Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/October 2019

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) 17:19:06 28 October 2019 (UTC) [1].

---

List of songs recorded by Paul McCartney

Nominator(s): – zmbro _(talk) 16:04, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Hendrix has two supports so I think I'm good to go with my next song list. This time one of the most important musicians of our time – and all time – and (very debatably) the greatest English musician of all time, Paul McCartney. I've already done George Harrison and John Lennon's song lists so I figured I might as well do Paul's. It includes all of his solo work, his recordings with other bands such as Wings, the Fireman, among others, and songs he's credited as featured artist, as well as classical music he has composed. As always, any comments or concerns are appreciated. Up next will be Ringo Starr's list and of course, the Fab Four together. – zmbro _(talk) 16:04, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:32, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

*An extremely impressive achievement, considering the sheer number of songs covered. I will do a full review later, but one quick point - I don't think the heading "Classical Songs" is appropriate. Firstly, there shouldn't be a capital S on songs, but beyond that most of them are (to the best of my knowledge) not songs. I think "Classical pieces" would be more appropriate -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:40, 30 September 2019 (UTC) Yeah, this by far the longest one I've ever done; I started this two years ago and it's taken til now to really get it to where it needs to be, for someone as important as McCartney. What's insane is that this list doesn't even cover his Beatles songs, which is over 200 more, as well as songs he just played on as a musician, like Jackie Lomax's "Sour Milk Sea" or Foo Fighters' "Concrete and Gold", or stuff he produced, like Mary Hopkin's "Those Were the Days"; that honestly deserves its own list. You make a good point about the title thing – fixed. Can't wait til hear your comments. :-) – zmbro (talk) 00:16, 1 October 2019 (UTC) More comments Do we need his year of birth in the first sentence? – Since he's still alive definitely not. Sorry force of habit :-) "his murder in December in 1980" => "his murder in December 1980" – whoops "Other individuals McCartney has collaborated with" => "Other individuals with whom McCartney has collaborated" – done Seems strange that all the people in this sentence are categorised by their nationality, other than Godrich – fixed Think that's all I have on the lead. I have not looked at the table yet -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:40, 1 October 2019 (UTC) First comments on the table is that the artist column does not sort correctly. Artists who have a Forename/Surname name need to sort by surname. Groups whose names start with "The" need to sort as if the "the" wasn't there -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:02, 1 October 2019 (UTC) Whoops, I'll take care of that in a bit. – zmbro (talk) 22:58, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

• • Another comment on the classical section, and maybe this is me being overly pedantic, but we'll see ;-) I had a look at the article on "Ocean's Kingdom" and it says it was "performed by the London Classical Orchestra". I understand that ol' Macca composed the score, but should the tracks from it be included on a list of songs recorded by him, if he didn't actually perform on it in any way...? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:47, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

• I had wondered that too. I mainly put it in the list since it's technically a "Paul McCartney album" even though he doesn't explicitly perform (same with Working Classical); AllMusic lists the performer as "Paul McCartney / London Symphony Orchestra" so I think it's good. Should I just remove it? – zmbro _(talk) 01:07, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

• I'm not sure. It's a bit of a grey area - most performers with lists of "songs recorded by...." haven't also composed ballet scores :-) I will see what other people think...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:32, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

**Further comments on the table: Songwriters for "Bye Bye Blackbird" should be highlighted "Coming Up" and "Coming Up (Live at Glasgow)" are the same song, surely? So no reason for two separate entries "Love is Strange" should be noted as a Mickey & Sylvia cover "My One and Only Love" is a Vic Damone cover "No Other Baby" was first recorded by Dickie Bishop and The Sidekicks, not The Vipers "That's All Right Mama" was first recorded by Arthur Crudup, not Elvis Notes C and D say the same thing, just worded fractionally different - see no reason not to combine them Notes which are complete sentences need a full stop HTH -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:37, 3 October 2019 (UTC) ChrisTheDude All done. Over 400 songs so I'm bound to miss something :-) Gonna take care of the sorting issues now in the artist col now. – zmbro (talk) 16:04, 5 October 2019 (UTC) Edit: Sorting issues should be taken care of. Lmk if I missed anything :-) – zmbro (talk) 16:27, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Comments

• Just had a quick look, and found that the notes and references are over linked per MOS:OVERLINK, there are many, like "the beatles", " Paul McCartney", " Parlophone", "Capitol Recors", "Apple records", "All music" and many other. Linking once is enough. If I find any other issues I will let you know. Dey subrata (talk) 20:27, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
• The tables are also over linked, mainly "Original Release" column in Songs table and "Release" column in the table Classical pieces.

• Dey subrata It's actually customary in these types of lists to overlink like that, primarily the release cols with albums so that the reader can get to them with every song they look at. But I can definitely take care of the ones in references and notes which should not be a big deal. In previous lists I've done I've tended to overlink locations like the US and UK which I've stopped but you're probably right about record labels and whatnot. – zmbro _(talk) 22:58, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Support Comments from Aoba47

• I understand the meaning of this sentence (Originally gaining prominence as a member of the Beatles, his songwriting partnership with bandmate John Lennon was one of the most celebrated in music history), but I am not certain if it is grammatically correct. I believe the initial, dependent phrase, in this case "Originally gaining prominence as a member of the Beatles", is supposed to describe the noun of the next part of the sentence. In this case, it would be attached to "his songwriting partnership with bandmate John Lennon", and that would not be correct.

• Changed to "As a member of the Beatles, he formed a songwriting partnership with bandmate John Lennon that is one of the most celebrated in music history." That better?

• I think that is better. Thank you for the revision. Aoba47 (talk) 05:50, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

• For this part "Around this time McCartney collaborated", I believe there should be a comma between "time" and "McCartney". – done
• For this part "More recently, McCartney has recorded music", I would avoid the phrase "more recently" as its meaning will change as time passes. "More recently" to a reader in 2025 or 2030 will mean something different to someone reading this now. It would probably be better to put in the decade or some approximation instead. I have always been told in the past to avoid using phrases like "recently" for the above reasons.

• Changed to "in the 2010s"

Surprisingly enough, I genuinely know very little about the Beatles or Paul McCartney outside of their respective greatest hits so I can only speak to the prose of the lead. You have done an excellent job because it is both informative and interesting and makes sense to a completely unfamiliar reader like myself. I just have three rather minor remarks, but once those are addressed, I will support this for promotion. Have a wonderful rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 00:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

All done. They really are one of the greatest. And now's a really good time to listen to them, since the Abbey Road remix just came out last week. You should check more of their stuff out if you get a chance! Thanks for the comments :-) – zmbro _(talk) 04:39, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

• I will definitely make sure to check out more of their work in the future. Thank you for addressing everything. I support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 05:51, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Ojorojo

Looks good, but there's a lot to take in. There was a separate Wings list – there are enough songs and they have their own discography. Or is it similar to Hendrix vs the Experience, where it's sometimes hard to distinguish the two? —Ojorojo (talk) 19:35, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Ojorojo I originally made a separate one for them but eventually realized doing that was dumb since other bands McCartney was in (like the Fireman with Youth) were included and Wings wasn't. A few things I thought about were: one of the main criticisms of Wings throughout their whole run was being none other than backup musicians for McCartney (was actually Henry McCullough's stated reason for leaving the band in 1973). On top of that, multiple compilations including All the Best! and Pure McCartney include Wings with his solo work and McCartney himself on his tours performs Wings' work colloquially so I just decided to merge it back and keep it with his post-Beatles work as a whole. In the case of Hendrix vs the Experience, I think it's a little easier to distinguish between McCartney's solo work and his work with Wings but not that much, considering both "Maybe I'm Amazed" and "Coming Up" achieved greater commercial success with live versions by Wings than their studio versions, but again that's why I just decided to merge it, because to me it makes more sense. – zmbro _(talk) 00:16, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

OK, makes sense. I did some spot checks on the album and singles refs and they look fine, so I'll support. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:07, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:09, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
• Support -- Alexcalamaro (talk) 16:21, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Woof, that's a long table. Agree with above decision to keep Wings stuff here, though. Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 17:19, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

• 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) 17:19:08 28 October 2019 (UTC) [2].

---

List of songs recorded by Jimi Hendrix

Nominator(s): Ojorojo (talk) and – zmbro _(talk) 23:16, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

After a previous failed nomination, User:Ojorojo and I have resolved the differences we had from that nomination and have collaborated extensively over the past few months into what we feel is FL worthy. Hendrix is known as one of the greatest guitarists of all time, and we made sure to make that known. We also decided to split the table into songs released during his lifetime and songs released posthumously, as we feel his most well-known songs were pre-1970, as well as most of his posthumous catalogue not being majorly well-known. As always, we'll take any comments or concerns anyone might have. Happy editing! – zmbro _(talk) 23:16, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Comments

• "However, Hendrix supplied his own interpretations, " => "Hendrix supplied his own interpretations, however"
• "as well as more the contemporary rock" - think a couple of these words are in the wrong order
• "Songs, such as "Freedom"" - don't need that comma
• "nonetheless has become part of his recording legacy" => "nonetheless it has become part of his recording legacy"
• "A majority of Hendrix's song catalogue" => "The majority of Hendrix's song catalogue"
• I would put the notes about alternate titles (Instrumental Solo, etc) against both listings, that way whichever one comes first will always have the note and readers don't have to scroll down to the other
• When sorting by title, "...And the Gods Made Love" comes at the end because of the dots - this should sort under A.
• "The Stars That Play with Laughing Sam's Dice" also sorts at the end when sorting by title but I have no idea why
• Stone Free is missing its opening "
• Refs against the last sentence of the Songs released posthumously section are in the wrong order numerically
• Might be worth clarifying that this section contains (I presume) only songs from the Douglas and Experience Hendrix releases and not the nine million other albums of dubious provenance released since his death. Or if it does include tracks from other releases, clarify which.

  Clarified: all are official, but kept it simple. There are others including by Kramer and Mitchell, Michael Jeffery, John Jansen, and Eric Blackstead, but thought this was too much detail. If it helps, I'll change it. —Ojorojo (talk) 19:30, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

• Same comments as above about multiple title/see also entries
• When sorting the second table by title, "The Little Drummer Boy" / "Silent Night", "The Queen" and "The Sunshine of Your Love" all appear at the end, again not sure why.
• Note Z - "Up from the Skies" was as a single in the US - missing word there
• Note AQ - "Hey Baby" is sometimes titled "New Rising Sun", although that is also the title of different earlier demo => "a different...."
• Note BE - "Straight Ahead" was titled "Pass It On (Straight Ahead)" on Live at Berkeley - in that case should there not be a listing for "Pass It On (Straight Ahead)" as per other alternate titles?
• Think that's it from me...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:04, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude Everything should be taken care of. Sorry it took a while, been pretty busy irl lately. – zmbro _(talk) 22:38, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:49, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Support Comments from Aoba47

• Would it be helpful to link "demo" in this sentence, "He also left behind a large number of partially completed songs, demos, and jams in a variety of styles, which continue to be issued.", to the demo (music) article?

  Added link. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:26, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

• Is there a citation for this sentence: "The majority of Hendrix's song catalogue is now made up of recordings released posthumously." I am just wondering because all of the other sentences in the lead except for this one has a citation.

  There's no citation I could find, but thought that it could be reasonably drawn from the relative lengths of the main vs posthumous tables (or one could count them). It was intended as a lead-in to the tables and doesn't add much; since it is conspicuous by the lack of a citation, I removed it. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:26, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

  Understandable. I agree with your comment. The only reason I pointed it out was because it was the only sentence in the lead without a citation. Aoba47 (talk) 23:30, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Overall, wonderful work with the list. I have never listened to Hendrix's music, but this list was an interesting read. I only have two very minor comments, and once those are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 01:22, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you for addressing everything. I support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 23:30, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Famous Hobo

• I feel like the Jimi Hendrix Experience should be mentioned more in the lede. It may have just be a vehicle for Hendrix, but regardless, they are still considered one of the most important bands of the 60s, if not all time. The fact that the Experience are briefly mentioned in a footnote doesn't feel right. I would mention how a lot of Hendrix' material was recorded with the Experience in the first paragraph. Outside of "Machine Gun", every song mentioned in the first paragraph was recorded when Hendrix was with the Experience.

  Actually, "All Along the Watchtower" and "Voodoo Chile", were recorded with additional musicians (without Redding), so technically they are not songs recorded by the Experience (a significant number of songs on Axis and Electric Ladyland do not include Redding). Additionally, "The Star-Spangled Banner", "Johnny B. Goode", "Blue Suede Shoes", "Freedom", and "Hey Baby (New Rising Sun)" were recorded after Redding left the group and were released under "Jimi Hendrix" rather than JHE (this applies to most of the posthumous releases). Rather than include all the various backing musicians, the focus of the lead is on songs. JHE and their albums are noted in the first sentence of the "Main songs" section. Zmbro made a similar point; maybe they can add something. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:06, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• Yeah I had originally said the same thing when we were building it up to FLC but Ojorojo brought up the same point, that he recorded with many more individuals than just Mitchell and Redding (and Miles and Cox on Band of Gypsys), so to me it's not a big deal to not mention the Experience. – zmbro _(talk) 23:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

• Something I noticed is that there are a couple of songs Hendrix recorded before he became famous which aren't listed here. For example "Testify" by the Isley Brothers features Hendrix on guitar. I'm not sure if this song should be included, just something to point out.

  There's a lot of material that Hendrix recorded as a sideman. The focus here is on songs he recorded as the principle artist. To include all the recordings made with and released by other artists would change the scope and lengthen an already long list. Perhaps a separate "List of songs recorded by Jimi Hendrix as a sideman" could be created to handle these. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:06, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• I'll be completely honest, I'm just gonna assume that the actual list itself has all of the notable songs, and that there aren't any mistakes with the years or writers. Famous Hobo (talk) 02:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

  After some more checking, I found a 40-second solo private recording Hendrix made in a hotel room in 1968, which was included on the 50th anniversary deluxe edition of Electric Ladyland released last November. In his hand written lyrics, he titled it "Our Lovely Home", but it was released with the title "Snowballs at My Window". I'll add it to the list. I'm confident that all the notable songs ("subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label") are included and are suitably referenced. —Ojorojo (talk) 13:38, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Famous Hobo Status update on this? – zmbro _(talk) 19:57, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Support — I've read through this article and I think it's a really good one. I did some ref spot checking and it seems alright. Great list. — Lirim | Talk 20:46, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! – zmbro _(talk) 22:09, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 17:19, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

• 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) 17:19:07 28 October 2019 (UTC) [3].

---

List of Hot Country Singles number ones of 1980

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:21, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

A total of 32 of these annual country #1 lists are now at FL and another seems on course, so here is the next in the series, covering a year in which none other than Clint Eastwood had a chart-topper. As ever your comments will be welcomed and acted upon promptly..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:21, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Support Comments from Aoba47

• It may be helpful to make this part (all three singles spending three consecutive weeks at number one.) into its own sentence with something like (All three singles spent three consecutive weeks at number one.) since the sentence is already pretty dense with information from introducing four different song titles and two singers.
• Reference 8 leads to a dead page (i.e. "page not found"). I would recommend archiving all the references if possible to avoid link rot and death.

Otherwise, everything looks good. Once both comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 01:41, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Fixed the long sentence, replaced the dead ref -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:19, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing everything. I support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 21:41, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support – Good for me. Great job as always. – zmbro _(talk) 15:48, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
• Everything looks good, I support the move, but as suggested by the other editor try to archive the citations, it will be better. Dey subrata (talk) 14:15, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
• Support – I spot checked a few refs and all look good. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:14, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
• Support – I see no issues.Lirim | Talk 18:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Just to note, I'm going to be away until next Saturday. If any new issues are raise here, I'll address them then..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:44, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

• Source review: The sources are all reliable and properly formatted. My issue with reference 8 has been addressed during my prose review. From my spot-checks, all the information seems to be properly supported with the citations so this passes my source review. Aoba47 (talk) 16:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Promoting another one. --PresN 17:19, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

• 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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 21:04:03 27 October 2019 (UTC) [4].

---

Jennifer Love Hewitt discography

Nominator(s): Aoba47 (talk) 01:42, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello everyone! Jennifer Love Hewitt is primarily known as an actress, but some people may be surprised to learn that she also had a music career. I had previously worked on the list of songs recorded by Jennifer Love Hewitt earlier in the year, and it successfully passed through the FLC process. It seems like the right time to draw attention to its companion list. I have only done one discography (for Alyssa Milano) before so any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 01:42, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments

• "American actress and singer Jennifer Love Hewitt has released: four studio albums, a compilation album, seven music videos, and thirteen singles (as well as five promotional singles)" => "American actress and singer Jennifer Love Hewitt has released four studio albums, a compilation album, seven music videos, and thirteen singles, as well as five promotional singles"
• "Hewitt moved Los Angeles" - where did she move it to? ;-)
• Mention that her first album was credited to "Love Hewitt" (and any other releases as appropriate)
• "which resulted in Hewitt being removed from Atlantic" - I would say "which resulted in Hewitt being dropped by Atlantic" - that's the usual wording, I think, and "removed from" makes it sound like she was physically removed from the premises :-)
• "The song reached number 59 [...] as well as number eight [...] and number 5" - bit of inconsistency here in how the numbers are shown
• "It was gold certification" => "It received a gold certification"
• "number 31 on ARIA Charts" - I think ARIA publish multiple charts so probably need to be more specific
• "number 75 on the GfK Entertainment charts, and number 72 on the Dutch Charts" - same for both of these two. Even if the individual charts don't have their own articles, I would still write "Dutch album chart" or whatever
• "both charted in the United States and internationally, and received a gold certification from the ARIA" - did both receive the certification? If so, I would say "and each received a gold certification from the ARIA"
• The compilation album has what I presume to be its catalogue number shown, but the other albums don't - better to be consistent
• Personally I would not include "acting" appearances in other artists' videos, as I don't feel they are part of her discography
• "Madeleine's Love Song" is spelt differently in the table to the lead
• Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:31, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: Thank you for the comments! I believe that I have address all of them. There were definitely some amusing typos in there lol. Maybe, Hewitt literally pushed Los Angeles to an entirely different state or was kicked out of the Atlantic offices by security lol. Let me know if there is anything else that requires further revision, and have a wonderful rest of your day! Aoba47 (talk) 19:33, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support - all looks good now as far as I can see...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:41, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you. I did not expect to get comments so quickly. Aoba47 (talk) 20:49, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• No problem. Enjoy the rest of your day. As for me, as I live in the UK, I am off to bed now :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:53, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Onceinawhile

• Is there a source for the first sentence "has released four studio albums, a compilation album, seven music videos, and thirteen singles, as well as five promotional singles" and what date is this verified to?

• I have followed the model for featured lists on discographies, like Lorde discography and Meghan Trainor discography. The citations used in the body of the lists are used to reference this information. It is also the most current information. I have not seen a discography FL include a date verified for this kind of sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 07:04, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

• Makes sense. Which particular source(s) makes you feel certain that the sentence is accurate (i.e. that we are not missing any)?

• I do not think there is a single site/source that lists all of Hewitt's music (albums, singles, and music videos). Hewitt is far more well-known as an actress, and I would not be surprised if people did not know she released music at all. I have checked through sites like AllMusic, Discogs, and others to make sure I have not missed anything, and I am pretty confident that I have caught everything. Aoba47 (talk) 12:15, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

• "on March 1992" => either put the specific day in March, or change it to "in March"

• Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 07:04, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

• "it produced three singles" seems an odd way to refer to an album. Perhaps "it included"?

• Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 07:04, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

• "under-performed commercially" -> underperformed what exactly - her other singles, or just Altantic's expectations

• Revised. It pretty much means that the albums did not sell. Aoba47 (talk) 12:09, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

• "spawned two singles... was the only promotional single for the album." -> I don't understand this. Doesn't this mean there were three singles? And what is a promotional single - can this be wikilinked?

• Promotional single is already linked in the first sentence, and a promotional single and a full single are treated as two separate things in the music industry. Aoba47 (talk) 12:09, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

• "and played a lead role in it" -> "in which she played a lead role"

• Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 12:09, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

• "has shifted her attention to acting over music" -> this sentence should move further up chronologically (before the 2006 reference).

• Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 12:09, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Well done Aoba47! A very well written list. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:33, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

• @Onceinawhile: Thank you for the review! I believe I have addressed everything. Have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 12:15, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Great, you have my support. Onceinawhile (talk) 17:49, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Let me know if you need any help with any of your projects. Aoba47 (talk) 19:05, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments

Not an expert but after a quick look got some points which need attention.

• it included three singles: "Dancing Queen", "What's It Gonna Take", and "Please Save Us the World". need a citation at least you can link youtube.

• The citations for the singles are already present in the body of the list. Aoba47 (talk) 05:19, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Last line, The same year, Hewitt collaborated with Sophie B. Hawkins on a song for the comedy film Alpha Males Experiment. needs a citation

• The citation for this is already present in the body of the list. Aoba47 (talk) 05:19, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• While using italics for albums, series and movies, any reason why such used for Billboard, its not in any of the category mentioned before.

• Billboard is a magazine so it should italicized. Aoba47 (talk) 05:19, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• I would rather ask to have seperate column for reference in the tables.

• To the best of my knowledge, discographies use references this way. See Meghan Trainor discography as an example. I understand what you mean though. Aoba47 (talk) 05:19, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Reference- 4 needs to add original date.

• Added. Aoba47 (talk) 05:30, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Reference 9,18,19, 35- Billboard have dates, ncan be added

• The dates show when the album or song peaked on the Billboard chart, which is not exactly the same as when the site published the information so I do not think it would be appropriate to use the dates here. Aoba47 (talk) 05:30, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Everything else seems ok to me. Dey subrata (talk) 03:46, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• @Dey subrata: Thank you for the comments. I believe that I have addressed everything. If there is anything else that needs to corrected, please let me know. Aoba47 (talk) 05:30, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Looks ok to me, I support. Dey subrata (talk) 07:07, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 15:28, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Ojorojo

• All looks good, but I have a question about the tables. In the "Album" column of "As lead artist", the first entry "Non-album single" is shaded, which is usually used for entries in the first columns of tables. This also appears in columns for "Other appearances" (use rowspan=2?) and "Music videos". They all use {{n/a}}. Is there a reason for this? (I hope this isn't a peculiarity of my system, which happens from time to time). —Ojorojo (talk) 15:46, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• @Ojorojo: Thank you for the comments. I changed the "Other appearances" table to include "rowspan=2", and I revised the "N/A" in the same part to "None" to be more descriptive. I have seen the {{n/a}} template and shading used in other discography lists, but I would be more than happy to remove it if necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 22:43, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support Apparently, there are a number of templates that may be used in tables to provide contrast, including {{n/a}}, {{Non-album single}}, and {{Unknown}}. Their use reflects stylistic preference, so no need to change. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:10, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 01:27, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Support from zmbro

• Good for me. Happy to support. – zmbro _(talk) 15:50, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 17:36, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Support from Rhain

• I really wanted to find something to criticise here, but I've got nothing. You've got me stumped! It's a support from me. Well done. – Rhain ☔ 07:55, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 08:00, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Source review

• Source review – Us Weekly (ref 8) is one of those celebrity gossip-type magazines, and I'm not 100% sold on it being a sufficiently reliable source. Would it be possible to find a substitute reference for that part? Otherwise, the reliability and formatting look okay, and the link-checker shows no issues. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

• @Giants2008: Thank you for the source review! I have replaced the Us Weekly source with something hopefully more suitable. Aoba47 (talk) 15:33, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for swapping that one out. The source review has been passed. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:09, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 03:11, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

• 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) 21:03, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

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) 01:54:05 10 October 2019 (UTC) [5].

---

Volpi Cup for Best Actress

Nominator(s): Damian Vo (talk) 15:41, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

A list covers the Volpi Cup for Best Actress, presented by the Venice Film Festival since 1932. I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets all of the FL criteria. Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Damian Vo (talk) 15:41, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Aoba47

• For this part (for her title role in The Sin of Madelon Claudet), I think it should be "the title role" instead of "her title role".
• For these parts (1947 to 1949), (1983 to 1987), and (introduced in 1993), should the years be linked like in other parts of the lead?

Great work with the list. Once my relatively minor comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any insight on my current FAC. Either way, have a great rest of your week. Aoba47 (talk) 01:01, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

All fixed. Thank you so much for your review. Please let me know if there's anything else you require. Damian Vo (talk) 17:33, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing everything. I support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 17:35, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Damian Vo (talk) 14:58, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude

• "The 1st ceremony was held in 1932, where....." - the second clause hangs off 1932, which is a date not a place, so "when" rather than "where", I think

Fixed. Damian Vo (talk) 09:32, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

• What's the source for all the name changes in paragraph 2?

The changes are mentioned in the table references by year. Damian Vo (talk) 09:32, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

• "The awards given from 1947 to 1949 were named the International Award for the Best Actor" - Best Actress, surely? This also applies to note C.

Fixed. Damian Vo (talk) 09:32, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

• "There has been two films" - have, not has

Fixed. Damian Vo (talk) 09:32, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Think that's it from me...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:07, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

• @Damian Vo: apologies, I had missed that you replied. I've noticed that you have "Only three of them has won more than once", which should be "Only three of them have won more than once". Also, you mention the two films for which two actresses won the award, but it might also be worth mentioning the one occasion (1988) when the award was shared by two actresses in different films. As it's only ever happened once, this is probably worth highlighting in the lead...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:14, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

It's great to hear back from you. I fixed all the things you mentioned above. Let me know if you have any further request. Damian Vo (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Now happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:59, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Damian Vo (talk) 14:58, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Comments from zmbro

• Gong Li isn't sorted by her last name

Her family name is Gong. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

• A Pornographic Affair should be sorted by "Pornographic Affair" per WP:Sorting

Fixed. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

• Any reason the lead only has 2 refs? (and only the first paragraph at that)

Expanded. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Rest looks good. Great job on this. Perhaps Volpi Cup for Best Actor next? – zmbro _(talk) 20:26, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@Zmbro: Sorry for the reply. I'd love to promote the list for best actor someday. I made some changes per your comments. Let me know if you have any further suggestion. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

@Zmbro: Hi, it's been over a month since your last comments :( I'm still waiting for your final verdict. Damian Vo (talk) 03:52, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Support – Oh wow I am so sorry I completely forgot that I commented here. My bad. :-( – zmbro _(talk) 19:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

That's alright. Thank you :) Damian Vo (talk) 00:19, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Resolved comments from A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 19:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Oppose Clearly a lot of work has gone into this list, but I'm afraid that I don't think it's at FL-level just yet. These are my edits; please feel free to revert if you disagree with them. My biggest problem is the sourcing. Out of 65 references, all but one of them come from the exact same source: Vienna Biennale. This is a problem because it means that almost the entire article is based solely on what the organisation that presents the award has said about it, which in turn raises concerns about bias and neutrality. References to more third-party sources are needed. A Google Books search returns plenty of results – could any of them be included in this article? Like zmbro says, two citations is fewer than I would expect to see in the lead of a featured list. Beefing up the number of citations to third-party sources might also beef up the lead, which, in my opinion, is lacking some information that I would otherwise expect to see. For example, exactly how many times has the award been presented? Is there any reason that it wasn't presented from 1969 to 1982? You might also want to include, say, what the actresses who receive the award think of it. Are there any quotes from any of them on what winning meant to them? At the moment, the lead doesn't really expand on what a reader can already discern from the table itself – is there anything else that you could say? Expanded. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC) Per WP:ALT#Importance of context, most of the alt text for the images probably needs to be rewritten. Alt text such as "A caucasian woman looking to the left" doesn't provide the necessary context for our visually-impaired readers. Something like, for example, "Black-and-white publicity photograph of Katharine Hepburn in 1941" might be more helpful. Fixed. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC) Might be worth wikilinking "slate" to Slate (elections). Added. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC) I'd have thought that "first ceremony" would be more appropriate than "1st ceremony", given MOS:ORDINAL – I might bring this up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards, so leave it for now. The final sentence of the lead needs an "As of 2019". Added. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC) Per MOS:NAVLIST, articles that are already linked in navboxes (such as Volpi Cup for Best Actor) don't need to be repeated in the See also section. Removed. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC) I think this article still has some way to go before it's at FL level. I'm happy to help in any way that I can. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 22:04, 11 August 2019 (UTC) @A Thousand Doors: Sorry for the reply. I made some changes per your comments. Let me know if you have any further suggestion. Damian Vo (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Looks much better now. I do have a couple of final comments:

• Do we know how the May 1968 events in France caused the award to be suspended for so long? If the events themselves only lasted a couple of months, why was the award not given for an entire decade?

None of the sources I found give the exact explanation. I gave the sentence a little tweak. Damian Vo (talk) 04:57, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

• Personally, I don't think you really need the actress table in the Multiple wins section – the lead already conveys the same information in a single sentence. If there were an actress that had won, say, three times, then the table might serve more a purpose, but to me it seems a bit redundant. But I'll leave it to you to decide.

Removed. Damian Vo (talk) 04:57, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

• "35 Years Of Sugar Cane Alley To Be Marked At BFI Film Fest" -> "35 Years of Sugar Cane Alley to Be Marked at BFI Film Fest"

Fixed. Damian Vo (talk) 04:57, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 19:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@A Thousand Doors: Hi, it's been over a month since your last comments :( I'm still waiting for your final verdict. Damian Vo (talk) 03:52, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Source review passed. Since the last reviewer doesn't seem to be coming back, and the remaining issues appear to be fixed for me, promoting. --PresN 01:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

• 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) 01:54:04 10 October 2019 (UTC) [6].

---

List of Local Nature Reserves in West Sussex

Nominator(s): Dudley Miles (talk) 17:27, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

This is the latest in my nominations of lists of Local Nature Reserves and is in the same format as FLs such as Kent and Suffolk. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:27, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

• Support - I genuinely couldn't find anything to query -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:32, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
• Support – I couldn't find anything to query either, despite a determined effort. Very happy to support. This is a fine addition to a marvellous series of articles. Tim riley talk 14:21, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
• Comment – Just one comment from me after reading through the list: refs 17 and 36 are exactly are same and ripe to be combined. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:26, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

• Done. Many thanks for your review Giants2008. Dudley Miles (talk) 08:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support – With that one small issue taken care of, I'd say that the list comfortably meets the FL criteria. Nice work. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:11, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Source review passed; a very brief set of reviews, but at this point I think the pattern of these lists is pretty well defined. Promoting. --PresN 01:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

• 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) 01:54:07 10 October 2019 (UTC) [7].

---

List of battleships of Japan

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk) 17:46, 21 August 2019 (UTC) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk)

This is a list of all battleships built or acquired by Japan, covering the period between the advent of modern pre-dreadnought battleships in the 1890s and the end of Japan's status as a naval power of the first rank in 1945. This list is the capstone to the Japanese national subtopic of the Operation Majestic Titan special project. It just passed a MILHIST A-class review, so hopefully there aren't many problems that need to be addressed. Thanks to all who take the time to review the list. Parsecboy (talk) 17:46, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

CommentsSupport by CPA-5

I guess lists never get old and long too. :) I'll review this one later. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 17:06, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

• In 1919, President Woodrow Wilson announced the resumption Add "American" before "President".
  • Good idea
• US v. U.S.
  • Fixed
• as part of Admiral Kurita's Center Force.[155][152] Re-order the ref here.
  • Good catch
• See a lot of British afterwards.
  • Fixed
• I could remember that you Sturm said to me "True, but I don't want to switch between Imperial and metric formats half-way through the list" however some tables tell to me that metric units are the primary units. Why that now?
  • I think you're referring to gun calibers - the general rule of thumb is to have the primary unit the official name of the gun - Vickers didn't make a 35.6cm gun, they made a 14-inch gun, while the Kure Naval Arsenal didn't build 18.1-inch guns, they built 46cm guns

That's it, I think. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:43, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks CPA. Parsecboy (talk) 11:45, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@CPA-5:, was there anything else you'd like us to address? Parsecboy (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

• Not really, I have probably forgotten this nomination. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

CommentsSupport by PM

I reviewed this at Milhist ACR, so just a few quibbles here:

• in the lead, suggest "and rebuilt the Kongō-class battlecruisers into fast battleships and modernized the existing ships"
  • Good catch
• suggest "The ships were also assigned to the 1st Fleet before the Russo–Japanese War, were present..." to avoid starting a sentence with "Also"
  • Done
• drop the comma after "Sagami and Suwo," and after "Pobeda"
  • Done
• "by an air attack ion Kure Naval Base"
  • Fixed
• which sub sank Shinano? Earlier you have named the sub that sank Kongō
  • Added

That's all I could find. Nice job on this list. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:27, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Peacemaker. Parsecboy (talk) 11:49, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

No worries, supporting. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:54, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments by ChrisTheDude

• The first paragraph just has one ref right at the end - does that source the entire para?
  • That's a question for @Sturmvogel 66:
    • I did some digging around, and it does seem to cover the whole paragraph
• "But to counter" - don't start a sentence with "but" - suggest changing "To counter the Imperial Chinese Beiyang Fleet in the early 1890s, however....."
  • Works for me
• "they ordered" => "Japan ordered" (to make is absolutely clear who "they" were)
  • Done
• "rebuilt the Kongō-class battlecruisers into fast battleships and modernizing the existing ships" - seems to be a bit of a grammatical mish-mash here - should it be "modernized"?
  • Fixed per Peacemaker's comment above
• "As part of the 1st Fleet the sisters participated" - presume the "sisters" are the aforementioned ships? Might be worth clarifying.....
  • Clarified
• "Sagami and Suwo, were originally" - don't need that comma
  • Fixed
• "the Satsuma class were obsolete before they were even launched" - previously (eg under "Sagami and Suwo") you treat "class" as a singular noun, here it's plural - best to be consistent
  • Good catch
• "it couldn't afford to upgrade all of them" => "it could not afford to upgrade all of them"
  • Fixed
• I've just noticed that "sister ships" is linked under Ise class, even though it's about the eighth time the term is used. Best to link the first usage.
  • Fixed
• Think that's it from me..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:09, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Query - is anyone looking at the comments on this one? Since the FLC was started the article has only received a single edit, which was to add a wikilink, and none of the comments raised above seem to have been looked at in up to three weeks..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:58, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Nate, just jogging your memory about these comments. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:00, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, yeah, I think Sturm and I got busy with other things. I'll get to these now. Parsecboy (talk) 11:36, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: - is there anything else that needs to be addressed? Thanks again. Parsecboy (talk) 12:54, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

• Humblest apologies, I forgot all about this one. I will give it another once-over later today -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:05, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
  • No problem, we weren't exactly on the ball with responding to comments either ;) Parsecboy (talk) 13:11, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:33, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Source review passed (though of course it's mostly books). Always neat to see an OMT list come through, even after all these years! Promoting. --PresN 01:53, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

• 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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 20:02:24 6 October 2019 (UTC) [8].

---

Sanjay Dutt filmography

Nominator(s): ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 16:18, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because he is one of the biggest actor of Bollywood. Please leave any comments below.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 16:18, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

• Comment - I would suggest the lead needs a copy-edit by a native English speaker, as the quality of the English is unfortunately not very good. For example: "Rocky became semi-hit at the box office, and it was ranked number 10 on the list of highest-grossing film of 1981" - "semi-hit" is not an English word and "highest-grossing film" should be "highest-grossing films". There's little things like this that I could pick up in almost every sentence, so I suggest a thorough copy-editing is needed...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:58, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: I've submitted the article for copy edit.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 19:08, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Something that can be fixed while you are waiting for the copy edit: there are a lot of instances like "....and Vidhaata (1982). In Vidhaata (1982) he was cast....". You only need to wikilink the film and give the date the first time the film is mentioned. You don't need to keep using the link and showing the date every time.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:13, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

• Comment - I'm going to hold off looking at the lead again until it has been copy edited, but here's some comments on the tables:
  • "Cameo Appearance" should not have a capital A
  • "Sequel of 1999 Hit Movie Vaastav: the reality" should be simply "Sequel to Vaastav: The Reality"
  • In one case "special appearance" is shown after the name in the "role" column, but in other cases it's in the "notes" column - make sure they are all in the same column
  • What even is a "special appearance"?
  • In the films table, the year is first, but in the other two tables the title is first - why are they not the same?
  • Why does one table have "Note(s)" whereas the others have "Notes"?
  • Are those really his only television appearances? Some of them are talk shows - has one of the biggest stars in Indian cinema history only appeared on talk shows five or six times in a career of nearly forty years?
  • HTH -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:04, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

• ChrisTheDude, I've fixed all of the issues, raised above. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 17:50, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

*Comment - since there seems to be no sign of that copy edit happening, I will start to highlight the issues with the lead "opposite of Tina Ambani" => "opposite Tina Ambani" done "in Sunil Dutt-directed romantic action film" => "in the Sunil Dutt-directed romantic action film" done "Rocky was average at the box office" - I presume this is meant to mean that its box office revenue was only average, but how can that be true when you go on to say it was one of the highest-grossing films of the year? done "After his debut film he went to star in two films, including Johny I Love You (1982), and Vidhaata (1982)." - don't think you need this sentence at all done "Shammi Kapoor, the film went to become the highest-grossing Hindi-language films of 1982." => "Shammi Kapoor; the film went to become the highest-grossing Hindi-language film of 1982." done "After appearing in series of box-office flop films," => "After appearing in a series of box-office flops," done "After Naam (1986) he appeared in several films, including Imaandaar (1987), Inaam Dus Hazaar (1987), Jeete Hain Shaan Se (1988), Mardon Wali Baat (1988), Ilaaka (1989), Hum Bhi Insaan Hain (1989), Kanoon Apna Apna (1989) and Taaqatwar (1989)" - don't think you need any of that done "His appearance in Kabzaa (1988), and Hathyar (1989) both films received critical acclaim for his performances" => "His performances in Kabzaa (1988), and Hathyar (1989) received critical acclaim" done That's just the first paragraph. I will check in later with some more.......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:37, 16 August 2019 (UTC) "In 1991 he appeared in Lawrence D'Souza's Indian romantic drama film Saajan (1991)" - can't see any particular need to say "Indian" done "in the film he starred alongside Madhuri Dixit, and Salman Khan" => "in which he starred alongside Madhuri Dixit, and Salman Khan" done "Than he was nominated again for the Filmfare Award for Best Actor " => "He was nominated again for the award" done "After the two Best Actor nominations, he managed to win Filmfare Award for Best Actor, Star Screen Awards for Best Actor,[7] and IIFA Awards for Best Actor," => "He won the Filmfare Award for Best Actor, Star Screen Award for Best Actor,[7] and IIFA Award for Best Actor," done "He also received critical acclaim for his appearance, one film critics wrote, "Sanjay Dutt looks terrific but with a shaky screenplay he can't hold the excitement for long." - this comment really isn't "critical acclaim", it's essentially saying "he tries hard but the script is rubbish", which is faint praise at best done "After Vaastav: The Reality (1999), Dutt appeared in Vidhu Vinod Chopra's crime thriller film Mission Kashmir (2000)." => "Dutt next appeared in Vidhu Vinod Chopra's crime thriller film Mission Kashmir (2000)." done "Dutt was nominated four awards for Mission Kashmir (2000), including Filmfare Award for Best Actor,[10] IIFA Award for Best Actor,[11] Screen Award for Best Actor,[12] and Zee Cine Award for Best Actor – Male[13]," => "For this role he was nominated for the Filmfare Award for Best Actor,[10] IIFA Award for Best Actor,[11] Screen Award for Best Actor,[12] and Zee Cine Award for Best Actor – Male[13]," done "Dutt managed to win one award Screen Award for Best Supporting Actor." - what film was this for? It can't have been Mission Kashmir....... - it was Mission Kashmir Also don't say "managed to win", just say "won" done Back for some more later.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:51, 16 August 2019 (UTC) "In the beginnings of 2000's, he appeared in Jodi No.1 (2001), Pitaah (2002), and Kaante (2002)." - don't think you need this done "Dutt's appearance in Kaante (2002) was met with some award nominations and praised for his role in the film. Dutt was nominated for Filmfare Award for Best Supporting Actor,[14] and he managed to win Bollywood Movie Awards for Critics Male Award." => "For his performance in Kaante (2002) Dutt was nominated for the Filmfare Award for Best Supporting Actor,[14] and won the Bollywood Movie Awards for Critics Male Award." done "In 2003 Dutt appeared in Rajkumar Hirani's directorial debut comedy-drama film Munna Bhai M.B.B.S. (2003), the plot of the film" - start a new sentence with "the plot" done What is a "goon"? done - goon means thug/gangster "The film emerged as commercially successful at box office," => "The film was successful at the box office," done "Munna Bhai M.B.B.S. (2003) grossed ₹23 crore in India, and the film grossed ₹36 crore worldwide" => "The film grossed ₹23 crore in India and grossed ₹36 crore worldwide" done "Critics praised Dutt's role in the film, some of the critics wrote, "Sanjay Dutt simply cakewalks through his role"[18], and "Sanjay Dutt is delightful as Munna"." => "Critics praised Dutt's role in the film; comments included "Sanjay Dutt simply cakewalks through his role"[18], and "Sanjay Dutt is delightful as Munna"." done "Dutt won Filmfare Awards for Best Actor in a Comic Role,[20] and Bollywood Movie Awards for Most Sensational Actor,[21] he was also nominated for International Indian Film Academy Awards for Best Actor,[22] and Producer's Guild Film Awards for Best Actor." - in every case here, "award" should be singular and you need "the" in front of the name of the award done Back for the fourth paragraph later -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:55, 16 August 2019 (UTC) "In 2006 Dutt starred in Rajkumar Hirani's comedy-drama film Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006), Dutt was cast alongside Arshad Warsi, Vidya Balan, and Boman Irani" => "In 2006 Dutt starred in Rajkumar Hirani's comedy-drama film Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006), alongside Arshad Warsi, Vidya Balan, and Boman Irani" done - as, "In 2006, Dutt starred alongside Arshad Warsi, Vidya Balan, and Boman Irani in Rajkumar Hirani's comedy-drama film Lage Raho Munna Bhai (2006)." What is a "prominent screening"? done - as it statyed in cinema's for long ammount of time "The film grossed ₹3.38 crore in its first day, then it went to gross ₹10.95 crore on its first weekend, and it went to gross all together ₹74.88 crore in India." => "The film grossed ₹3.38 crore on its first day, ₹10.95 crore on its first weekend, and ₹74.88 crore overall in India. done "Dutt was nominated for four awards, including Global Indian Film Awards for Best Actor,[28] Filmfare Award for Best Actor,[29] Zee Cine Awards for Best Actor (Popular),[30] and IIFA Award for Best Actor.[31]" => "Dutt was nominated for four awards, including the Global Indian Film Award for Best Actor,[28] Filmfare Award for Best Actor,[29] Zee Cine Award for Best Actor (Popular),[30] and IIFA Award for Best Actor.[31] " done "Dutt won several awards including Global Indian Film Awards for Best Actor (Critics),[32] Screen Award for Best Actor (Critics),[33] Stardust Award for Actor of the Year – Male,[34] and Zee Cine Critics Award for Best Actor – Male.[35]" => "Dutt won several awards including the Global Indian Film Award for Best Actor (Critics),[32] Screen Award for Best Actor (Critics),[33] Stardust Award for Actor of the Year – Male,[34] and Zee Cine Critics Award for Best Actor – Male.[35]" done Are all those nominations and awards for the same film? If they are, then you probably only need to mention the ones he won, not the ones for which he was nominated but failed to win. done

• Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:43, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

@CAPTAIN MEDUSA and ChrisTheDude: I've just finished copy editing the lead of the article. I did not look through your list of suggestions, however; as a copy editor, I am only responsible for improving the prose of the article and not for any issues associated with FLCs. The GOCE Requests page has a backlog, and copy editors generally pick the oldest articles to copy edit first. Best of luck on the FLC. Bobbychan193 (talk) 05:43, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

@Bobbychan193: thank you so much for the copyedit. @ChrisTheDude: thank you for the comments, I've gone through, and fixed all of them. If you additional comment's let me know.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:55, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Comments

• Fix these links.
• The lead should be trimmed. Actors with larger career that Dutt have shorter filmographies.
• There are ref formatting issues. Starting from the the first ref of box office India.
• I can see instances of unrealiable sources like IMDb, addatoday, Filmibeat and Glamsham, to name a few.
• Several refs don't even mention their publishers name.
• The second sentence of the first para should start with "He" instead of Dutt.
• There are several instances of problematic prose, like the sentence about Rocky's financial success and the sentence about Vidhata.

Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

@Yashthepunisher: I have fixed the comments listed above and thanks for your feedback.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 21:25, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

• The Rocky sentence can still be rephrased.
• Any other fact worth mentioning about Vidhaata apart from its commercial success? Because it sounds very repetitive.
• "awardsandshows.com", "Planet-Bollywood", "Falling in Love with Bollywood", "moviefone" are not RS.
• filmfare.com --> Filmfare
• Fix the red markings in the references.
• Publisher missing in the Mera Faisala source.
• Ditto for a bunch of others.
• Stick to only National Film Awards and Filmfare in the lead and in table, per other existing FLs.
• "He also received critical acclaim for his appearance." Great, but there is only one review of the film. Provide a source that supports this claim.
• There are a lot of box-office figures mentioned in the lead. I'd suggest you to remove most of them unless they are milestones. A success cannot be only measured by the monetary gains.
• Comment #1 hasn't been fixed.
• "Sanjay Dutt is an Indian actor and film producer". There is nothing mentioned in the lead of the film's he has produced (and their fate).
• Some refs have a lot of redundant info in them. Like almost every refs used in the 'Television' section. Also, you should only mention the shows he has hosted.

I'm afraid there are still a lot of issues on ref formatting, prose quality and the articles overall comprehensiveness. Yashthepunisher (talk) 05:53, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

@Yashthepunisher: I have fixed the comments listed above, also the check links URL doesn't work anymore. Thanks.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:16, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

• The lead is too short now. Also, you haven't removed the IIFA's and the Screen awards from the article.
• "Cinestaan" is not a RS.
• Three receives cannot be enough to support the 'critical acclaim' and 'turning point' claim. Mention a source that specifically talks about the aforementioned.
• Why his role in Ra.One in comma's?

Yashthepunisher (talk) 11:38, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

@Yashthepunisher: those have been fixed as well.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 12:33, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

• Remove the critics review from the lead. They don't belong here.
• Remove Sanju from the lead. It would be significant to mention, Dutt played himself, not otherwise.
• Mention the status of his unreleased films in the table.

Not done. Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:42, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

@Yashthepunisher: now done.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 14:10, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

• He was only mentioned as 'Khalnayak' in Ra.One.

Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:02, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

@Yashthepunisher: done. I have removed the Sanju from the lead, quotes, and other stuff as well.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 13:35, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support Yashthepunisher (talk) 05:12, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments

• Just one thing so far. I was doing a spot-check of the refs and there are quite a few "deprecated parameter"/red-linked warnings. Per Help:CS1 errors#deprecated params all the deadurl= parameters need to be changed to url-status= with one of the following values as appropriate: dead, live, unfit, usurped. Shearonink (talk) 18:28, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

There are 97 different instances of dead-url, all of those will have to be converted into url-status= with the appropriate values. Shearonink (talk) 22:03, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

@Shearonink: fixed. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 09:59, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

• In the lead..."Widespread critical acclaim" is only supported by one ref and that ref talks only about a particular screening at the 2007 Cannes Tous Les Cinemas du Monde....that is not really "widespread critical acclaim" plus the wording itself is verging into WP:PUFFERY territory. You need 1)multiple reviews or articles about critics' thoughts about the movie & 2)the sentence should be changed to WP:NPOV wording, something like "the film was well-received by critics" or "received favorable reviews from critics", etc. Shearonink (talk) 14:52, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Shearonink: fixed.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 16:44, 12 September 2019 (UTC)a

CAPTAIN MEDUSA The BWW/Broadway World Ref (present ref# 18) ... all it does is say "some of the biggest and critically acclaimed Bollywood blockbusters since the turn of the millenium: 'Lage Raho Munna Bhai', ..." but it does not list out "critically acclaimed" with reviews to back up that assertion. Besides, the review is just a PR/sales listing for a workshop and is not a researched article from a reliable source with editorial oversight. In my opinion it should be removed. Shearonink (talk) 18:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

done___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 18:14, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for adding additional refs for "widespread critical acclaim". I still have a problem with the adjective & wording in this sentence: The film received widespread critical acclaim. I think it might be enough to say "The film received critical acclaim." or something similar, using "widespread" plus "acclaim" seems slightly unnecessary. Maybe the Bob Dylan example at WP:PUFFERY explains it better than I am doing... Shearonink (talk) 05:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

done.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 11:06, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

• I noticed that the 2003 box-office results in terms of money for Munna Bhai M.B.B.S. are laid out only in rupees. Since En.Wikipedia has a worldwide audience I think it would be appropriate to also have a conversion from rupees to dollars (like kms to miles, miles to kms, etc.), you can use the coding at Template:INRConvert which goes like

{{INRConvert|rupee_value|currency_formatting|rounding digits|lk=|to=|year=}}, so, for instance, the Indian box-office of ₹230 million in 2003 would be

{{INRConvert|230|m|year=2003}} which will give you the following: ₹230 million (equivalent to ₹850 million or US$10 million in 2023).

thanks, done.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 11:06, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

• In general I think this List is looking rather good but I will be doing a spot-check of your references. That will probably take me a little while, I'll post back here when I am done. Shearonink (talk) 05:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@Shearonink: any comments.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 12:35, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

CAPTAIN MEDUSA Life has been interfering with my Wikipedia-ing this week and into the start of next. I'll try to finish up sometime next week if I can. Sorry for the delay. Shearonink (talk) 20:46, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I just did a spot-check of some references and couldn't find any problems. My last thing is the last sentence in the lead section. Presently it is

The film received critical acclaim. Dutt won several awards, including Global Indian Film Awards for Best Actor (Critics).

which seems slightly clunky. I think it just needs a little bit of tweaking to something like (not word for word, it's just that "the film..." sentence is so very short):

The film received critical acclaim with Dutt winning several awards for his role, including Global Indian Film Awards for Best Actor (Critics).

Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 21:57, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

@Shearonink: I have tweaked the sentence. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 11:05, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

• Question – @Shearonink: Have you looked at the reliability and formatting of the sources, in addition to doing spot-checks? Please let us know if that is the case. If so, we can consider this the article's source review and not have to do a separate one. Giants2008 (Talk) 15:41, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Giants2008 I did a spot-check of various sources I picked out randomly (maybe 15 or 20 total?). I didn't find any issues at all but then again I didn't do a massive/comprehensive review of every ref...if a complete ref-check is necessary for this FLC I suppose we could split the refs up and each interested editor could check a specific section (like, Refs 1-20 or 1-30 or whatever). I do not have the time to check all 186 references by myself... Shearonink (talk) 17:02, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Notifying @Giants2008:___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 11:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll remember to review those items if the FLC gets to that point and no one else has done it. Thanks for doing spot-checking, which is very valuable in its own right. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:22, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Resolved comments from §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:47, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

* Comments by Dharmadhyaksha: Dutt did not host the TV shows Comedy Circus, The Drama Company and Entertainment Ki Raat as is claimed in the article. Please rectify. done I am against mentioning minor appearances as "guest" on various reality shows. If you want to keep it, and if that's the generally accepted practice, how do you confirm that these three shows are the only shows he has appeared in as "guest". Or, how do you ensure the list is comprehensive? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 03:46, 25 September 2019 (UTC) Dharmadhyaksha Dutt has not appeared in many shows as a host. The best thing would be to remove the section.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 11:50, 25 September 2019 (UTC) I don't oppose deletion of the whole section. But his Bigg Boss host needs to be mentioned in prose somewhere. Rest all minor appearances can be neglected and deleted. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 02:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC) Dharmadhyaksha done, I have mentioned Bigg Boss.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 12:39, 26 September 2019 (UTC) What's the difference between "Cameo appearance" and "Guest appearance"? Cameo is a short appearance, which is in character. Guest is like the appearance of a celebrity. Dutt has won 3 more awards for Lage Raho Munna Bhai. But lead mentions "Global Indian Film Awards for Best Actor (Critics)". GIFA was presented only for 2 years and is not very notable as such. I would prefer mentioning Star Screen Award and/or Zee Cine Awards which were both established in late 1990s and haven't died yet. done You may also mention that Lage Raho was sequel/follw-up of MBBS. done Sunil Dutt was his father and he launched him. Isn't that worth mentioning? done Dutt seems to have collaborated with many directors for multiple times. That finds no mention in lead. Is it not not-worthy or are they no such references linking/establishing the collaboration? done Please use Template:Sanjay Dutt. done Please check if Dutt is co-producer of Prassthanam. done §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:50, 24 September 2019 (UTC) @Dharmadhyaksha: I have fixed the problem's raised above. And thanks for your comments.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 20:08, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support'. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:47, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Support Comments from Aoba47

• The word "directed" is not needed in this part "in his father Sunil Dutt's directed romantic action film Rocky (1981)".
• It should be "a series" in this part "After appearing in series of box office flops" instead of just "series".
• I would use "performance" instead of "appearance" in this part "He also received critical acclaim for his appearance." unless the critics are literally praising his physical appearance in this film.
• I would avoid the repetition of "the film" in this part "The film was successful at the box office, the film grossed ₹230 million". It can be easily corrected by changing the latter half of the sentence to ", grossing ₹230 million".
• For this part "The film received critical acclaim from critics", the "from critics" part is not necessary as that is already covered in "critical acclaim".
• This part "Dutt has frequently collaborated with film director's including Rajkumar Hirani, Vidhu Vinod Chopra, and Mahesh Bhatt." sounds odd to me as it is not particularly odd for actors to collaborate with film directors. I would change it to something "Dutt has frequently collaborated with directors Rajkumar Hirani, Vidhu Vinod Chopra, and Mahesh Bhatt." to be more specific.
• For this part "alongside of Salman Khan", it should just be "alongside" not "alongside of".
• I would use "Child actor" instead of "Child artist".

Once my comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 22:34, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

@Aoba47: I have fixed all of the comments. Thanks.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 16:32, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing everything. I support this for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 16:51, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Source review – As promised, I'll have a look at the sourcing. Spot-checks were done already, source reliability looks okay, and the link-checker tool shows no problems. The formatting has a few issues, however:

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 22:10, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

*Some of the references are using a different type of citation templates than the others; it's apparent because "retrieved" shows up in lower-case for them. The style of cite template should be made consistent throughout. My suggestion is to change the citation templates to the cite xxx family, since there are many fewer of them. The ones that need fixing are in the first 70 references, so you only have to check the first half of the list for them, in case that helps. Ref 17 has page numbers that could be added to that cite. There was one other Google Books link without a page number, but that link doesn't give page numbers so there's nothing to fix. The ISBN numbers in refs 15 and 17 need hyphens, for both style and consistency reasons. I see some inconsistencies in reference publishers. There are multiple instances of both British Film Institute and BFI, and is italicized sometimes but not always. The latter problem is also an issue for British Board of Film Classification cites. Pick one style for both and stick with it throughout. An access date isn't needed in ref 61, since that is a cite to a book and the Google Books link is merely a convenience link (the book itself could be cited if the links ever went dead). All caps in the title of ref 73 need removal. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:40, 3 October 2019 (UTC) *Giants2008 I have fixed all of the problems with sources. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 11:51, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

• The formatting issues all look to have been resolved. Nice job with the fixes. The source review is a pass. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:10, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah good job CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Thanks for checking the sourcing Giants2008. Shearonink (talk) 02:53, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

• 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) 20:02, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

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