Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/March 2018
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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:32, 30 March 2018 (UTC) [1].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Yashthepunisher (talk) 09:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My second National Film Award nomination. I feel its a well written and well sourced list worthy of promotion. As always, all the constructive comments and feedbacks are welcomed. Yashthepunisher (talk) 09:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from Jmnbqb (talk) 20:33, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from Jmnbqb
Overall good job! If you get time, I could use a review on one of my listed FLCs. Jmnbqb (talk) 13:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – Also need to add alt text to images per MOS:ACCESS. Other than that looks good! Jmnbqb (talk) 20:33, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your comments and support. Yashthepunisher (talk) 06:10, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 14:44, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
Looks good. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 22:28, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – Looks good. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 14:44, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your comments and support :) Yashthepunisher (talk) 15:05, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support-Great job. My only comment is that Ref2 is dead. Just replace it and the list will be good to go — FR+ 06:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- FR, done as suggested, thanks for the comment and support. Yashthepunisher (talk) 06:57, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review
[edit]- You might want to check that "deadurl" field as yes if the link is dead as was the case of the first ref. Make sure all the links have been checked.
- Archived.
- Ref. 1 says that the awards were instituted in 1968, the article says it was 1967. Does ref. 2 say 1968? I haven't been able to look through the entire document so it would be helpful if you tell me where to look.
- The reference says: "Separate awards for artistes and technicians were instituted in 1968 for the films of 1967."
- Why does the url field in ref. 2 have the archived url? Also, is this ref of any use, I haven't been through the entire document?
- Removed, seemed unnecessary to me as well.
- Ref. 3 mentions Mukherjee, but does not say that the awards are presented by President in general.
- Fixed.
- Wikilink Outlook, Business Standard, The Asian Age and the likes.
- Done
- You might also want to be consistent with wiklinks in refs. You link International Film Festival of India on multiple occasions, but the rest only once. Either link only on first occurrence or link everywhere.
- Fixed. Yashthepunisher (talk) 14:22, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Going through the contents of the table, VedantTalk 09:27, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Further:
- I have to say Yash, I am fairly confused on how you've given the titles to the refs. 58th National Awards has a unique instance of the year mentioned in the title and none of the other do; the 64th National Awards pdf has the year in the title but the ref does not. You'll have to help me out here.
- The title of ref's are consistent now. Most of the references have year mentioned in them, but some don't have that. I don't think its necessary in any way.
- Also, I still think that the "deadurl" field in the refs issue has not been addressed. Most of the "original" URLs are dead and should say yes in theirrespective "deadurl" field as it is in the last ref. In that scenario the archived URL comes first which is ideal.
- Replaced dead urls.
They are all available and working in the archived forms otherwise. VedantTalk 16:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Numerounovedant I have hopefully resolved your comments now. Have a look. Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Everything looks good, but you've misunderstood me on the last point again. You do not have to change the URL with archived url as you did here. All you need to do is this, just replace the no with a yes. Other than that, consider the source review done. Good luck getting this promoted! VedantTalk 14:22, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Numerounovedant Done as suggested. Rest of the links are working. Is their anything else? Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:11, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes. that should be it then. Consider this done. VedantTalk 05:25, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the review Vedant. Yashthepunisher (talk) 06:21, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes. that should be it then. Consider this done. VedantTalk 05:25, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Numerounovedant Done as suggested. Rest of the links are working. Is their anything else? Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:11, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Everything looks good, but you've misunderstood me on the last point again. You do not have to change the URL with archived url as you did here. All you need to do is this, just replace the no with a yes. Other than that, consider the source review done. Good luck getting this promoted! VedantTalk 14:22, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed above, thanks Numerounovedant! Made one tweak- the date formats were mixed between DMY and MDY. Promoting. --PresN 21:45, 30 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:32, 30 March 2018 (UTC) [2].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Kosack (talk) 17:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I have brought the page up to the same standard as the recently promoted Welsh hat-tricks list to meet the FL criteria. Kosack (talk) 17:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from Jmnbqb (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments from Jmnbqb
Overall it looks good! If you get a chance, I would appreciate a review on one of my listed FLCs. Thanks! Jmnbqb (talk) 19:22, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
Support – Good job! Jmnbqb (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 12:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 12:17, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- My only concern is this bit: "The Republic of Ireland has conceded nine hat-tricks during their history", in which the same subject is treated as both single and plural, all within the same sentence..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:52, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @ChrisTheDude: Thanks for reviewing, I've fixed that sentence now. Kosack (talk) 12:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - can't see any issues now........... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:14, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed, promoting. --PresN 21:32, 30 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:30, 30 March 2018 (UTC) [3].[reply]
- Nominator(s): MWright96 (talk) 10:46, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This list concerns the ESPY Award for those who partake in boxing and mixed martial arts competitions. This is one of many ESPY Awards that were introduced in the 2000s and is the official replacement for the Best Boxer ESPY Award. Your comments, suggestions and support are most welcomed and I will endeavour to address them in a timely manner. MWright96 (talk)
| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 17:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
That's all I got. Great job to you! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 23:31, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – All good for me. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 17:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose – This list includes columns identifying nationality, weight class and sanctioning body or league. The intro says the award is given "irrespective of nationality, gender, weight class, or sanctioning body or league". So, if the Nominating Committee is specifically and directly saying those factors are irrelevant, they probably shouldn't be listed here as relevant factors. If the award is truly given to the person "adjudged to be the best in a given calendar year" wouldn't something like their win-loss record or # contests, or titles held be more relevant? maclean (talk) 04:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Maclean25: Personally I am not convinced that such a proposal of replacing the mentioned factors with a win-loss record would enhance the list's value. MWright96 (talk) 12:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Maclean25: Update: the section of text you questioned has now been removed as I was unable to locate any explicit evidence to support that statement. MWright96 (talk) 18:28, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I still don't follow why nationality is given such weight. The winners and nominees are all listed by nationality (it looks like they are representing their country) and there is a "Winners by nationality" summary table in a separate section. With respect to receiving this award, why is their nationality more relevant than their achievements of that given year? maclean (talk) 05:10, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Maclean25: I wouldn't say that the nationality of the boxers is more important than their achievements but having the nationality after their name is common with other lists of this type like Laureus World Sports Award for Action Sportsperson of the Year. MWright96 (talk) 14:13, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I would say it was about presenting information that our readers would be interested to see, and in no way veers into the "UNDUE" territory. The nationality of winners of sporting contests is practically commonplace as to make it trivial yet expected in these records. It's taking LEAD a long way down a requirement creep path to oppose based on the fact that items are included in the list which the lead prose says are not part of the selection criteria. If a huge amount of analysis of the nationalities was made and some kind of conclusions drawn then we'd be in different territory but simply noting it and summarising it is not a problem at all. We don't know what achievements were considered by the awarding jury so to add a synopsis of their various successes would be pure WP:OR. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Is the logic that, in an article about the 'Best Fighter' in a given year, the belief is that the reader is interested in what the winner's (and nominee's) nationality was in that given year? I just see that as WP:INDISCRIMINATE (note that WP:UNDUE is about neutrality and no one has questioned that). The references don't give any weight to it — only Pacquiao's references mention anything about nationality. Ranking the nationalities, a quality that the references only off-handedly mention about two of the two dozen people, seems kind of random. The references provided just summarize some of the winners' activities that led to winning the award. —maclean (talk) 08:34, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- That's certainly part of it. Most award sites make note of the nationality of the recipients, it's perfectly encyclopedic information. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Is the logic that, in an article about the 'Best Fighter' in a given year, the belief is that the reader is interested in what the winner's (and nominee's) nationality was in that given year? I just see that as WP:INDISCRIMINATE (note that WP:UNDUE is about neutrality and no one has questioned that). The references don't give any weight to it — only Pacquiao's references mention anything about nationality. Ranking the nationalities, a quality that the references only off-handedly mention about two of the two dozen people, seems kind of random. The references provided just summarize some of the winners' activities that led to winning the award. —maclean (talk) 08:34, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I still don't follow why nationality is given such weight. The winners and nominees are all listed by nationality (it looks like they are representing their country) and there is a "Winners by nationality" summary table in a separate section. With respect to receiving this award, why is their nationality more relevant than their achievements of that given year? maclean (talk) 05:10, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from Ianblair23 (talk) 21:17, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
:Hi MWright96, fantastic job with this list. Please find my comments below:
|
- Support – Great job MWright96, looking forward to reviewing the remainder of the series. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 21:20, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 12:42, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Query - why is Demetrious Johnson listed under "Multiple winners and nominees" when he has only one win and no additional nominations? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:44, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- No reason in particular. So I have removed him from the list. MWright96 (talk) 20:31, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Cool. With that resolved I am happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:21, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- No reason in particular. So I have removed him from the list. MWright96 (talk) 20:31, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. While I see that there's one opposer, in looking over their arguments I follow the logic but I'm not convinced. Yes, the ESPYs do not limit nominees/winners on nationality/weight class/etc. Wikipedia, on the other hand, is not the ESPYs- not only that, but the list is not attempting to split the table up by any criteria, but simply adding those details as metadata to the winners/nominees. Readers are (or potentially are) intersted in seeing that the award is given most often to X weight class or nationality, even if the award itself does not place restrictions on those. It's certainly possible to go overboard on that sort of "extra" information, but in this case the extra details are relatively standard for lists like these, and don't get to be too much. Indeed, if they were omitted, the list would literally just be a list of 5 or so names per year, as the same logic against nationality would remove even the pictures (and props for using a different picture for each year per winner).
Tl;dr: directors don't just count votes, therefore, promotion. --PresN 21:29, 30 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:33, 26 March 2018 (UTC) [4].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Jmnbqb (talk) 17:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My first list nominated has support and issues have been addressed, so I'm putting this list in the pipeline. I have added all alumni from Category:Missouri University of Science and Technology alumni and have done research to add a few more to the category/list. Information is lacking for early alumni, but I've done my best to add correct information. Jmnbqb (talk) 17:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from Courcelles (talk) 08:07, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
*"The most recognizable name on the list is..." The anecdote about Dorsey is fine, making this claim about recognizability appears to be OR.
Courcelles (talk) 05:27, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support I consider it comprehensive enough for a dynamic list to be promoted, people will always be adding more, so more care will be needed to maintain the star than in most lists. Courcelles (talk) 17:49, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:33, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments
Otherwise for me it's just how comprehensive it is, and I simply don't have time to check that. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:47, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 17:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
Everything else looks good to me. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 23:42, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – Alright I understand. I'll offer my support. Great job to both of you! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 17:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support this nomination. Just one thing, archive the links that aren't already. Yashthepunisher (talk) 17:39, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your support. Links are archived. Jmnbqb (talk) 21:03, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 15:51, 26 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:32, 26 March 2018 (UTC) [5].[reply]
- Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:27, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The list for 2000 has already been promoted to FL and the lists for 2001, 2002 and 2003 all have multiple supports, so here's the next in the sequence...... ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:27, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from BeatlesLedTV
- First pic needs alt text
- "in 2004 was the seven achieved by" → "in 2004 was seven, achieved by"
- Unsort ref col
- Artists should be sorted by last name per WP:Sorting. Currently they're sorted by first name
That's all I got. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 20:33, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- All sorted -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – Looks good to me. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 04:03, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 19:57, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments
The Rambling Man (talk) 21:11, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- " having been at the top since the issue of Billboard dated December 20, 2003." Ref? Courcelles (talk) 21:42, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Courcelles (talk) 06:26, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Done -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this one stalled out a bit, after the earlier ones went so fast too. I'm trying to clear out some of these stalled ones at the bottom of the FLC list, so I'm going to be unorthodox and promote after a review. I tweaked a couple minor things (note my comment about how to write alt text for the future), and source review passed. --PresN 16:54, 26 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:31, 26 March 2018 (UTC) [6].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Damian Vo (talk) 17:11, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm nominating this for featured list because it meets the criteria for a featured list. Look forward to your comments and suggestions. Damian Vo (talk) 17:11, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- Delink Italy, as WP:OLINK suggests us not to link popular places.
- Done. Damian Vo (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- You can simply write the character names in bracket and remove 'as' from the plot synopsis.
- I put the actor names in bracket. Damian Vo (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I feel linking cinematographer and soundtrack is redundant.
- I delinked "cinematographer". The "Soundtrack" link is headed to the film's soundtrack subpage, not the genre. Damian Vo (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Is the premiere date necessary? If not, then write '2017 Sundance film festival' and remove the dates.
- That's the world premiere date, so I think it's fairly important. Damian Vo (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Linking words like wide release and limited release is not necessary.
- Delinked. Damian Vo (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- ".and performances by Chalamet, Hammer, and Stuhlbarg." --> and performances by the lead actors.
- I simply changed into "performances" since I have found positive reviews for Casar as well. Damian Vo (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The above sentence should be backed by some references.
- It is supported by sources from Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic in the following sentences. Damian Vo (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support this nomination. Yashthepunisher (talk) 12:13, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you so much for your support! :) Damian Vo (talk) 12:23, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, looks good to me. --Golbez (talk) 19:29, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – All good for me. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 02:23, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you both! Damian Vo (talk) 11:12, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 15:51, 26 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:31, 26 March 2018 (UTC) [7].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Erick (talk) 21:00, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
With my FLC for Billboard Latin Music Hall of Fame gaining enough supports, I am now nominating this article for FL. Continuing on with my FLC for Latin music, this list is different in that the accolade is for the behind the scenes guys (producers, engineers, etc.). This FLC is based on the Latin Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award which I got FL two years ago. I look forward to your comments. Erick (talk) 21:00, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 20:54, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
That's all I got. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 02:17, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – Looks good to me. Great job on this! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 20:54, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from Aoba47
- For this sentence (This can include producers, songwriters, composers, record label executives, and journalists.), I would avoid using “This” in this format”. Maybe something like: “It can be award to…) or (Recepients can include…) to avoid this use of “this”.
- For this part (a string of galas just prior to the annual Latin Grammy Awards ceremony.), I do not think that “just” is needed as “prior” works on its own and conveys the same meaning in my opinion.
- I am not sure about the lead’s second paragraph. It seems like it could be combined with the first paragraph.
- The last sentence of the first paragraph and the first and second sentences of the second paragraph have the same sentence construction (i.e. the “presented” verbage). I would revise to avoid the repetition of this word if possible.
- I was a little confused by the notability of this sentence (Pierre Cossette was also the recipient of the Grammy Trustees Award in 1995.). Is he the only person to ever receive both? If so, then please clarify this. It seems rather out-of-place in the lead without the full context.
- You link the countries in the lead, but not in the table. Just wanted to raise this to your attention.
- According to the infobox, the award as last given in 2017. The lead does not mention that the award is no longer given or why it was discontinued. Can you please address this in the lead?
Wonderful work with this list. Once my comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this for promotion. If possible, I would greatly appreciate it if you could provide some comments on my current FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/All Money Is Legal/archive1). Either way, good luck with this, and have a great start of your week. Aoba47 (talk) 22:54, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Aoba47: I believe I have addressed your issues. The last awarded is just the last time they gave the award. It hasn't been discontinued. Erick (talk) 21:24, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for addressing everything. I have removed the "last awarded" part from the infobox as it implies that it was discontinued. I would add to the infobox the current recipient of the award to the infobox (see these two articles for what I mean Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress and Academy Award for Best Actress). I will support this once this comment is addressed. Aoba47 (talk) 22:02, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Aoba47: Thanks for the comments. I have fixed the issues you brought up. Erick (talk) 17:36, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I support this for promotion. Great job with this! Aoba47 (talk) 17:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from Yashthepunisher
- The country names should be delinked per WP:OLINK.
- "Latin Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences" in the general reference is piped to a redirect.
- You can mention the total number of times the award has been given, in the infobox.
Yashthepunisher (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Yashthepunisher: Addressed everything but the last point. I don't see a parameter on the template for the number of times it has been awarded. Erick (talk) 04:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- You can take a clue from here. Yashthepunisher (talk) 10:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Yashthepunisher: I've added the number of times awarded. Erick (talk) 16:20, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support this nomination. Yashthepunisher (talk) 05:55, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 15:51, 26 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:30, 26 March 2018 (UTC) [8].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Lizard (talk) 17:28, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Another list of AP NFL awards. This one isn't as straightforward for various reasons, but I believe I've done the best I can and the list meets FL criteria. Lizard (talk) 17:28, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Note: This nomination was not transcluded onto WP:FLC until January 24) --PresN 20:54, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 03:22, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments – I commented last year on the article's talk page regarding a table formatting issue and have been meaning to look at this FLC. There are a handful of things I found that could use fixes, and a couple of them will depend upon updates that will be needed later this week.
|
- Support – Made a further tweak to the article myself to finish off my batch of comments. Overall, this looks like a strong list, and I'm sure TRM's couple of comments will be handled in due course. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:14, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 11:45, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments - Nice piece of work
The Rambling Man (talk) 07:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support - my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:45, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, this one has been here for a while and stalled out, and the two supports are the only other two people who could promote it... so I'm going to do something a bit unorthodox here. I reviewed the list and found no issues, and did a source review and found 2 minor things that I fixed myself as faster than describing them, and I'm going to go ahead and promote. --PresN 16:07, 26 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC) [9].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Jmnbqb (talk) 01:39, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because (yes it meets the criteria), but more so this list contains information of interest to multiple communities and would provide viewers with information on notable people with Greek life involvement, specifically Tau Kappa Epsilon, which is rarely communicated to audiences. I have researched and added as many applicable, secondary references as possible, and I have incorporated all of the suggestions from the peer review such as expanding the lead, standardizing the capitalization, and ensuring all entries have a reference. I would deeply appreciate consideration for this article becoming a featured list (which would be my first!) Jmnbqb (talk) 01:39, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 19:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
That's all I got for now. Great job on this! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 04:18, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
- Support – All good for me. Great job to you! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 19:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:34, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments a quick runthrough right now:
|
- Stupid question time, what is the "Grand Chapter"? Those listed for it don't have a school listed...? Courcelles (talk) 17:47, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Nah not a stupid question. It's essentially the chapter of TKE Headquarters, so there's no associated school. Most of the Grand Chapter brothers were initiated at various TKE Conclaves, which are international biennial meetings of the Fraternity. Jmnbqb (talk) 04:01, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Can we add a footnote explaining that? Courcelles (talk) 08:22, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Footnote is added. Jmnbqb (talk) 01:18, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Courcelles (talk) 19:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Three minor questions/comments (and my support is *not* conditional on them being changed)
- Three brothers are listed as being from Colonies, does that mean they became brothers as part of the colonization effort but had graduated by the time the charter was granted? If so, can that be explained?
- Note is added.
- Grand Chapter brothers are, I believe, what most fraternities would call Honorary brothers. Does only Grand Chapter have the ability to grant brotherhood in Tau Kappa Epsilon to people no longer associated with a college (and if so, can a chapter grant brotherhood to a professor)
- Yes, initiates from the Grand Chapter are honorary, but other chapters can also initiate honorary members.
- are any of the other brothers listed under chapters honorary to the chapter?
- Definitely, but the problem is that there is no definitive source or method to distinguish who is honorary and who isn't, so I avoided notating it since I can't guarantee that it's correct for everyone.
- are any of the other brothers listed under chapters honorary to the chapter?
- Yes, initiates from the Grand Chapter are honorary, but other chapters can also initiate honorary members.
- Putting Westling and Boxing together seems a little odd, might splitting work better? (and that's a general question, so if others support the merger, please say so)Naraht (talk) 14:01, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The only reason for merging is that there is only one boxer, so I just lumped them together.
- Missed that the last was a wrestler.Naraht (talk) 17:01, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The only reason for merging is that there is only one boxer, so I just lumped them together.
- Also, for those Tau Kappa Epsilon brothers who are notable and who were Presidents of Tau Kappa Epsilon, please include that in their notability.Naraht (talk) 14:17, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Notability is added.
- Added in Logan and Muse as well.
- Thanks!
- Added in Logan and Muse as well.
- Notability is added.
- Comments are addressed. Thanks for the review! Jmnbqb (talk) 14:34, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanx! I may find
- Source Review
- All references that have the author as "Staff writer" or similar should remove it- the author field(s) are for named people, not generic writer name stand-ins; in that case, leave it blank.
- Fixed.
- Please add ISBNs to book citations, such as ref 109 (use [10] to get a properly-formatted 13-digit ISBN if you have an unformatted/10-digit one, like at ref 81)
- Fixed, although there are 2 problems. I couldn't find an ISBN for ref 51, but found an OCLO number; also, ref 108 isn't registering the isbn, even though it matches the ISBN in the URL link.
- How is "Stacy's Got Greek" a reliable source? It appears to be an apparel store website, not a biographer
- Reference removed.
That's all, not too much. --PresN 20:27, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- PresN, replied to comments. Thanks for the source review, Jmnbqb (talk) 22:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd actually feel better if Stacy's Got Greek was removed. This doesn't reduce any of the brothers down to a primary source *except* for Jim Harrick, which I can't find in any external source. The odd thing is that Jim Harrick (Sr.) didn't graduate from Marshall, he graduated Morris Harvey College (now U of Charleston) which is two hours away. He graduated in 1960, and his date of induction is in 1957. So there is an oddity here. Did he transfer schools from Marshall to Morris Harvey?Naraht (talk) 21:01, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- (Apparently so. "After Harrick transferred from Marshall to Morris Harvey..." See https://www.upi.com/Archives/1982/03/10/The-state-of-West-Virginia-is-mighty-proud-of/4988384584400/ ) Still would feel better with a second source.Naraht (talk) 21:03, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 15:27, 12 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC) [11].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Pseud 14 (talk) 09:39, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've been working on this list beginning of January 2018 on the songs recorded by Filipino singer Regine Velasquez, listing down notable songs/singles that span her 31-year career. It has undergone a GOCE copy-edit for the lead section. Constructive criticism, in any form and from anyone, will be appreciated. Cheers! Pseud 14 (talk) 09:39, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from BeatlesLedTV
[edit]| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
That's all I got. Great job on this! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 19:32, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – Everything looks good to me. Great job to you! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- BeatlesLedTV, Thank you --Pseud 14 (talk) 13:13, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Ceranthor
[edit]- "Filipino singer Regine Velasquez has recorded material for seventeen studio albums, nine soundtrack albums and five extended plays (EP), and has collaborated with other artists on duets and featured songs on their respective albums." - seems like it could be split into two sentences
- "including "I Don't Want to Miss a Thing" by Aerosmith, "The Long and Winding Road" by the Beatles, "I'll Never Love This Way Again" by Dionne Warwick, and "Music and Me" by Michael Jackson.[15] " - you haven't been using the serial comma elsewhere, so don't use it here
Otherwise, prose looks good to me. ceranthor 15:18, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Ceranthor, thanks for your comments. The above have been addressed. Cheers! --Pseud 14 (talk) 10:12, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I feel comfortable supporting this, then. ceranthor 14:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you Ceranthor, much appreciate your support. Cheers! --Pseud 14 (talk) 11:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I feel comfortable supporting this, then. ceranthor 14:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from FrB.TG
[edit]- Support
- "The lead single "Fly" was released—the only original song on the record" - suggest moving "the only original song on the record" between Fly and was.
- Done
- "A cover album, it contained covers of international singles" - cover ... cover.
- Fixed.
- "The album has since been certified twelve-times" - not sure hyphen is needed here.
- Removed
- "She worked with producer Tats Faustino, who wrote "Dadalhin", and collaborated with singer Janno Gibbs, who wrote the ballad "Sa Aking Pag-iisa"." - who wrote ... who wrote. Repetitive.
- Fixed
- "In addition to her studio work, Velasquez has recorded songs for her films' soundtracks" - what do you mean "her films"? Has she starred in them? If so, that should be clarified since there is nothing here talking about her film work.
- Clarified and reworded.
Nothing major to detract me from supporting. FrB.TG (talk) 21:16, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- FrB.TG, thank you for your comments. I have addressed them as mentioned above. Much appreciate your support. Cheers! --Pseud 14 (talk) 11:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Cartoon network freak
[edit]Hi there Pseud 14! I really apologize for this coming so late, but I really didn't find time for this earlier. I really appreciate what you've done with the article and found no significant issues apart for some tweaks I've done in the lead [12] to improve the language and flow of the text (feel free to undo things if you feel I've done something wrong...). The table and the refs also seem to be on point. All in all, this is a clear support from me! Best regards and good luck; Cartoon network freak (talk) 22:06, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks Cartoon network freak! Much appreciate your support. Cheers! --Pseud 14 (talk) 07:57, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 15:27, 12 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:31, 12 March 2018 (UTC) [13].[reply]
- Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk) 16:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Following hot on the heels of Bryan Habana's list, this is all about BOD, no, sorry, BO'D. Legend of Irish and Lions rugby, basically a try machine and hopefully this list is worthy of his achievements. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from Kosack (talk) 17:45, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
| Comments from Kosack
Comments:
|
Support - Looks good to me, nice work. Kosack (talk) 17:45, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
Everything looks good as always. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 20:26, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – Alright looks good to me. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from JennyOz (talk) 10:37, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
| Comments by JennyOz
Hi TRM, my questions and tweaks..., Prose
Key
Table
Refs
That's all my queries. JennyOz (talk) 13:18, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
Support - Thanks for changes, very happy to support another fine list. JennyOz (talk) 10:37, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - can't see any issues -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:48, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 15:27, 12 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:32, 5 March 2018 (UTC) [14].[reply]
- Nominator(s): Yashthepunisher (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC) & Vivvt (talk · contribs)[reply]
This list is inline with the other Padma Bhushan FLs of every decade. As usual, hope to receive constructive criticism for improvement. Cheers! Yashthepunisher (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
That's all I got. Great job on this! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 20:23, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – Looks good to me. Great job on this! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Quick comment - You can't use File:Sharan Rani.jpg in this article, there isn't (and won't be) a suitable fair use rationale for its inclusion. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:02, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed. Yashthepunisher (talk) 10:02, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- Fix external links
- Be consistent in providing access dates. Some PDF's have access dates some have not.
- Please provide alt text
- Please resolve TRM's comment above and remove the greenish glow in File:Saroj Ghose - Kolkata 2014-02-13 8915.JPG
- Try to find a better picture of B. K. S. Iyengar.
Once you have resolved the above feel free to count me among the supporters — FR™ 10:01, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Force Radical Thanks for your comments, I have hopefully resolved them. Yashthepunisher (talk) 10:12, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Short notes since time is short, identify who is BKSI in the black and white image. External links not fixed and Saroj photograph not fixed or replaced(Try changing the hue of the photograph on basic phone photoeditor/use filters on Photoshop) [If you absolutely cannot then I will be willing to forgo it] — FR™ 15:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Force Radical I don't see any problem with the external links now, the official site opens properly. The other site had some issue which I could't fix, so I decided to remove it. Sorry I didn't read the Saroj bit but, is it really necessary? Yashthepunisher (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- There are some more problems which I found on a more detailed look:
- Force Radical I don't see any problem with the external links now, the official site opens properly. The other site had some issue which I could't fix, so I decided to remove it. Sorry I didn't read the Saroj bit but, is it really necessary? Yashthepunisher (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
none of the conferments of Padma Bhushan during 1990–99
-1990-99 in 2000-09 ? also conferments sounds off ? May be a better phrase should be used
- Fixed.
In 2003, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's pracharak (volunteer) Dattopant Thengadi refused to accept the award "until revered Dr. Hegdewar (RSS founder) and Shri Guruji (RSS ideologue Golwalkar) are not offered the Bharat Ratna".
-the abbreviation RSS is not introduced before being used. Best to get rid of the word pracharak and stick to the word volunteer.
- Done
- As far as images go - I personally overlook them but it would certainly be good if you could tweak or replace the images of Veerendra Heggade and Saroj Ghosh(the Veerendra Heggade picture has a pink glow where)
- mha.nic.in is down for me, the dispenser tool also says that they failed to establish a connection. To be on the safe side just add their archives in the refs
I won't oppose based on the pictures but then it would certainly be better if you could change them.
- Working on the Images and the mha link. Yashthepunisher (talk) 16:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed the dead links. Will work on the images soon. - Vivvt (Talk) 10:07, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Vivvt how are we getting on here? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:02, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Force Radical and The Rambling Man: I am done with the changes. Please review. Apologies for the delay as I was busy in the real life. - Vivvt (Talk) 08:59, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review
[edit]- This needs to be fixed.
- Done
- All web references should preferably be archived.
- Done
- There are certain references that are missing accessdates. They might be redundant in some cases but you'd want to stay consistent.
- I have been told that Pdf files don't require accessdates. It is mentioned in rest of the refs.
- The Hindu has not been italicised in some cases; sams for India Today
- Fixed
- Also, isn't Frontline a magazine too?
- Yes, fixed.
- What's "Hyderabad: Deccan Herald"?
- Fixed.
- The Pioneer and The New York Times among others haven't been wiki-linked at all.
- Linked publishers at their first instances.
- The ones that have been archived all look proper and functional. VedantTalk 08:55, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Numerounovedant Thanks for your review. Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:35, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- You might also want to remove Press Trust of India from the first reference, as you do not mention it anywhere. VedantTalk 17:47, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The source review is now complete. VedantTalk 20:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support from Aoba47
Wonderful work with this list. I could not find much to comment about except for my suggestion below. I support this for promotion. My only comment is this:
- For sentences like this (Twenty awards were presented in 2000, followed by thirty-two in 2001, twenty-five in 2002, thirty-two in 2003, nineteen in 2004, thirty in 2005, thirty-seven in 2006, thirty-two in 2007, thirty-five in 2008 and thirty-one in 2009.), I believe that it is Wikipedia policy to put numbers over ten in numerals rather than spell them out. However, I believe either format would be correct as long as it is consistent across the board so I personally do not have an issue with it, but someone who is more by the book may raise this as something that requires improvement/change. Just wanted to let you know. Have a great start to your week! Aoba47 (talk) 21:29, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Aoba47 Thanks for your comments and support. I have performed the change as per your suggestion and MOS:NUM. Yashthepunisher (talk) 10:25, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for addressing this. Aoba47 (talk) 22:19, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from FrB.TG
- Maybe de-link because WP:OVERLINK advises against linking countries or well-known geographic locations.
- "Awards can be revoked or restored, both of which require the authority of the President, the award is archived and the recipients are required to surrender their medals when their names are struck from the register;[4] none of the awardees of Padma Bhushan during 2000–2009 have been revoked. The recommendations are received from all the state and the union territory governments, as well as from Ministries of the Government of India, Bharat Ratna and Padma Vibhushan awardees, the Institutes of Excellence, Ministers, Chief Ministers and Governors of States, Members of Parliament, and private individuals.[3]" Unbelievably long; definitely needs splitting. Also that comma splice is rather awful.
- "These included 37 foreign recipients; one each from the China, Czech Republic" - why "the China"? That "the" should rather be used for Czech Republic.
- " However she was surprised" - comma after "however".
- " She stated, "I would only accept awards from academic institutions or those associated with my professional work, and not accept state awards."[8]" Do We really need this quote? Too much weight has been given to this part. I think that the previous three sentences illustrate your point just well without this.
- "L. Subramaniam, known as "the god of Indian violin," was awarded Padma Bhushan in 2001 and is considered the first among Indians to introduce the concept of Jugalbandi between Hindustani classical and Carnatic music.[11]" "The god of Indian violin" part is really unneeded and is more importantly not given in the source.
- "Raj Reddy is an Indian-American computer scientist and is the recipient of the Turing Award (1994) for his work in the field of Artificial Intelligence and computer science.[13]" When do we get to the part of his relevance in this list?
- "A recipient of the Padma Shri and Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize for Science and Technology, Govindarajan Padmanaban is an biochemist and biotechnologist. He is a former director of Indian Institute of Science.[19]" Great. But when did he receive the Padma Bhushan? FrB.TG (talk) 18:25, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your comments FrB.TG, I have hopefully resolved them all. Yashthepunisher (talk) 07:02, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support now. Good work. FrB.TG (talk) 11:11, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Promoting. --PresN 20:37, 5 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:31, 5 March 2018 (UTC) [15].[reply]
- Nominator(s): The Rambling Man (talk), Sahara4u (Talk) 14:12, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just tidied this one up, re-verified the lead, made the table and images accessible. Most of the hard work was done by Sahara4u who has been away from Wikipedia for a bit, but I've co-nominated them. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:12, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
Everything else looks good. Great job on this! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 02:05, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support – Looks good to me. Great job on this! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
CommentSupport –Word order needs a fix in "making three against centuries them."That's the only issue I found. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:35, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Giants2008 done, thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:29, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from JennyOz (talk) 14:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
| Comments by JennyOz
Hi TRM, my comments (and a question) follow, Prose
Tests table
ODI table
Regards, JennyOz (talk) 11:46, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
Support - another great job! JennyOz (talk) 14:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 20:37, 5 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:30, 5 March 2018 (UTC) [16].[reply]
- Nominator(s): — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 14:31, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This article provides a listing of the notable awards and nominations received by the 2010 Indian Hindi drama film, My Name Is Khan starring Shah Rukh Khan and Kajol. This film is notable for garnering its cast and crew members several awards and nominations. It is my thirteenth attempt at an accolades FLC, and my second for a Bollywood awards list. Any constructive comments to improve this list are most welcome. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 14:31, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by ChrisTheDude
[edit]- Comment - "Rizwan Khan (Khan), a NRI suffering from Asperger syndrome who is married to a single mother, Mandira" - if she's married, then by definition she isn't single............ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- If so, ChrisTheDude, then how do I rephrase the sentence? How do I say that he has married a woman who has a son from her previous marriage/relationship? — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 10:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I would pretty much just say what you have put above: "Rizwan Khan (Khan), a NRI suffering from Asperger syndrome whose wife, Mandira, has a child from a previous relationship"...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:06, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. As suggested, ChrisTheDude. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 15:06, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I would pretty much just say what you have put above: "Rizwan Khan (Khan), a NRI suffering from Asperger syndrome whose wife, Mandira, has a child from a previous relationship"...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:06, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- If so, ChrisTheDude, then how do I rephrase the sentence? How do I say that he has married a woman who has a son from her previous marriage/relationship? — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 10:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Kailash
[edit]- Sameer dies as a result of a racist attack by school bullies - It happens in the US, right? Perhaps you may want to link to Racism in the United States.
- Rizwan takes her literally - Not like she was saying an idiom, was she? Or maybe an adynaton? Either way, you may want to replace "literally" with "seriously".
Just these two. I hope there is someone who has enough time to conduct a source review. --Kailash29792 (talk) 09:10, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Kailash29792, I have resolved the first but I believe "literally" would be more appropriate as she does tell him to tell the president that his name is Rizwan Khan and he's not a terrorist and questions him if he can do it. Although she said that out of grief for her son's death, Rizwan takes her words literally as it is and tries to implement it by meeting the president. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 10:27, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: Not on the basis of COI, but because I find this good enough for FL. ----Kailash29792 (talk) 04:58, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you very much, Kailash29792. Your thoughts and comments are greatly appreciated. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 09:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Vedant
[edit]I'll take a look later today. VedantTalk 04:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "a NRI suffering" - maybe you could spell out non-resident Indian as it'll be self-explanatory and the reader would not have to go to a separate page.
- The latter half of the first paragraph is a little monotonous with the overuse of was/were sentences. Maybe you could mix it up.
- Shouldn't the article use INRConvert?
- "went on to win for including" - four?
- "with Johar alone winning for Best Director (Bachchan)." - the "alone" isn't required.
The rest looks good. VedantTalk 16:55, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Numerounovedant, I have hopefully resolved all your comments. Do let me know if there's anything pending. Thanks. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 08:36, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- In that case, I can support this for promotion. Fine work Ssven2. VedantTalk 15:37, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you very much, Numerounovedant. Your thoughts and comments are greatly appreciated. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 15:58, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support from BeatlesLedTV
[edit]- Support – Looks good to me. Most things I can think of are covered above. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 01:53, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you very much, BeatlesLedTV. Your thoughts and comments are greatly appreciated. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 02:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Comments from Jim
[edit]I read and re-read the lead a couple of times before I worked out that this is probably set in the US, not India. If that's correct, it would help to make it explicit Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:28, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. As suggested, Jimfbleak. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 14:32, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I can't see anything else, changed to support above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:08, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you very much, Jimfbleak. Your thoughts and comments are greatly appreciated. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 11:56, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I can't see anything else, changed to support above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:08, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from The Rambling Man
[edit]| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 11:50, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments
Otherwise all good. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:25, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support this one is good go, nice work. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:50, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you very much, The Rambling Man. Your thoughts and comments are greatly appreciated. — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 12:17, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 20:37, 5 March 2018 (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.
- 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 promoted by The Rambling Man via FACBot (talk) 23:31, 1 March 2018 (UTC) [17].[reply]
- Nominator(s): ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 21:30, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating List of HolbyBlue episodes for featured list because I feel that after many months of hard work on improving this article, it is now ready to be considered for promotion to Featured List. I began working on this article back in July, having not seen any of the episodes, but despite this having a good understanding of the show. I watched and researched all of the episodes from both series and constructed elaborate summaries from there. I believe that the prose is professional. Although it took me a long time to write a lead that I was satisfied with, I feel that it covers all the necessary aspects of the show, summarises HolbyBlue neatly, and is suitable in length. This article is not the target of any recent edit wars. This is my first FLC and I look forward to it hopefully succeeding after many hard months of work on it. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 21:30, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 12:16, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments
That's about it from me. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:36, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
| Resolved comments from BeatlesLedTV (talk) 22:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
;Comments from BeatlesLedTV
That's all I got. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 16:07, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
- Support – Good for me. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 22:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "The show was also nominated for six awards during its run." Unless you have a source that specifically says six, I'd consider axing this sentence. That'll all I've got. Courcelles (talk) 05:44, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Courcelles:
Done Removed the sentence as I could not find a source specifically saying six. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 08:15, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Courcelles:
- Support This isn't the easiest type of list to do, good work. Courcelles (talk) 13:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from Aoba47
- For this part (and focuses on the daily lives of a number of police officers working at Holby South police station.), I would remove “a number of”. It sounds rather vague and does not add much to the sentence. Done ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I have a suggestion for this sentence (Two series of HolbyBlue aired, with the show's ensemble cast for series one consisting of Jimmy Akingbola, Joe Jacobs, David Sterne, Cal MacAninch, James Hillier, Kacey Ainsworth, Richard Harrington, Zöe Lucker, Chloe Howman, Kieran O'Brien, Tim Pigott-Smith and Elaine Glover.). I have received a note in the past during FAC reviews that the “with” construction is discouraged from featured-level work. I would revise the sentence to avoid that. I also not certain about the placement of the “Two series of HolbyBlue aired) as it would seem more appropriate for the second paragraph, which focuses more on the airdates, than the first paragraph, which focuses more on the characters and actors. Done ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- For this sentence (By the end of the first series, Pigott-Smith had departed.), is there any information on why the actor left the show? A brief part here could be useful as it is rather abrupt. Done ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Something about this sentence (Series two saw actors Oliver Milburn and James Thornton join the drama.) reads a little odd to me. I think it would be better to use this structure (Actors Oliver Milburn and James Thornton joined the drama for series two). I think that the “saw” verbage is throwing me off a little. Done ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Unlink “Tony Jordan” in the second paragraph as he was already linked in the first paragraph. Done ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- For this part (at 8 pm, which was one week later than scheduled, for unknown reasons.), I do not believe that the second comma is necessary. Done ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The word “series” is used quite a lot in the second paragraph. I would try to cut down on that if possible. Done ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- For this part (this time for an extended run of twelve episodes, a 50% increase from the first series.), I do not think that the “a 50% increase from the first series” is necessary. Done ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I would try to vary the sentence construction for the end of the third paragraph as it is rather repetitive (i.e. X was nominated for/under Y).
- @Aoba47: I think I have managed to reconstruct the sentences so they are less repetitive now, but I am not too sure. Could you let me know what you think of the last few sentences now please? ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful work with this list. Once my comments are addressed, I will support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 22:43, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for addressing everything. This is a great and interesting list. It definitely inspires me to do another list project in the near future. I support this for promotion. Have a wonderful rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 22:19, 27 February 2018 (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.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.