Four articles, two featured, two good, seems to fit all criteria -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:38, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - good work! (I piped the lead) rst20xx (talk) 13:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - great job. Are you going to attempt the singles next to make the topic expand into her discography? Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:47, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, I'll have to see how dedicated I'm feeling - it's taken me since Christmas to get all the album articles up to scratch :-P -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:45, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, to call it "discography" you'd have to do the non-album singles and the EPs. The other songs can be subtopiced to their respective albums. (Although if you do get both the album subtopics up to scratch I would think you should probably merge all 3 topics because that would still only be 17ish articles) rst20xx (talk) 13:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Well done! —TheLeftorium 14:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This topic covers the known members of the missionary group that converted Anglo-Saxon England to Christianity. I believe it meets all the requirements. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looks good, but should there not be a category as well? I have expanded St Augustine Gospels recently, which seems of GA standard to me, and an obvious member of the topic. Johnbod (talk) 14:02, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. I don't play with categories. I wouldn't know how to start one if my life depended on it... Ealdgyth - Talk 14:04, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. First topic nomination. So I don't need it in the box if its in the title? Ealdgyth - Talk 16:04, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Correct (see the other FTCs on this page) so, the one in the box is the one to remove. Good luck with your first FT nom. CheekyMonkey (talk) 17:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Thanks for the help! Ealdgyth - Talk 18:04, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I did initially endorse this topic over at WT:FTQ but now I'm having slight second thoughts, in that what you've nominated above doesn't comprehensively cover the Gregorian mission (articles such as St Augustine's Abbey, Pope Gregory I, Æthelberht of Kent, Bertha of Kent and some other Kings are missing, as is St Augustine Gospels, as pointed out above), it only comprehensively covers the members of the Gregorian mission (well, those that merit articles!) Having said that, you do definitely IMO have a valid topic here - if you remove Gregorian mission from the topic, replace it as the lead article with List of members of the Gregorian mission and change the topic name to be "Members of the Gregorian mission", then you have an unequivocally comprehensive topic and would definitely have my full support - rst20xx (talk) 22:20, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okies, I've made the change... I should remove the FTC tag from Gregorian mission, right? Ealdgyth - Talk 23:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support! - and yes ;) rst20xx (talk) 23:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - not sure reduction in scope was quite necessary, but whatever. Fine as repurposed. Johnbod (talk) 03:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the kings and gospels could be used as a future expansion to the topic, but it's fine at the moment. Great work. BencherliteTalk 07:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice work, meets all the criterion as far as I can tell. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:53, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support! —Chris!ct 02:03, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this Lists of United States Naval Academy alumni because I think it meets the FT criteria. All five lists are Featured Lists. When I started on the main list, it was obvious it would be too big for one list, so it was suggested I sublist the larger topics in the list and make a FT out of it. So, after getting all five to FL, I would like to make them an FT. All images are free. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:23, 5 April 2009 (UTC)...PS All connected with a template at the bottom. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I saw these go through FLC, though unfortunately I didn't get a chance to review them. I think the articles are great though. Should legislators be renamed to lowercase (per astronaunts' FLC)? NuclearWarfare(Talk) 19:37, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
the legislators one is lower case. Where are you seeing it upper? — Rlevse • Talk • 19:40, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Huh. I thought I saw it above as uppercase, but apparently I misread. My apologies. NuclearWarfare(Talk) 19:44, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't misread it, I fixed it before you took a second look. :) Dabomb87 (talk) 19:48, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Congrats to Rlevse. Meets all criteria. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:38, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Note: I was heavily involved with the astronauts list before it was forked out to its own page. -MBK004 19:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - great work, well done. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:31, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question should the section heading (where you can click edit above) and the clickable link to the main list be "Lists" or List"? I wasn't sure what to do here since depending on whether you have the final "s" it would refer to the whole set of lists or to just the main list. Pls advise. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:37, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support: All articles are GA, still not sure on The Bellas being involved, but were valets/managers for the end of their existence, so that probably does mean they were apart of the team.--WillC 16:44, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - but could do with some kind of navbox - rst20xx (talk) 18:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There was a navbox, but it was deleted at WP:TfD, here, as it was deemed unnecessary. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 14:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though I agree that a navbox would have been nice. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:08, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- hopefully this doesn't come off as COI, but the topic is complete and meets the criteria. The navbox was deleted as a result of TfD, so it can't really be added, as it may end up at TfD again.--Truco 01:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The lack of a navbox is okay if TfD didn't want one, but I have one question. I notice that they both share Jillian Hall as a manager and that Mizanin only has Nikki Bella listed as a manager rather than both of the twins. Can you explain why the twins are being considered the manager of the team here? Thanks. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Actually, I never even noticed Jillian Hall was listed as a manager in Mike Mizanin. I've removed it, because I don't recall any instance of her managing him, and it's not mentioned in the article anywhere. She did manage John Hennigan, however, that was a few years before John Morrison and The Miz was formed, so it's not needed here. Secondly, I've added The Bella Twins to Mike Mizanin's managers section, as it is accurate, and I don't know why it wasn't there before. The Bella Twins were involved in a storyline, where they couldn't decide whether to date/manage Morrison and The Miz or The Colóns, so for a while they managed both. They both accompanied Morrison and The Miz to the ring on a few occasions, before The Bellas split, and Nikki went with Morrison and The Miz, and Brie went with The Colóns. I hope that explains it a little better. Sorry for the confusion. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 04:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
