Talk:Lists of Légion d'honneur recipients

message: 09-Feb-2008: In order to simplify searching of names, I have added the combined list into the top article, and expanded it to include over 720 names (many stating occupation) linked to articles.  The prior 26 separate sub-list articles still exist, but have not been individually updated.  The combined list has been quite easy to update, not only because of the single edit operation, but also because of moving names within the list, since determining last-name letter varies by culture or hyphenated last names.  -Wikid77 (talk) 12:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-added combined list

message: Traditionally, alphabetical sub-lists are divided into groups of letters (such as A-L, M-R, S-Z) rather than 26 separate letters. People are typically NEVER queued into 26 separate lines by name. Groups are usually split into roughly equal numbers, often having large numbers of "M" or "S" names, although that depends on cultural naming conventions, where "Smith" or "Perez" might be the most common name.  French names would be likely more common. I haven't taken the time to merge or update all names currently in the 26 sub-lists, nor have I even looked at all 26 sub-lists yet. I guess it would have been much easier as just 3 sub-lists. -Wikid77 (talk) 12:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Handling sub-lists

message: This whole list concept seems confused.
For starters, there is really no such thing as a "Légion d'honneur recipient" -- there are multiple ranks, and en.wikipedia.org should just follow fr.wikipedia.org in using multiple categories
* Chevalier de la Légion d'honneur
* Officier de la Légion d'honneur
* Commandeur  de la Légion d'honneur
* Grand officier de la Légion d'honneur
* Grand-croix de la Légion d'honneur
* Régiment décoré de la Légion d'honneur
* Ville décorée de la Légion d'honneur
But why even bother trying?  Perhaps the right thing is to simply link to the French catégories, which at least have a snowball's chance of being updated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.191.212.109 (talk) 09:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  According to http://legiondhonneur.fr/shared/en/en_ordresdecorations/en_fordredecoration.html, there are about 93,000 living persons who have been awarded some rank of this honor.  We certainly aren't going to list all of them, not to mention the much greater number of deceased members, and there is no explanation of how this very small subset of persons was selected to be listed.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 22:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Should be a category

message: I am proposing a change from the present unstructured and confusing "text-based list" structure to a new sortable "table" format, with columns for "Recipient Name", "Dates (born/died)", "General Work", "Legion of Honour Category (Year Awarded)", "Reason for the Award" etc. 
This "table" format change is designed to resolve a few of the intrinsic problems with the old "text-based list" format:- <BR>
<B>1) STANDARDISING DATA -</B> With a "table" format, editors will know which data is required and how to add that data. <BR>
<B>2) SORTABLE -</B> The "text-based lists" at the moment are only sorted in order of surname, however, with a sortable "table" format, entries can be easily be ordered into any category that is required, by any user needing that information. <BR>
<B>3) ENTRY DUPLICATION -</B> A sortable "table" format enables easy identification of duplicate entries, thus avoiding this continual problem. <BR>
<B>4) FULL DATA -</B> Allowing a column for each data category required means that information is unlikely to be omitted by editors adding new data, as they have to leave such required fields blank.  <BR>
In addition to this format change, I am also tightening up the inclusion of inline citations. This avoids the problems associated with vandals adding dubious names that might not be of people that have genuinely won such honours. 
I will be trialing a few pages, to test out the popularity of this new "table" format, to see if there is any opposition. If there is no negative feedback, I will convert the rest of the pages of the alphabet. The following is a running tally of this conversion process:- 
NEW FORMAT WITH DATA<BR>
Page "C"
Page "D"
Page "I"
Page "O"
Page "P"
Page "Q"
Page "T"
Page "U"
Page "V"
Page "X"
Page "Y"
Page "Z"
NEW FORMAT ONLY [not populated with data yet]<BR>
Page "A"
Page "B"
Page "E"
Page "F"
Page "G"
Page "H"
Page "J"
Page "K"
Page "L"
Page "M"
Page "N"
Page "R"
Page "S"
Page "W"
<B>OLD FORMAT</b>
NONE REMAINING
I would like to have feedback on the pages converted already, before I make the transition with all the pages of the alphabet. What does everyone think? Does this new format benefit these pages at all? Do not be shy in voicing your views. Let's discuss it! SMargan (talk) 09:45, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: CONVERSION UPDATE - I have had no feedback for a year since I first started making these changes, either positive or negative, so I am just going to make the transition to all the list pages into the new format over the next month. SMargan (talk) 13:40, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  CONVERSION FINALISED - The conversion is now complete, and there are no pages in this series that remain in the old non-table list format. The only task left now is to ensure that the data present in each table is fleshed out, so that all the columns are utalised. I will keep updating this running summary as each page's data is populated. SMargan (talk) 13:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Format for "Legion of Honour" Awards