*:Hello @RunningTiger123, thanks for you comments. I've included references in the lead section. Regarding the tables, as you can see, there are a large number of them in this list. Could you please specify which table requires correction? 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 04:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- For starters, by my count, the tables for Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Punjab, Puducherry, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, and Uttar Pradesh lack references. (That would be over half of the states/union territories listed.) Other tables with sources seem questionable – for instance, the Andhra State Act 1953 does not provide information about the leaders who came after its passage. Formatting also needs to be fixed in essentially every table because they all vary so much and need to conform to a single standard. Things to consider:
- Should the tables have a visible header or not? (They need some form of header in every case; it can just be set for screen readers only.)
- Should consecutive terms following different elections be combined into one cell or split into separate rows?
- Should references go in the table header or in a column heading?
- In my opinion, it seems fine to have a reference attached to the table header. Still, I would like to know your view, if using 'blank' instead of 'No Image Available' is going to cause any trouble
- Should cells use "no image available" or just be left blank?
-
- For all of the items listed here, my point is solely that there needs to be consistency. It doesn't matter which approach you choose as long as you do it for every table. RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:39, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello @RunningTiger123, I have restructured the entire list with a new format and have utilized mostly different sources for each table. Please take a moment to review it and let me know if it's good to proceed. Thanks. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 16:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- The list still needs work but I think there's at least a clear sense of what a "standard" table looks like, so I'll offer a re-assessment within a few days. One quick note: The table caption should use proper formatting, not just a row spanning all columns at the top. See H:TC. (I was unclear about this by referring to captions as headers; my mistake.) RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you so much for the H:TC part. Corrections have been made. I will await your further notes. Thanks again. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 14:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- And so on. There's even more I could point out, but I think I've made my point for now. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- All your suggestions noted. Also, allow me couple days to make corrections recommended by you. Much thanks. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 03:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Re-review of the article after changes:
- "3 December, 2023" – no comma when using day-month-year format
- Fixed
- Link Himachal Pradesh like the other states
- Fixed
- Fixed
- No reason to add the abbreviation "UTs" if it's not used elsewhere – avoids awkward use of parentheses back-to-back
- Fixed
- "twenty-eight states and three union territories" → "twenty-eight states and of three union territories" – this clarifies that "each" earlier in the line doesn't apply to the union territories as there are more than three of them
- Fixed
- "state level" should not be hyphenated
- Fixed
- Citation needed for last sentence of second lead paragraph
- Fixed
- "Okram Ibobi Singh ... has been the longest-serving chief minister from the INC." – but the tables show Gegong Apang served longer?
- Fixed
- "longest serving Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh" – any reason why this state is more relevant than the others?
- DoneOther states included like Delhi, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh as well.
- All tables: Names should sort by surname/family name
- Fixed
- All tables: Portrait columns should not be sortable
- Fixed
- All tables: Since the term in office header spans three columns, sorting is only applied to the first column (start of term), and it is not possible to sort by the other two. It might be worth splitting into "Start of term", "End of term", and "Span" columns (or similar) if you want to be able to use all three in sorting. This is an optional change.
- Allow the list stick to its existing state please, if it's okay.
- All tables: Ordinals should have specified sort values so they sort in numeric order instead of alphabetical order (e.g., sort value for "First" should be "1"). Even ordinals in numeric form (e.g., "12th") need this since I suspect the MediaWiki software will not recognize that as a number.
- Fixed
- All tables: Add row scopes (see PresN's accessibility reviews throughout WP:FLC for more)
- Fixed
- Andhra Pradesh: Time span for Marri Chenna Reddy is incorrect (probably a bad parameter)
- Fixed
- Arunachal Pradesh: Add table caption; add sorting; why is Apang's term split into four "subterms" (not supported by source)? I think they should use a single start and end date while keeping separate rows for the assembly column. If they are to be listed this way, each subterm should have its own time span (same for Tuki)
- Done
- Assam: Add table caption; address Bordoloi in same way as Apang above
- Done
- Bihar: Use rowspan=2 instead of repeating name, portrait, constituency columns (like you do in other tables); fix format for Rai's start date; use years and days for Mishra's second term
- Fixed
- Chhattisgarh: Add table caption
- Done
- Delhi: Add table captions; "Office Abolished, 1956–93" is not an appropriate table caption; address Dikshit in same way as Apang
- Fixed Table caption added
That's plenty to start with. I would highly suggest you look for similar issues in other tables – in particular, confirm that all tables have captions, row scopes, and correct sorting, and that all tables address the "subterm" issue (in essence, each start and end date should have a span in years/days that is associated with only those dates, whether those dates covers all subterms or just one – let me know if more clarification is needed). RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello @RunningTiger123, I have endeavored to address all the issues that were raised. Could you please review it and advise on any further requirements. Thank you.
- Sorry for the delay, didn't get a ping (I think you have to sign your edit for it to ping a user). From the edits above, the remaining issues are:
- Row scopes still missing as best as I can tell
- Could you please highlight those tables specifically? It will help me resolve the issue quickly.
- Incorrect name sorting for third table for Andhra Pradesh
- Fixed
- Tuki's time span should be split in two, like Apang
- Fixed
- Incorrect name sorting for Assam and for Bihar
- Fixed
- I made several other edits to fix small typos and the like. I can look further once these tables are done. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @RunningTiger123 I have made the required changes. Please have a look.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 04:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, I wasn't super clear but some of the sorting errors are still there; K. Rosaiah is incorrect in the Andhra Pradesh table and Abdul Gafoor is incorrect in the Bihar table. For row scopes, those need to be added to all tables. (I also missed it earlier, but column scopes are also needed.) See MOS:DTT#Overview of basics – tables should have captions, row and column headers, and scopes for the row and column headers. Note that if a column header spans multiple columns, it needs
scope="colgroup" instead of scope="col" . (It's similar for rowgroup when row headers span multiple rows.) I'll provide an example of what this can look like for the Andhra Pradesh tables, just to prevent further confusion.
- Given the length that this review has lasted, I suggest that this review be closed as not promoted – to tweak a different saying, FLC is not cleanup, and lists that have a long way to go should be worked on through a separate process such as the article talk page or peer review. I would gladly re-review the list in a new FLC after it's been polished. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello @RunningTiger123 I would request not to close this review, rather allow me some time. I will make the necessary changes and also look into other FL for reference. I shall get back to you once I am done. Thank you for your patience. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 05:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello @RunningTiger123 I have made the required changes. Please take a look. If there are still many issues remaining, please close this review, and I will nominate at the appropriate time. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:39, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
|