Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Open Championship champions

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 User:Scorpion0422 01:14, 29 September 2008 [1].

List of The Open Championship champions

I am nominating this list for featured list status, as I belive that after an engaging peer review, this list meets all the criteria necessary to be a featured list. Thanks in advance for your comments. NapHit (talk) 19:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jameboy (talk · contribs)

  • Minor grammatical point - the Vardon, Morris and Taylor captions are all missing a comma after the word "who".
Done
  • The list of winners in the main article (The_Open_Championship#Winners) includes the amount of prize money collected by the winner. Could that not be included here?
No because it's original research, and there are no references which support this
How about this? [2] --Jameboy (talk) 17:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As you can probably tell I'm reluctant to add the prize money, especially since the other two lists; List of Masters Tournament champions, List of U.S. Open (golf) champions don't have it, and I'm not sure it's necessary, the main aspects of the list are the champion, score, and the course, which are all included, and I'm not sure prize money comes into this it just seems a bit trivial NapHit (talk) 18:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In a very general sense, I agree with you that sporting prize money is fairly trivial and not always worth recording. However, given that (for example) the European Order of Merit is decided by total prize money won, it would seem to me that prize money is very important to golf and therefore worth including here. I'm not really a golf fan (I'll watch The Open but that's about it) so forgive me if this perception is wrong. --Jameboy (talk) 20:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm still not convinced, yes there is a European order of merit, but the person who wins that generally wins the most competitions therefore winning the most money is not that important in a sense, especially when talking about majors as to win a major is considered to be the best thing a golfer can achieve in their lifetime, unless your Tiger Woods, also there is no prize money info available for the other majors and I believe the lists should be consistent if they are going to be a featured topic, therefore including prize money on one list would be inappropriate NapHit (talk) 20:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done

--Jameboy (talk) 20:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments, I've addressed them all NapHit (talk) 15:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the main article list (The_Open_Championship#Winners, soon to be replaced by this list, I presume) there are footnotes for those golfers who became naturalised citizens of the United States. Could you include those here? --Jameboy (talk) 22:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • First two sentences of lead could be cited?
  • Claret Jug (golf trophy) seems to be capitalised elsewhere and has this nifty link so you could use it?
  • " a Gold Medal" - why is this capitalised?
  • "Up until 1870..." - Up is redundant here.
  • "...winning the championship six times during..." - "the championship" is redundant as well.
  • "His son Tom Morris, Jr. is the ..." - I'd be tempted to comma before and after his name.
  • You mention "over 72 holes" - is it worth stating that this is conducted as 4 rounds of the same 18 holes with, perhaps, the pin position being relocated on each green each day?
  • Link par in the lead.
  • In the opening sentence of the lead, why isn't The part of the wikilink? The competition is called "The Open Championship" right? Check the captions etc for other instances of this if you agree...
  • Can you assure me that the footnotes are referenced?
Yes they are all referenced, the playoff ones are in the respective reference NapHit (talk) 19:38, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 73 has an incomplete date.

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed all your comments NapHit (talk) 19:38, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Comments

Otherwise sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I've removed the golfmajorchampionship ref, and replaced the antiqe golf scotland one, with an official site ref instead. NapHit (talk) 15:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Willie Park, Snr.'s article mentions a championship belt - was this awarded more than once? was it awarded together with the Claret Jug or instead of it?
The championship belt is mentioned in the lead NapHit (talk) 17:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lehman's not English.
  • The notes aren't referenced?

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:46, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments, they've been addressed NapHit (talk) 17:02, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing : is it "Snr", "Sr", "Snr." or "Sr."? Same for Jr. At least be consistent with the same person. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rectified this NapHit (talk) 17:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just move the Multiple champions section into the table. For example, Tiger Wood's last championship should look like this, "Tiger Woods (3)". If done that, I'll Support. -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 04:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather not, I think the table looks cluttered like that, and prefer the multiple champions table which is clear and easy to read, and it also saves users moving up and down the list to find when so and so won there second tournament. NapHit (talk) 14:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
May you please explain to me why it would look cluttered. You can also save more time than the Mulpitle champions by just sorting their names. Just please do this for a better WP:FL? criteria #4, Structure. -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 04:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is easier for the reader if it is in one table as the information is to hand, and they don't have to go searching up nd down the table, also I've made the table sortable as I think that was what you were suggesting above NapHit (talk) 15:50, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever than, I'll Support. -- K. Annoyomous24[c] 01:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SatyrTN comments
  • The sortability of the "Course" makes sense to me. The sortability of the "Location" less so. A suggestion is to use the {{sort}} function to sort that column by country & city, rather than sorting as free text.
  • Does the second column need a header? And I don't know MOS:FLAG, but that column may be in violation.
  • See if there are more pictures? Having them on the side there is wonderful, but having them run out (when you're scrolling down) is disappointing :)

I conditionally support this FLC. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've done everything you requested except for more pictures, which I think are unnecessary as there are more than enough pictures already, and I think they should only be within the champions header, Cheers NapHit (talk) 15:27, 25 September 2008 (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/List_of_The_Open_Championship_champions&oldid=1164846744"