Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Audie Murphy filmography/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 not promoted by Giants2008 10:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC) [1].[reply]
Audie Murphy filmography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): — Maile (talk) 00:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe the subject matter is of historical significance to the film industry in general, and to the Western (genre) in particular. This is one of three articles I would like to take to Featured Topic. The main article of Audie Murphy is being worked on to submit for FA, and the other article Audie Murphy honors and awards is currently also listed here at FLC. But whether or not the FT eventually works out, I would still like this filmography to be FL. — Maile (talk) 00:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - We need to establish whether this is "listy" enough for FLC. I count 14812 characters of prose in this article, taking up five screens on my laptop, whereas the list itself is about 4 screens on my laptop. If this is to be a filmography (a list) I'd definitely expect consistency with Christian Bale filmography, Laurel and Hardy filmography, Gene Kelly filmography, etc. ... i.e. a short-ish lede and then a list of works. Other opinions? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:37, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- If it turns out that your point of view is the majority here, how difficult is it to move this over to FAC? Now that I'm dipping my toes into the FA waters, I'd like to see it through with one type or the other. I'm not picky about which. You folks sort it out. — Maile (talk) 01:46, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Not all that difficult. Close this as failed, update the article history, and nominate for FAC. I think the FA delegates (Ian Rose and Graham Colm) wouldn't mind you doing it right away (but, of course, better to confirm with them). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:49, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not going to be on the computer too much longer this evening. So, I'll pick this up tomorrow morning and see who has weighed in. However, it was suggested over at WT GA that the article name should be changed to Film career of Audie Murphy. And then someone suggested that's not standard naming at Wikipedia. It would be good to get that aspect cleared up, also. — Maile (talk) 02:00, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe I found the answer as to whether or not this should be named "Film career of Audie Murphy". The only article similarly named is Film career of Grace Kelly, so I think the Audie Murphy filmography is going to stay named as such.— Maile (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a simple suggetion: move the large chunk of prose to the main Audie Murphy article, then use just the lead for this. Then, the Murphy aticle is further expanded and of greater quality, the FLC meets consistency standards, and there's no list vs. article debate. Win-win. Wizardman 01:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Not keen on that idea. The main article has already been through edit war hell this last year, and I've been through hell with it. I'm staying off the main article until better editors hone it up to FA standard. I really don't want this filmography prose mixed in there. It started there, and it was a lot of rubbish. We went through a lot weeding it out the first time. Don't make me do that. It's too horrible to think about. I don't want to go back and forth, back and forth all the time with that article. That would set off another round of disruptive editing of all types. I'm not going into the details, but my lord, what I went through to get this filmography on its own to make it decent. No. No. It's terrible. — Maile (talk) 02:00, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I am withdrawing this FLC as pre-mature. — Maile (talk) 16:11, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, 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. Sorry for the delay: I've only just seen the withdrawal. - SchroCat (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.