Wikipedia:Featured list criteria/Comprehensive long lists

This page is for explanation of the problem only. Please keep debate on the talk page

History

This discussion has been prompted by problems that arose at FLC and FLRC, specifically at xxxxx and xxxxxx. The detailed debates can be viewed there. This page attempts to synthesise the major problems and propose potential remedies.

Problem in brief

WP:SIZE

To reach the levels of detail required by reviewers at FLC, an increasing amount of data is being required. With a list that in its comprehensive state may include (say) 3,000 items, each of which passes WP:N... problem...

Sortability

Erm.. difficulty of sorting long lists? Broken up lists etc

Greater and lesser "notability"

While (say) anyone who ever played a single game for Manchester United passes our notability criteria, he clearly is in a different league (sorry, pun) from other players who represented that club on hundreds of occasions, winning cups and international honours. The football WikiProject generally took a line at 100 appearances as being the bar for inclusion... special reasons for others'... arbitrary - bad, easily applicable - good, meant players most of interest in list and others covered in Cats...

Potential remedies

No remedy

In brief: The criteria are not broken. To be featured quality, it makes sense for a list to be 100% comprehensive for all notable constituents. Therefore, any list that omits a notable constituent is not comprehensive and therefore not of featured quality. Concerns over sortability, WP:SIZE etc should be overcome by finding some kind of accurate name, or, if that's not possible, perhaps editors should resign themselves to accepting that the list cannot ever reach featured status.

WikiProjects

Let them dictate how the FLs of their projects reach comprehensiveness?

Consensus

We would like to address this problem using consensus, rather than a vote. Please do discuss the issues at the talk page. Thank you.