry, not the rank, so that should probably be examined. If the bold is a problem, inserting the "plainrowheaders" attribute in the table class will remove the bold; I happen to think that it is much less obtrusive in cases like this. — KV5 • Talk • 00:33, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
done
Please reconsider your edit. It was bizzare to use <th> HTML markup (via the wikitable "!" syntax) for the Rank column; it is worse to use it for the second column. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 03:46, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You have consider what is the key element of data in each line, and without the country, the other items are irrelevant. So for screen reading software, the country is the most obvious choice. Perhaps we should ask User:RexxS to comment as he is usually quite clued up on this kind of thing. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:51, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Andrwsc, I've got no option left. TRM, do I need to ask RexxS? — Bill william comptonTalk 10:53, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't be a bad idea, getting someone who is very up on WP:ACCESS issues to have a look at it and perhaps explain more clearly where we're coming from. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The table at present is marked up about as well as it can be for accessibility - well done to the nominator for taking on board these issues.

@Andrwsc: modern screen readers provide the ability to navigate a table in different ways, for example a blind reader may want to go down the row of gold medals and hear how many were gained. If there is no row header marked up they will hear "Gold, 185"; "Gold, 32"; "Gold, 27", etc. as they move down the column; or the screen reader software may take a guess that the first column contains row header info, so they would hear "Gold, 1, 185"; "Gold, 2, 32"; "Gold, 3, 27", etc. However, if we mark up the 'Nation' column as a row header (i.e. <th> in html) and give it the row scope, then the blind reader can hear "Gold, China (CHN), 185"; "Gold, Japan (JPN), 32"; "Gold, South Korea (KOR), 27", etc. Surely you would agree that is far better accessibility for the visually-impaired? Have a look at HTML Tables with JAWS and MAGic for a good description of how a popular screen reader (JAWS) can be set to interact with properly marked-up tables.

For a screen reader to navigate by reading down a column as you describe, is a row header and row scope necessary? It really looks silly for these columns to have the darker background color (since the default CSS style for <th> is different from <td>). I note that the "Good example of headers structure" at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Data tables tutorial#Correct headers structure does not utilize row headers, so what makes this medal table different that it requires them? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You asked this question before. An answer was already provided. Regardless of whether the table tutorial (which is just an instructional guide, not an all-inclusive policy or guideline) contains this type of header structure, this table does require it, and that's because of the actual WP:ACCESS portion of the Manual of Style. Your question to RexxS leads me to believe that you are still viewing this header markup as a simple aesthetic change which you do not favor; I implore you not to think of it this way. I didn't like it either at first, but I volunteered to make an FLC for which I was responsible a testcase for the implementation of this standard, and I am now convinced of its worth. Some may cite WP:IAR as a reason not to implement these because they "look silly". However, it's not within the spirit of IAR because this is not "[preventing] you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia"; indeed, not implementing it hinders Wikipedia's development into a tool as an encyclopedia that everyone (including non-sighted users) can use. — KV5 • Talk • 00:13, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, it wasn't. "Because MOS says so" is an utterly useless answer. The MOS gives "good" examples of tables without row headers, so it appears as though only column headers are necessary. But perhaps that's besides the point. I do understand the accessibility considerations described here, and I can see the utility to read the table column-wise per the example from RexxS. However, my question is whether or not the screen reader requirements depend on the <th> markup or is the scope declaration sufficient? I'm asking if the aesthetic effect of the table header can be decoupled from the semantic meaning. It really looks bad for a row header to appear in the middle of the table. Clearly the intent of the darker color for header cells is intended for the top-most row and the left-most column. Is there any way to satisfy the accessibility requirements without coloring the "Nation" column differently? Your suggestion to use the plainrowheaders class to remove the bold header text is exactly the kind of thing I'm looking for, but with respect to cell color instead of font style. Should .wikitable.plainrowheaders in MediaWiki:Common.css also include background-color: #f9f9f9;? Or should we add style="background:#f9f9f9" to each nation entry in the table? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 04:08, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The only improvement I can think of would be to drop the use of {{flagIOC2team}} and separate the name of the country into its own cell, which would then be marked as the row header, since that would remove the repetition of the country abbreviation each time when spoken by the screen reader. However, that is a minor gain for considerable effort in this case, so I wouldn't bother to request it.

I'd be happy to Support this list as a good example of how accessibility can be implemented. I ought to mention that in the [[File:]] syntax, the parameter for alt-text has to be |alt= because the wikimedia software does not recognise |Alt= (I've fixed that for you) - hope that's ok. --RexxS (talk) 01:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Note C needs an en-dash.
done
  • Ref 5 - I don't see a publication date on the webpage.
Date was after Rajab, and I thought it's a some Pakistani name (author name), but actually it's a month of Muslims, my bad.
  • Ref 22 - space before 82.50kg in the title.
Where? in between "–" and 82.50kg?? because there is already a single space in between "Women's" and –82.5kg.
Forgot the word "needed" between "space" and "before"... is it indicating "up to 82.5kg"? otherwise it should be "– 82.5kg" like the other titles. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
done as per Wikipedia:MOSNUM#Common mathematical symbols.

The Rambling Man (talk) 09:51, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/2010_Asian_Para_Games_medal_table/archive1&oldid=1143879765"