Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/1st Academy Awards/archive1
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by Dabomb87 23:10, 23 November 2010 [1].
1st Academy Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): TbhotchTalk C. 22:39, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that meets the criteria, this is the first article that I nominate for something without a previous peer review. The article is the first award ceremony on either film award, so it is a bit important. Thanks for your comments. TbhotchTalk C. 22:39, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Ucucha 23:13, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Since these were the first awards, there should definitely be something on the background, (for example who came with the idea for starting them?). Nergaal (talk) 05:02, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Seems like MGM/AMPAS history should be added, doing... TbhotchTalk C. 05:33, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I did it. TbhotchTalk C. 02:25, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks good. But going through the list I saw that there are two awards retired after this. I think it would be worthwhile to have a Reception/Aftermath section also; it should discuss asides the two retired awards, how were the awards received by the public: did they care? was it prestigious enough that people demanded it the next year? what did the organizers learn from this first edition? etc. Nergaal (talk) 20:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Seems like the retired awards belong into 2nd Academy Awards and about reception, I will make a research, but I don't think that I would find something. TbhotchTalk C. 20:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I made a research, but I found no much information about the reception, there are books, but I cannot see them on Google books. TbhotchTalk C. 19:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks good. But going through the list I saw that there are two awards retired after this. I think it would be worthwhile to have a Reception/Aftermath section also; it should discuss asides the two retired awards, how were the awards received by the public: did they care? was it prestigious enough that people demanded it the next year? what did the organizers learn from this first edition? etc. Nergaal (talk) 20:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I did it. TbhotchTalk C. 02:25, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 15:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 20:07, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
Resolved comments from Courcelles 03:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
*Oppose Good list, but some problems that aren't commonly thought of, mainly with the images.
|
- I may or may not come back to the image issues. I haven't gotten a chance the last couple days, though, so it's not fair to the nominator to leave these out. (Besides, it would be better if/when I return to start fresh.) Courcelles 03:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
:*Entire first paragraph is unreferenced
Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
- Support Everything looks good, I'm not sure about image licensing, so I'll leave those to Courcelles. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:01, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Good work. Ready for promotion.--AlastorMoody (talk) 06:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - I have no problems with the list. Afro (Talk) 12:56, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:08, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments –
|
- Comment: Found no issues beyond what Giants found; will support when he acknowledges his concerns as addressed. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 18:18, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.