Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/December 2013
- 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 SchroCat 20:22, 27 December 2013 [1].
- Nominator(s):—FRANKY! 13:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that it meets the FL criteria. —FRANKY! 13:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Rejectwater (talk) 23:45, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments from Rejectwater
Additional Comments from Rejectwater
|
Quick question - Why do you refer to her as Vidya rather than Balan (compare List of awards and nominations received by Aishwarya Rai where she is referred to as Rai, List of awards and nominations received by Preity Zinta where she is referred to as Zinta etc...)? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:42, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Because "Balan" is the name of her father and not a family name and I see a majority of sources calling her "Vidya" rather than "Balan" (Here are some examples [2] [3] [4]). Please also
seeread the first line of lead section of the actor's biography. —FRANKY! 00:38, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There are inconsistencies in the repeated sentence "She has won XXX awards from XXX nominations." When I count the nominations and awards, they do not seem to match the tables. Is there an explanation for how the sentences are counting awards and nominations, or are the sentences wrong?
- The awards table were according to 2013 but the sentences and infobox were according to 2012.
The award counts are also different in the Infobox. Now I'm thoroughly confused.
- Done.
I think the Infobox award list should be in the same order as the article's list of awards, unless there is a good reason to do otherwise. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:54, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- There can be placed only 14 awards list in the award template but if we give the specific name of the award which're saved in the template (like Academy, Filmfare, IIFA etc) there can be more than 14. As you know the section of awards are more than 14, it won't be possible.
Comment: I have completed a copy edit of this article under the auspices of the Guild of Copy Editors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:07, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your work. —FrankBoy (Buzz) 12:34, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Quick oppose
- Link Pradeep Sarkar in the lead
- Done.
- Avoid starting paras with pronouns
- Done.
- The following sentence is too lengthy and unclear.
- Done.
- Guru is only a semi-biographical film.
- Done.
- Majority of the lead talks only about the Filmfare Awards, as if she won only that award.
- Done.
- " As of July 2013, Vidya has won 53 awards out of 78 nominations.[2]" fails WP:V.
- Done.
- A majority of the award descriptions are one-just liners.
- Done.
- Refs. are either cluttered or poorly formatted.
- Done.
- Despite most of the tables having the same no. of columns their width is not uniform
- Done.
- You could add a separate column for references in the table and add them instead of placing them in the prose.
- Done.
- The urls of refs. #7, #26 and #45 are relocated to somewhere.
- Done.
- Multiple references are using the same name (awards)
- I have very limited knowledge about the topic and the listed ones are just a sample and many more are to come from reviewers who are well versed with the topic. —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:29, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done and thanks for giving your time.—FrankBoy (Buzz) 13:00, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Quick comments
- "Reference" should at least be "Reference(s)".
- Done.
- Table column widths differ from section to section making the whole list look really messy.
- Done.
- Last sentence of first paragraph.... count the words.... too long.
I failed to do that, The Rambling Man, but I'd very much appreciate it if you could help me with your expertise in this area.
- Done.
- In the "National Film Awards" part of the info box, how can an award have been won without a nomination?
- Because "National Film Awards" do
esnot have any nominations, they do have consideration but are not declared publicly.
- Because "National Film Awards" do
- Why are five refs needed for one award?
- Done.
- Why is India suddenly wiki-linked midway through?
- Well, I asked the article to be copyedited so in response to that the user, Jonesey95 wiki-linked that.
- "Best Actress - Drama" etc, check for WP:DASH.
- Done.
- Is it "Best Thriller/Action Actress" or "Best Actress - Action/Thriller"? Be consistent. Check the others.
- Done.
- Check reference titles for WP:DASH.
- Done.
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Please check to avoid over linking, e.g. television in India appears to be linked at least three times... The Rambling Man (talk) 15:08, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment that infobox image is more closely cropped. (logged-out) User:Indopug 122.172.11.178 (talk) 08:28, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done, regards.—FrankBoy (Buzz) 15:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been not reached a consensus for promotion, but there may be a delay in processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Thanks - SchroCat (talk) 17:35, 6 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.
- 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 SchroCat 10:08, 16 December 2013 [5].
- Nominator(s): Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:33, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because we need more FLCs on chapter lists and I have been working on this for months now, but had to leave for a two-month long Wikibreak back in August. I believe this chapter list meets the FLC criteria. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:33, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments by DragonZero
- Ref names should not be in all caps
- Refs should list the site's publisher? You have random house refs under Del Ray as the publisher.
- You should reword the international release part. Is there a reliable source that says Fairy Tail is only published in those regions? Otherwise, it should be something like "released in regions such as..."
- You can link the publishing companies in the lead, at least for star comics.
- "40 tankōbonvolumes" needs space. Add nbsp; between the number and the unit
- I find the third paragraph confusing overall.
- The sources in the paragraph don't seem to back anything up there.
- Later noted, some references contradict the release dates.
I'll take a closer look at the sources one by one later. Also, is it that easy to get FL for chapter lists? I'd be submitting them in hoards if it is. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 23:12, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry for the really late reply, but I am trying to help update the article as well by adding news about digital releases. I'll see what I can do about the rest. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:41, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Just one fix I think needs to be done. "The chapters are being collected in tankōbon format since December 15, 2006." - "Are being" is that really proper grammar? It just strikes me as really off. Rewording the whole sentence might be the only way around it though. Otherwise it looks good from a few spot checks, but I am totally new to this process. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:08, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose The references do not support the release dates. Until such a time that they do this shouldn't be a featured list. --Lightlowemon (talk) 01:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I see now. Some of the dates don't match the sourcing. Should be addressed. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 01:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Weren't those the sources you were referring too? --Lightlowemon (talk) 01:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Right, I forgot I mentioned that already. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 01:22, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Weren't those the sources you were referring too? --Lightlowemon (talk) 01:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I see now. Some of the dates don't match the sourcing. Should be addressed. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 01:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - Sorry, SJones, but I'm not really comfortable with this list. It's a summary of three other lists (List of Fairy Tail manga volumes (1–15), et al.), and adds no new information beyond what they have. Maybe if it was actually those three lists put together, with the chapter summaries, replacing the three, but if it's just going to be shortened forms of the same tables I don't see the purpose of the list. --PresN 00:02, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose it's nothing but a summary, and adds nothing to the other lists. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:05, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- 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 SchroCat 20:04, 1 December 2013 [6].
- Nominator(s): Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:01, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I feel it meets all the requirements that have been laid out by Wikipedia:Featured list criteria. I've had people mention that these articles should be FANs, so I'd like to point out that seasons 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8 of the series were promoted to Featured Lists, and many television series' season pages have been promoted to FLs before; I just want to maintain consistency. The prose is of Good Article quality (which is passed a few months ago), it features alt text, images, pristine references, and MOS-complying tables. While any critiques would inevitably make this better, I feel it is ready for the next step.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:01, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: Great job on prose and organization.
Resolved comments from Lemonade51 (talk) 18:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
|
- Support Lemonade51 (talk) 18:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I like the format. I am only wandering if some entry should be included in the table about the retrospective episode. Nergaal (talk) 15:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmmm, it's mentioned in the "Production" section, but because its not an officially sanctioned episode, I did not include it in the episode list infobox.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:09, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Prose is excellent and I see no other issues. Great job!Caringtype1 (talk) 00:49, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment (leaning oppose): This looks like it should be a featured article candidate, not list. The list is nowhere close to even 50% of the article. There are 22k characters of prose taking up 4 or 5 screens on my laptop, while the list only takes up 2.5 screens and is nowhere near 22k (I'd be surprised if it hit 8k characters) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- As I point out above, season 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8 of the show are featured lists. I nominated this as a FLN to maintain consistency. There are also plenty of other shows that have their season pages as FLs. It was also pointed out to me that an article like this with such a prominent list probably wouldn't fare well in FAN.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:54, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- None of those you point to are 22k of text. Homicide: Life on the Street (season 1) and Homicide: Life on the Street (season 2) are both featured articles, as are Parks and Recreation (season 1) and Smallville (season 1). Season articles can pass FAC, and this one should be sent that way. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:02, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I just wanted to maintain consistency here. I'll do whatever is needed.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:12, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- SchroCat alerted me to this one, in my capacity as a FAC coordinator. I have to admit that I'm surprised the earlier season pages were classified as lists rather than articles. In my experience, the list component of a list page is the main thing. Here, and indeed in the other Office FLs, the prose section comprises at least half the page. In fact, albeit on a more superficial level, if this is truly counted as a list, why isn't it "List of The Office (U.S. season 9) episodes"? As Crisco suggests, FAC seems a more appropriate venue for this and similar pages. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:35, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I just wanted to maintain consistency here. I'll do whatever is needed.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:12, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- None of those you point to are 22k of text. Homicide: Life on the Street (season 1) and Homicide: Life on the Street (season 2) are both featured articles, as are Parks and Recreation (season 1) and Smallville (season 1). Season articles can pass FAC, and this one should be sent that way. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:02, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- As I point out above, season 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8 of the show are featured lists. I nominated this as a FLN to maintain consistency. There are also plenty of other shows that have their season pages as FLs. It was also pointed out to me that an article like this with such a prominent list probably wouldn't fare well in FAN.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:54, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess I withdraw this.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:40, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]