Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/65th Academy Awards/archive1

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 Giants2008 03:14, 16 November 2015 [1].

65th Academy Awards

Featured list candidates/65th Academy Awards/archive1

Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk) 07:06, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating the 1993 Oscars for featured list because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I also followed how the 1929, 1987, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 were written. Please note that the winners are both indicated with boldface text AND double daggers. This was agreed upon based on a resolution regarding accessbility taken up at the FL nomination for the 2015 Oscars. Birdienest81 (talk) 07:06, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from jimknut

Resolved comments from Jimknut (talk) 21:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

* The last line of the intro: "The telecast garnered almost 46 million viewers in the United States." Is there a citation for this? Jimknut (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimknut: Done: Added citation which indicates the viewership figuers It reads "1993 31.2 51 45.7 Unforgiven" with the 45.7 representing the total average viewership. As per convention in intros, the figures are rounded to the nearest whole number.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 05:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Looks good. Jimknut (talk) 21:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support – I am not sure when was the last time I supported a nomination without comments. Top work; engaging prose, brilliant references and plenty of content. However, I do have a minor comment: can you rephrase the first sentence of the ceremony information section as it reads a bit odd, especially "riding on the success". Also, it would be pretty good if you change "last year's ceremony" to something like "preceding ceremony" or previous. -- Frankie _talk 12:32, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: Done: Changed "Riding of the" to simply "After", and changed "last" to "previous". Thanks for the support.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 23:27, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from SNUGGUMS

Only two things from me:

"Ratings and reception" seems rather short for its own subsection, I'd probably move the reviews to here so it has a more reasonably large amount of text
In "see also", only List of submissions to the 65th Academy Awards for Best Foreign Language Film has any relevance to this article; remove all the others

Outstanding work overall. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:03, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SNUGGUMS: Done: Merged the ratings section with the reviews. Removed other awards in the "See Also" section.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 03:53, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can now gladly support this for FL. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:57, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SNUGGUMS: Thank you so much!

--Birdienest81 (talk) 04:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from - Vivvt (Talk) 08:14, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Vivvt

"Three weeks earlier, in a ceremony held..." Consider rephrasing the sentence.
"Unforgiven won four Oscars"...reorder best picture and director.
"Bram Stoker's Dracula and Howards End with three awards" --> with three awards each.
ditto for "...and Scent of a Woman with one."
"The telecast garnered almost 46 million viewers in the United States". why "almost"? consider providing accurate info.
"Federico Fellini — To Federico Fellini"...remove duplication - Vivvt (Talk) 07:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done: Addressed all your comments. Dropped three weeks earlier since there is a date mentioned for the Sci-Tech Awards ceremony and replaced it with "In related events" as a transition to link the ceremony as related to the main event.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 08:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support All my comments have been resolved. - Vivvt (Talk) 08:14, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep not mentioning the big 5 in the intro? Nergaal (talk) 03:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nergaal: Done: Mentioned all acting winners.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 06:04, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support – The list looks to be neatly written and covers the major aspects appropriately. Only one minor comment: with regards to the announcer, you list her as Randi Thomas in the presenters sub-section where in the ceremony information section, she is listed as Randy Thomas. Please correct this. Z105space (talk) 10:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Z105space: Done: Changed Randi to Randy per these books covering the Oscars: The Big Show by Steve Pond and Inside Oscar 2 by Damien Bona. Thanks for the support.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 17:50, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.