Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of UN peacekeeping missions/archive1
List of UN peacekeeping missions[edit]
Self nomination. I listed this on PR, and after some good feedback, it's now quiet so I figured it was time for FLC. Rather than the long list of references for the missions' websites, I've integrated them into the table. It's comprehensive (verifiably so), useful, and visually appealing. --Dmcdevit 06:50, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Support Very nice. CheekyMonkey 12:35, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
- Support, interesting colour selection for the first sections of the table, but still a good list. Phoenix2 16:45, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry, I'm not good with that kind of thing. Go ahead and change it if you like another color better, I was just trying to differentiate between the two sections. --Dmcdevit 19:43, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Support =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:11, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Neutral The list is excellent in almost every respects. However, the formatting of the tables are somewhat confusing with regard to the horizontal lines going across them. This is apparent when more than one country is involved in a peacekeeping deployment. If this is fixed, I will change vote to support.--Sophitus 20:15, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean. I did that so that it would be less confusing. Are you saying you wouuld rather them on one line, or what? Sorry, could you be more specific as to what you mean by fix? --Dmcdevit·t 20:38, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Alright, for example, take the section for United Nations Aouzou Strip Observer Group. This is one mission, but there is a horizontal line going through the table that separates the Chad and Libya flags. Reasonable enough, but it also bisects the year and the title - "United Nations Aouzou Strip Observer Group". Perhaps I am nitpicking, but it seems that this line adds a little confusion and clutter to the tables. Does that make it clear? Let me reemphasize that the list is excellent otherwise and if you feel my suggestion is unreasonable, well, you already have enough support votes above.--Sophitus 18:15, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
- I'm sure it's not unreasonable, no matter how many support there are, I'm just trying to understand your comment. On my screen, the white line only bisects the columns that have more than one. The year column on the Aouzou strip row doesn't have a white line through it (because I used the "rowspan" table markup). You're saying you see it differently on your screen? Or am I just being totally stupid and not getting what you're saying? --Dmcdevit·t 01:13, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, I do see it differently on my screen, and suddenly it all becomes clear. The terrible browser I am using is messing something up. I should add that for the past several weeks I have been using someone else's computer, not my own. As such, I offer my Support--Sophitus 06:54, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
- I'm sure it's not unreasonable, no matter how many support there are, I'm just trying to understand your comment. On my screen, the white line only bisects the columns that have more than one. The year column on the Aouzou strip row doesn't have a white line through it (because I used the "rowspan" table markup). You're saying you see it differently on your screen? Or am I just being totally stupid and not getting what you're saying? --Dmcdevit·t 01:13, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Alright, for example, take the section for United Nations Aouzou Strip Observer Group. This is one mission, but there is a horizontal line going through the table that separates the Chad and Libya flags. Reasonable enough, but it also bisects the year and the title - "United Nations Aouzou Strip Observer Group". Perhaps I am nitpicking, but it seems that this line adds a little confusion and clutter to the tables. Does that make it clear? Let me reemphasize that the list is excellent otherwise and if you feel my suggestion is unreasonable, well, you already have enough support votes above.--Sophitus 18:15, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean. I did that so that it would be less confusing. Are you saying you wouuld rather them on one line, or what? Sorry, could you be more specific as to what you mean by fix? --Dmcdevit·t 20:38, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Support Dsmdgold 00:58, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Support -- ALoan (Talk) 19:33, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
- Support --Spangineer (háblame) 17:46, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
- Comment Perhaps United Nations can be abbreviated "UN" throughout the list? 63.98.108.24 14:47, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
- Support --Cyberjunkie | Talk 02:19, 21 July 2005 (UTC)