Jump to content

User talk:RunningTiger123/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

94th Academy Awards FL Draft Update

Hi there,

Thank you for adding info regarding both the Will Smith-Chris Rock altercation and the controversy regarding the relegated tech awards. They were well written and concise unlike. I made a few adjustments myself. Notably, I've added another paragraph under Ceremony information describing COVID-19 health and safety protocols enacted during the ceremony (the third paragraph, FYI). I also added a sentence mentioning the moment of silence for Ukraine at the end of the In Memoriam section similar to the sentence describing the moment of silence for 9/11 victims during the 74th Academy Awards. Now, my only concern is what to do about the Oscars Fan Favorite and Cheer Moment (fake) award. While it was not an actual award, it was part of the festivies (sort of). I'm not sure how it should be addressed within the article. If you are willing to take a stab at it, feel free to do so (unless you feel it's unnecessary to mention it).

Also, there is a dispute about winners markup. Joeyconnick, thinks that there should not be a double dagger indicating winners since he claims its redundant due to it being listed first, but back when I did earlier Oscar ceremonies, I was told their had to be a markup for winners listed in tables other than bold and listed first due to Manual of Style standards and accessibility concerns for visually impaired readers. I really don't want to get into an edit war, but I want this list promoted to FL.

Anyways, I'm surprised we were able to report on this very tumultuous ceremony in a fairly neutral and objective manner. Thanks for your help. As always, the draft is listed under User:Birdienest81/sandbox thirty-three.

--Birdienest81talk 11:35, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: Thanks for the feedback. I'll look into the other sections later. For the daggers, I think they are necessary because some years may have ties, so the first film listed wouldn't be the only winner. Even if a year doesn't have a tie, the dagger should still be there so a reader using a screen reader would know there wasn't a tie. RunningTiger123 (talk) 12:11, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: I've finished some more revisions, including adding a short-ish paragraph for the "Oscars Fan Favorite" and updating some sources. At this point, I'm pretty happy with where it's at, but I don't know how you're feeling about it. Feel free to keep making tweaks to it until you're happy. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
@RunningTiger123:: Actually, it looks perfect. I'm honestly fine with how it looks since it covers all the basic and important information of this awards annal. I'll probably just add alt captions to the photos and double check for grammatical or spelling. My only concern is how to convinve Joeyconnick to not mess with the double daggers since it's supposed to be there for Accessibility purposes.
Oh, I'll probably take a look at your most recent FLC for the 59th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards by at least tomorrow. Also, if you have any questions or if you need me to look up citations for the 74th Primetime Emmy Awards, feel free to give me a ping.
--Birdienest81talk 04:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

74th Primetime Emmys host and venue info

Hi there,

With the announcement that Saturday Night Live comedian Kenan Thompson was selected to host this year's Primetime Emmy ceremony, I found some more information that may expound the response for Kenan himself and also more conformation that the ceremony will return to the Microsoft Theater (at least for now).

Hope this helps.

-- Birdienest81talk 00:12, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Tonight Show conflict GAN

Hello RunningTiger123, first off I just wanted to say thank you for starting the GAN review of 2010 Tonight Show conflict. I just wanted to give you a heads up that I might be a little delayed in responding to to your review points. I'll be traveling and might not have access to the internet. Just wanted to give you a heads up, thank you again. -- LuK3 (Talk) 11:09, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of 59th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards

Congratulations, RunningTiger123! The list you nominated, 59th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Giants2008 (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

74th Primetime Emmys (Main Ceremony and Creative) and 94th Academy Awards FLC

Hi there,

I've gotten more articles about last night's Creative Arts Emmy Awards and the Main Ceremony scheduled for next week. This time it's regarding COVID-19 protocols. According to this article, proof of negative COVID test is required for all attendees and production crew. Futhermore, there will be 94 tables on the main area closest to the stage to enforce social distancing due to showbiz guild protocols (similar to this year's Oscars). No masks are required for attendees, but production crew must wear one (Ironically, there was supposedly a masking rule at the Oscars for attendees sitting on the mezzanine in the back and those sitting on the balconies on the side, but apparently according to this photo authorized by AMPAS, no one in the mezzazine or balcony is wearing one—see top left of photo. Oh, well. I’m personally don’t wear masks since I got vaccinated unless required to and tend to avoid said places unless necessary like the doctor).

Oh, also, the 94th Oscars lost all three categories it was nominated for at the Creative Arts Emmys. I don't know how you want to address that. I'm not sure where I can find an article proving it. The official Television Academy list "The Oscars" for all nominations for every show since 2013. So it mucks up the count for each individual ceremony since 2013.

Anyways, if you can ask more folks to review the FLC for the 2022 Oscars, that would be swell. In the meantime, hope these nuggets help with the writing for the 74th Primetime Emmys.

-- Birdienest81talk 09:04, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 74th Primetime Emmy Awards

On 17 September 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 74th Primetime Emmy Awards, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 08:17, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Successful FLC

Way to go on getting this promoted! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:26, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of 94th Academy Awards

Congratulations, RunningTiger123! The list you nominated, 94th Academy Awards, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

FAC review needed

Hi, RunningTiger123. Last year you reviewed List of career achievements by Yuzuru Hanyu for FL. Now the sister article Yuzuru Hanyu Olympic seasons is under review as FAC. So, I'd like to invite you to review it if you're interested and have time for it. We would really appreciate it. Regards. - Yolo4A4Lo (talk) 01:09, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

List of accolades received by CODA (2021 film) FLC and 74th Primetime Emmy Awards suggestions/advice/help

Hi there,

I was wondering if you could proofread List of accolades received by CODA (2021 film) for featured list promotion? I would appreciate the feedback.

Also, do you need me to research anything or add something to the 74th Primetime Emmy Awards so that it will be ready for a featured list candidacy? I will gladly look up information for you. If you want, you may credit me as co-nominator in the event you nominate the list for featured list nomination. I don't plan to nominate anything myself until maybe November.

--Birdienest81talk 20:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: Since I did some work on the CODA list before its promotion and it seems to be doing okay at the moment, I'm going to stay away from reviewing it for the time being – while not strictly disallowed, I think it's best for reviews to come from uninvolved users. (And don't worry about nominating it without me, I'd forgotten about it for a while.) As to the Emmys article, I'm waiting to get a little further from the event before pursuing FLC, just so it's sure to be stable. I'll probably start with the Creative Arts ceremony once I have time since it's more straightforward. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:32, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, RunningTiger123. I'm just posting to let you know that 59th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for January 30. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 22:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Full names of characters on Award nominations

Hi, as the names of characters on Award ceremonies must use full names of characters. Examples: Ruby "Rue" Bennett and Siobhan "Shiv" Roy, both HBO characters. CastJared (talk) 07:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@CastJared: Why do those articles have to use full names? Is there some sort of policy or guideline to support that? If not, I would argue it is more important to stick with what the sources state. Otherwise, how would we ensure that any one name is "correct"? (For instance, is Nicholas Braun's character on Succession Greg Hirsch, Gregory Hirsch, or Gregory "Greg" Hirsch? Without a source to specify otherwise, any of those is a "correct" full name.) RunningTiger123 (talk) 14:16, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Update: Per WP:BRD, I have reverted the pages to how they were before the changes started. RunningTiger123 (talk) 14:45, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
I didn't realize that I saw that on their TV series articles, "Succession" and "Euphoria", which they have characters' full names with nicknames used. CastJared (talk) 15:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
@CastJared: Isn't that essentially citing another Wikipedia article? That's generally discouraged since there is no good way to ensure reliability (see WP:CIRCULAR). RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:13, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Somewhere Else (The Good Place)

On 22 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Somewhere Else (The Good Place), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ted Danson's role in "Somewhere Else", an episode of The Good Place, featured a nod to his previous role as a bartender? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Somewhere Else (The Good Place). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Somewhere Else (The Good Place)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of 74th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards

Congratulations, RunningTiger123! The list you nominated, 74th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Euphoria

Hi, the 54th NAACP Image Awards are about to approach, and I think this accolades table needs to be updated. CastJared (talk) 06:37, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

@CastJared: Are there any particular issues? If not, it should just be a case of copying the formatting from other awards for the new awards. RunningTiger123 (talk) 06:43, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, gonna edit the table for this. CastJared (talk) 06:47, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Update: Already edited by myself. CastJared (talk) 07:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Ozark

This article is still out of date and doesn't have 2023 awards involved. CastJared (talk) 13:20, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

95th Academy Awards and potential "In the News..."/Featured List status

Hi there,

As you probably heard the 95th Academy Awards ceremony is scheduled to air this upcoming Sunday night. One of the potential issues I am concerned with if the article will be good enough to be posted on the Main Page's "In the News..." section. At the moment, the article for the 2023 broadcast is littered with facts/trivia that is mostly uncited with reliable sources. I try to trim down on such facts that can be proven with reliable sources and try to keep that section tight and focused as possible. For example, I try to avoid facts that say "X person/film is the 16th overall person/film to achieve this distinction" unless the achievement has not occurred in a considerable amount of time. Also, the Andrea Riseborough nomination section seems bloated and appears to not be objective/neutral point of view. I tend to avoid "controversies" based on "snubs" because feedback from previous ceremony lists I have nominated for featured list status have indicated to make sure the article is maintaining a neutral point of view since there will always be people who complain that their favorite(s) got unfairly "snubbed." Also, I don't want the page to sound like a gossip article. So that's my dilemma at the moment.

In preparation, I've been working on a potential FLC-ready version of the awards on this sandbox page. I hope to one day transfer the content onto the actual article when it's ready. I usually wait until around July so as not to get into an edit war. If you have any advice regarding the articles, you can ping me back or reply below. I'll see if I can review the 74th Primetime Emmy Awards for featured list promotion around next week when I have more time. Thanks.

--Birdienest81talk 02:14, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: Thanks for the heads up – I tagged a bunch of the trivia as "citation needed" a few weeks ago in the hopes that either (a) sources would be added or (b) the trivia would be removed. I can take a look this evening and try to parse it down. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: Okay, I've trimmed some of the fat from the trivia section. Some of the trivia could probably be trimmed further, but the key thing is that everything is sourced now (which is key for ITN). As to the Riseborough controversy, it doesn't actually seem too bad – there's probably some trimming that could also be done there, but I think it merits some discussion because it dominated Oscars talk for a while. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

74th Primetime Emmy Awards FLC and other stuff I'm up to...

Hi there,

As promised, I have reviewed the 74th Primetime Emmy Awards for featured list promotion. Also, thank you for slightly keeping an eye on 95th Academy Awards. I plan to cleanup the list over the next few months before submitting it for FLC on July 18. I am waiting for the list to become stable as to not instigate an edit war and also so I can gather the necessary information to completely report about the ceremony and the awards. I might consider also submitting accolades lists for the following:

List Target date for FLC submission
2022 Winter Olympics medal table March 27, 2023
List of accolades received by Dune (2021 film) May 4, 2023
95th Academy Awards July 18, 2023
List of accolades received by Everything Everywhere All at Once September 18, 2023
List of accolades received by Parasite October 13, 2023
List of accolades received by The Revenant November 27, 2023
54th Academy Awards February 3, 2024
50th Academy Awards February 24, 2024
1996 Summer Olympics medal table March 25, 2024
55th Academy Awards May 21, 2024
96th Academy Awards July 29, 2024
57th Academy Awards February 6, 2025

Of course everything is subject to change. So that's what I have been planning so far.

--Birdienest81talk 05:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

96th Academy Awards

Hi there again,

I forgot. Somebody has started the article for 96th Academy Awards, but the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has not yet announced the date yet for those awards even though they had already announced some rule changes regarding nominees and diversity/inclusion standards since June 2020. Should that article be deleted until the Academy has officially announced a date for the ceremony?

--Birdienest81talk 06:12, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: The current article is weak since the information is already covered at Academy Award for Best Picture, but deletion is probably a bit extreme; a redirect is preferable, so the current content can easily be restored later. I'll adjust the page shortly. RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:25, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of 74th Primetime Emmy Awards

Congratulations, RunningTiger123! The list you nominated, 74th Primetime Emmy Awards, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

2022 Winter Olympics medal table FLC

Hi there,

I was wondering if you could proofread 2022 Winter Olympics medal table for its impending featured list promotion? I would appreciate the feedback. --Birdienest81talk 18:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

96th Academy Awards date for 2024 and other things

Hi there,

It was announced that the 96th Academy Awards will be televised on March 10, 2024, with the corresponding nominations announced on January 23. Is it possible to restore the article from the redirect now that the dates have been revealed?

Also, if you have time, could you rewrite the Andrea Risenborough controversy section for the 95th Academy Awards since you think it still should be addressed? I will give you credit when the list gets nominated for featured list status. I plan to start doing more improvements to the ceremony list in June.

--Birdienest81talk 07:57, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: Sorry for the delay, I recently updated the section to trim some unnecessary words/details. Is there a sandbox where you're working on the full article's updates? I'd be happy to look over that as well if you want. RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:00, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
@RunningTiger123: Hi there,
I apologize for being so late to respond to you given when you commented it was close to me and my mom's birthday. Also, I had involved in a car accident with someone rear-ending me. So I had to do business with the insurance company and body shop.
As promised, I have made one comment on your FLC nomination of List of awards and nominations received by Modern Family. Good job.
In regards to the 95th Academy Awards and its upcoming FLC (aiming for July 18), I have been making changes to the article over at User:Birdienest81/sandbox twenty-eight. I was wondering if you could copyedit or make revisions to the Andrea Riseborough nominations controversy section since I feel that you are better equipped to handle this type of situation. Also feel free to make any corrections if you see any.
I'm thinking of also doing a 9/11 related FLC by suprucing up an article given that the anniversary falls on Monday and I feel that the FLC on that day should be related to that event.
--Birdienest81talk 11:52, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of List of awards and nominations received by Modern Family

Congratulations, RunningTiger123! The list you nominated, List of awards and nominations received by Modern Family, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of 95th Academy Awards

Congratulations, RunningTiger123! The list you nominated, 95th Academy Awards, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Janet(s)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 6 December 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/December 2023. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 19:46, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Online Safety Act

Hi. You have made a number of edits to this article - once to suggest OR and once to delete content. I'm assuming good faith, and asking that you discuss any further edits on the talk page first before making any further edits. The issue here is simple but unusual. This article page - up until 26th October related to the Online Safety Bill - draft legislation. This article was well source. However, on the 26th, according to sources, the Bill received royal assent, making it current law, ie an Act. Normally when this is the came the text of the Act is published on leglasation.gov.uk at the same time as royal assent. For some reason - unknown - this has not happened. Similarly, on Wikipedia articles, when the articles relates to an Act there's always an external link and/or citations to the text of the Act. In this case, there has resulted in a situaiton where an article about the Online Safety Act is actually very thinly and inadequately supported by sources, since nearly all the sources relate to the draft Bill. The sources that do relate to the Act do so only in a thin and passing manner and only repeat the Government press release announcement. This source is flawed since is does not provide any evidence of the text of the Act. This is a highly unusual situation where a potential front page Wiki article is underpinned almost entirely by a Government announcement, and no substance. I would image that this situtation would be short lived and that the text of the Act will be published shortly. Until then, however, I think it would be prudent to keep this clarification paragraph. Otherwise, the Wikipedia article would not only be inaccurate, but could lead to Wikipedia looking less than encyclopaedic and impartial if the situation turns out not to be short lived for any reason. I will reprint this on the article's talk page, please do discuss further. Thanks for your understanding. Tonyinman (talk) 22:19, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tonyinman: If the situation is indeed so unusual, it would be covered in secondary sources. We should not try to draw conclusions about whether this is unusual. I ultimately removed the paragraph because it was inappropriate synthesis – pointing out the lack of publication in a primary source and pointing to a different primary source relating to when publication should occur to conclude on your own that something is unusual is basically the definition of inappropriate synthesis. I'll leave a message on the article talk page for others to weigh in. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Noted. However, be aware that, in the event that this is unsual, the edit history is public - as it should be. Tonyinman (talk) 23:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
@Tonyinman: What do you mean by the edit history is public - as it should be? That comes across as intimidating to me. If I'm wrong and other sources point it out as unusual then I'll fully support a mention of that – no need to cast aspersions. RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Simply a factual comment. No intimidation intended and no aspersions cast. Tonyinman (talk) 04:18, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on List of University of Texas at Austin presidents

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page List of University of Texas at Austin presidents, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:50, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

TFA

Thank you today for Janet(s), your first FA, introduced in 2021: "This article is about an episode of the television series The Good Place and is probably most notable for D'Arcy Carden's multiple roles, though it also contains several major plot reveals. I got this to GA status last year but have made major additions since then to fully cover production, analysis, and critical reviews, and I now hope to make this my first FA."! - enjoy your first TFA day! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Happy December 9th!


Season's Greetings!


I've revamped "Abed's Uncontrollable Christmas" and nominated for GA. Merry Christmas! — Bilorv (talk) 23:57, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bilorv: Great to hear! I had thought about rewriting in the past and even compiled some sources for it, but now that you've rewritten it, I might take a look for its GA review (unless you'd like a less involved set of eyes). RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:02, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Nice source list—I've added NY Daily News. Let me know if you can access the paywalled WSJ article as that could be valuable to add. If you're interested, it'd be great to have you take the GA review! — Bilorv (talk) 10:37, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:02, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Upcoming projects

Hi there,

I had taken a break due to other commitments, but I am ready to slowly return to editing and improving lists on Wikipedia. Right now I am planning to submit 54th Academy Awards for FLC on February 3, as I have completed overhauling that article. Meanwhile, I need help with 50th Academy Awards, because I am wondering how to parse down the section regarding the controversy surrounding Vanessa Redgrave's Oscar acceptance speech. You can view the improvements I am making to the ceremony article in this sandbox. If you feel like you can rewrite that entire section, you make take a stab at it.

Also, the 96th Academy Awards is coming up. I am also planning to turn it into an featured list in July. Can you help me maintain that article so that it may be posted in the "In the news" section of the Main Page after the ceremony has concluded? Again, I would greatly appreciate your help. I will give you credit for both the 50th and 96th ceremonies when nominated if you can help out.

Meanwhile this is my tentative work schedule which is subject to change.

List Target date for FLC submission
54th Academy Awards February 3, 2024
50th Academy Awards February 24, 2024
1996 Summer Olympics medal table March 25, 2024
55th Academy Awards May 21, 2024
96th Academy Awards July 29, 2024
List of accolades received by Oppenheimer (film) circa September 11, 2024
57th Academy Awards February 6, 2025

There are also other lists/articles I am considering improving down the road:

So that is what I'm planning to do. Hope you can help me first with the 50th Academy Awards.

--Birdienest81talk 08:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: I'd be happy to look over some of those lists, particularly the 50th Academy Awards. I don't want to overcommit to anything right now because I'd like to focus on the 75th Primetime Emmy Awards once that list stabilizes after Monday, but I'll see where I can help. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
@RunningTiger123: That's totally fine. In fact, I am willing to help you a little bit on improving the 75th Primetime Emmy Awards in terms of facts, reviews, and other important info. Bear in mind, I have some computer issue and may not respond swiftly.
--Birdienest81talk 11:01, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

54th Academy Awards FLC and help with 75th Primetime Emmy Awards

Hi there,

I was wondering if you could proofread the 54th Academy Awards for featured list consideration? I would appreciate the help. Also, I could help you with finishing up the 75th Primetime Emmy Awards for featured list consideration down the road. I could help you find reviews and other facts about the winners.

--Birdienest81talk 08:12, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Renominated Critical Role (campaign two) to FLC

I couldn't find any guidance on pinging reviewers from old nominations but I wanted to let you know that I renominated Critical Role (campaign two) to FLC. In the last round, I didn't have time to incorporate all your suggestions before the nomination closed. The major outstanding concern (plural verbs) was mostly addressed by another editor & I just fixed the ones they missed that were on your list. If you have time to take a look at the new nomination, that would be awesome. Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

  • Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
  • Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
  • Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
  • Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
  • Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
  • Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
  • Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
  • Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
  • Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
  • Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
  • Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
  • Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
  • Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
  • Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
  • Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
  • Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
  • Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, RunningTiger123. I'm just posting to let you know that List of awards and nominations received by Friends – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for May 6. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 20:51, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK for William Lambdin Prather

On 21 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article William Lambdin Prather, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that William Lambdin Prather introduced the phrase "the eyes of Texas are upon you", which was incorporated into the school song of the University of Texas at Austin? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/William Lambdin Prather. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, William Lambdin Prather), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of List of University of Texas at Austin presidents

Congratulations, RunningTiger123! The list you nominated, List of University of Texas at Austin presidents, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

HI there,

I have recently transferred an updated version of the 96th Academy Awards from User:Birdienest81/sandbox twenty-nine. I have been working on the article slowly but steadily since May 22. I was not able to do so earlier because I had intermittent computer problems for the first five months of 2024, but now my computer is working to the point I can do substantial amounts of editing. The original pre-copy-edited version of the article is still kept on over at User:Birdienest81/sandbox seventeen. It is of my understanding that this Oscar ceremony had been a previously failed FLC back in March because the original nominator did not make any significant changes to improve the article as suggested by commentators. I was going to help but as I said, my computer kept freezing. And the original nominator all but abandoned the nomination. So I took it upon myself to improve the article. Hence I found many of the citations did not support the statements that were being made, and there were no alt text for the pictures. So I made a complete overhaul of it.

Now, is it possible that you could help me add some finishing touches particularly with regards to Jonathan Glazer's speech and the critical reviews. For Glazer's speech, I followed how I wrote the description of Michael Moore's speech at the 75th Academy Awards and the ensuing reaction. I was wondering if there is something missing or is it adequate enough. Also almost all of the critical reviews of the ceremony were on the positive side. I cannot find a single negative review from a reliable source. If you could help me finish the improvements to this article, I'll promise to name you as a co-nominator when the article will be submitted for FLC. I am aiming for a July 29th submission for FLC. I surely would appreciate the help.

--Birdienest81talk 07:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: I think both of these issues would be fixed by returning the "Critical reviews" section to be more in line with how it was during the first FLC (where it was just "Reception"). As I noted then, I thought it did a good job capturing the specific parts of the ceremony that drew positive and negative responses, and it's also much more engaging. This would also be a good place to put Glazer's speech – it drew a response, but the response was basically "some people supported it and some people didn't", which easily fits into a single paragraph, and I don't think that warrants its own section.
I think some of the issues here are a side effect of an overly formulaic approach to writing these sections. Please don't take this personally, but I feel like every ceremony's reception section has become exactly one paragraph of positive reviews and one paragraph of negative reviews, with a few fairly generic quotes in each paragraph. We shouldn't promote a false balance – based on Rotten Tomatoes, the clear majority of reviews were positive, so we shouldn't go scrounging for negative reviews. It's also really difficult to judge the overall reception from year to year when every year looks so similar. The 75th ceremony is a good example of the pitfalls; it says it received a positive reception from most media publications but has a paragraph for negative reviews that is just as long, the quotes are generic (there were several heartfelt and memorable moments – like what?), and I'm left with no real impression of what it was actually like.
Again, I think returning to the old section would fix this; since very few reviews are entirely positive or entirely negative, you could talk about the specific parts critics liked and didn't like instead of boiling their responses down to a single sentence each, making the entire thing much more engaging and resolving the "issue" of not having many overall negative reviews. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:37, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
@RunningTiger123: Okay, so I moved the text for Glazer's speech back into the Critical reviews sections now renamed "Reviews and reception". I renamed the section because come July 17th, I'm pretty sure the 76th Primetime Emmy Awards and its corresponding Creative Arts Awards will nominate the Oscar ceremony for a few awards and this is probably more fitting section rather than the ratings part.
I remain very wary about using Rotten Tomatoes (although I do agree that almost all the reviews for this ceremony are pretty much positive on the whole with only a few quibbles on some elements). As I have stated before, the reviews page for the 72nd Academy Awards on Rotten Tomatoes is dubious regarding its critics score because it most likely hasn't accounted for several other reviews for newspapers/news outlets that don't have archive on Newspapers.com for older ceremonies. I know for a fact that there were more positive reviews for the 72nd ceremony as promoted in the book Inside Oscar 2 by Damien Bona. My fear is that using Rotten Tomatoes now in an Oscar ceremony will lead to pretty much every ceremony including much older ones from the 1980s and 1990s using the score even though they very well be skewed toward negative. Birdienest81talk 10:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
You don't have to incorporate the Rotten Tomatoes score; you could just use it to support an assertion that reviews were generally positive. (See 74th Primetime Emmy Awards#Critical reviews and viewership for an example.) However, from this edit request, it seems other editors may have a different perspective. I wouldn't get worked up about a purely hypothetical addition of RT scores to old ceremonies; if that happens, have a conversation at the relevant talk page and explain your concerns. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
@Birdienest81: forgot to ping you for my reply. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:02, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Controversies on Oscar being included in the lead section

I decided to describe another dilemma regarding Oscar ceremony articles and featured list status. Well last year, someone out a brief description regarding the Chris Rock–Will Smith slapping incident toward the end of the intro, I tried to remove because I thought it would be overblowing the controversy more than it was, but was unsuccessful. The following year, I get feedback regarding my nomination of the 50th Academy Awards ceremony regarding FLC promotion. It said, "It summarizes the winners but there is nothing about Redgrave's speech and the reception.". I wasn't able to address that concern and the others because of computer problems, and therefore my FLC for the 50th Academy Awards failed. I feel that this is connected to the 94th Oscars intro because in hindsight the person who wrote the brief blurb about "The Slap" was right because that incident is so inseparable from that particular ceremony. I think though that the mention of that incident should be mentioned before the statement regarding the viewership figures since I think the ratings are the last thing the article mentions about the ceremony and the ratings are pretty much the final verdict. I think this could also be applied to the 61st Academy Awards which had the infamously panned Rob Lowe-Snow White opening number.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think every controversy should be brought up. Not all controversies or incidents during are of the same weight as others, but I hope you understand where I am getting at. Birdienest81talk 10:25, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

@Birdienest81: MOS:LEADREL says emphasis given to material should reflect its relative importance to the subject, according to published reliable sources. For an awards ceremony, it makes sense to emphasize basic ceremony information and the winners, as that receives the most coverage. Reviews and controversies also receive coverage, but not nearly as much (in most cases – the Rock–Smith incident being a notable exception), so I think it's perfectly fine to omit that from the lead. I recognize this may seem opposed to summary style, but if we made sure the length of each section reflected its relative coverage, we'd have to repeat the winners and nominees several times – obviously there's a limited amount of information that should go in that section regardless of depth of coverage, so the relationship between the length of each section and the section's relative importance breaks down. The comments at the 50th ceremony's FLC relied on a more straightforward application of summary style, which isn't wrong per se, but I think omitting reviews and controversies is generally better. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:26, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

96th Academy Awards FLC

Hi there,

I have finally nominated the 96th Academy Awards for featured list consideration. Hopefully it is more successful than the first one. Birdienest81talk 09:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Academy Awards

Hi,there. I've see that you have add the new Tagged quote. The oscars awarded for film industry in all the world, the winners and nominees come from international, seeing: https://variety.com/2024/awards/awards/oscars-global-filmmakers-1235929184/. Isn't any problems? Thanks. Stevencocoboy (talk) 08:14, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

@Stevencocoboy: The issue is that a quote is used, but that quote is not used in any of the cited references and I can't find the quote via a Google search. If you're not directly quoting someone, you shouldn't use quotation marks, as it gives the wrong impression about who said it (i.e., you're implying that the wording is based on an authoritative source when it's really an original comment). If you can't find the source for that quote, it should be removed and the previous wording restored for now. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:46, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

76th Primetime Emmys Awards potential "In the News" and FLC

Hi there,

The 76th Primetime Emmy Awards are scheduled to be broadcast tonight. I attempted to begin work on preparing the article eligible for In the News consideration and ultimately featured list promotion (which I plan to nominate it on October 10 or 19). I was wondering if you could help me with expanding the article because I know you promoted three Primetime Emmy ceremonies and their respective Creative Arts portions to FL. I am currently working on List of accolades received by Oppenheimer (film) as a featured list candidate. Birdienest81talk 07:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

@Birdienest81: I can't help too much today or this week for ITN consideration, but I'd be happy to help with more work to get it up to FLC standards after that. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: Discussion-only period now open for review

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

HI there,

I've recently rewritten and expanded sections of the 76th Primetime Emmy Awards article in preparation of nominating the list for featured list promotion on October 10 or 19. Among the changes that I've made:

  • A completely revised introduction that now includes a summary of the winners.
  • Inclusion of more facts and historic firsts from the nominees, programs, and networks proceeding the tables.
  • Revised total awards won tally by network that includes wins from the Creative Arts and Main Ceremony.
  • References for the presenters and they are now bundled into one at the top of the section.
  • Details of production of ceremony such as musical director, choice to group presenters by character archetype, etc.
  • Critics reviews of the program.
  • Ratings denoting a slight increase from 6.87 to 6.9 million as denoted by Programming Insider (it reads 6.897, so I rounded up the figure and used a better citation, in this case Reuters).

That's what I have so far. I'm planning to include maybe three more reviews. I've followed how you did it according previous Primetime Emmy ceremony lists that were promoted to FL. As for rule changes, there doesn't seem to be anything that affects the main telecast portion of the awards since most of the changes seem to affect the craft categories handed out during the Creative Arts portion. The only thing affecting both ceremonies is probably the switching of Variety Live Special, Writing for a Variety Special, and Writing got a Variety Series which was actually agreed upon two years ago as part of a rotation agreement with the WGA. If you see anything urgent feel free to give me feedback or you can make edits to the list yourself. Birdienest81talk 21:17, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

@Birdienest81: I'll make sure to look over the article and make updates as needed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:23, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
@RunningTiger123: Alright, I've added three more critics reviews of the ceremony and noted the category switching. I was wondering if I should mention under the "Winners and nominees" section about Pasek and Paul joining the List of EGOT winners since they won in a category presented at the Creative Arts ceremony a week before the main broadcast? Other than that, I think all the bases have been covered. If you want to try to revised or change, feel free to do so (I think I may need help on the critical reviews section). I plan to co-nominate with you this list on October 10 or 19. Birdienest81talk 18:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Infobox awards list § Totals should be avoided

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox awards list § Totals should be avoided. Since you've participated in the discussion previously, and a mock-up of Template:infobox_awards_list without the awards totals has been created, it would be good to get your opinion again. Sgubaldo (talk) 12:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Possible collaboration

Following the completion of several other projects I wanted to set myself a semi impossible task in a How I Met Your Mother GT. Given that there are over 200 episodes and most of them need to be burnt to the ground I was looking into reaching out to a few fellow editors who may perchance be interested in co-nominating a few of those articles? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 23:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

@OlifanofmrTennant: It's been a little bit since I've watched the show and I'm currently starting a different task, but I'd be happy to chip in if I have some time. Do you have any resources that could help fill out the articles? Reviews will probably be easy enough to find, but I suspect production sections will be more difficult, especially for a multi-cam sitcom where production is less intricate. I would recommend researching if there are any guides to the show – I know that's how The X-Files has a lot of episode GAs. DVD commentaries have also been used, but I suspect that using them for entire sections nowadays would be rejected as too much primary sourcing. RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Unfortuantly no but the popularity of the show and the creators did enjoy interviews means there are am abundance of sources of varying quality. There are some pretty solid dvd extras Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 01:16, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
@OlifanofmrTennant: Sounds fine by me. I would suggest starting with season premieres and finales as those generally get better coverage, and working from there based on how sourcing looks. Just my two cents. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:56, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Given that the season 1 article for HIMYM is FLC I would be willing to help you fix it up. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
@OlifanofmrTennant: Also fine by me, though to be clear, the likeliest course of action would be to nominate the list at GAN, not bring it back to FL standards. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
I understand Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RunningTiger123/Archive_2&oldid=1254899531"