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. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 11 days, 4 support, 0 oppose. Promote. Juhachi 05:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This list is descriptive, fully sourced and meets the FL criteria, as well as the standards set by the featured List of WWE Champions. MarcK 10:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I was going to support, but I have two minor concerns.

1. Could the notes about when the title was vacated be modelled after the List of WWE Champions?
2. There are no sources in the lead. There should be at least one. Normally the lead not being perfectly sourced wouldn't matter to me, but since this is a list, the lead should be fully sourced.

Other than that, great job on the list, well sourced (for the list portion) and once those two concerns have been addressed, I'll support this page. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Y Both problems fixed. MarcK 01:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Then I Support this article. Good job! -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Are three columns necessary for the references, I would think two is fine. --Phoenix (talk) 03:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It has been fixed. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks, support now. --Phoenix (talk) 04:15, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• support Wow! ref in 3 figuers. Don't see that for lists very often. Buc 15:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Meh, they're all from the same website. "Wwe.com" as the sole reference would have effectively conveyed the same thing, but we all would have opposed on the grounds of no references. --Phoenix (talk) 19:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Suppport --十八 05:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]