Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/John Ford filmography/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by The Rambling Man via FACBot (talk) 23:30, 12 October 2017 (UTC) [1].[reply]
John Ford filmography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Jimknut (talk) 18:16, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because John Ford is largely regarded as one of the greatest movie directors of all time. Therefore he warrants a featured list for his filmography. Having done several FL filmographies in the past I have now prepared this one for what I believe is ready for the upgrade. Please feel free to make some suggestions to help me get there. Thanks. Jimknut (talk) 18:16, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from Sportsguy17 (T • C) 03:04, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
| Comments from Sportsguy17
@Jimknut: A very solid list, but I do have a few comments.
It may look like a long list, but all of the above items are relatively minor. If you get them all resolved, I will support the promotion of this list. Best, Sportsguy17 (T • C) 18:46, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
|
Support - All my concerns were addressed. I'm quite impressed with how well-written the list is. Sportsguy17 (T • C) 03:04, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you. Jimknut (talk) 14:32, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support from Slightlymad: Tried so hard for a nitpick but alas, this list exceeds expectations—from comprehensiveness to high-quality sources. Well done! SLIGHTLYmad 16:34, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Once again, thanks. Jimknut (talk) 21:33, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Good work on the article. A fully detailed list and well sourced.--Earthh (talk) 21:43, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you.Jimknut (talk) 19:16, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Source review – The sources all look to be reliable, and spot-checks of a few LoC refs didn't turn up anything that I am concerned about (interestingly a couple of the pages I checked called him Jack Ford, but I see from his article that this was his early professional name, so no problem). The only issue I see is that the publishers of the Washington Post article in ref 187 and ref 220 should be italicized per style guidelines. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:07, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Jimknut (talk) 17:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:14, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments
That's enough for a quick run through. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:13, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply] |
- Thanks, Rambling Man. Jimknut (talk) 16:09, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from BeatlesLedTV
Overall looks great. A couple comments:
- Looking at other featured filmography lists, such as James Cameron, Alfred Hitchcock, and Quentin Tarantino, I see that they have the movie title on the far right side of the table with the year column to the right of it. They also have the title column darkened (for this use ! scope="row"|) and put "plainrowheaders" at the top of the table to avoid having the titles centered. However, the Gene Roddenberry list has the layout like yours currently but still has the title column darkened. In your case I'd probably follow Roddenberry's list to save time but other than that everything looks great. BeatlesLedTV (talk) 22:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. Obviously, your comments are well meant but nonetheless I find them dealing with aesthetic issues. My goal is to present accurate and comprehensive information about the subject, which I believe I have done. All of the other filmographies I have created or upgraded (Mary Pickford, Charlie Chaplin, Gene Kelly, Laurel & Hardy, David O. Selznick) have the release dates listed first, followed by the titles. They have all achieved FL status, so I'll retain the current formatting on this one. Jimknut (talk) 15:56, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – You got it. I got no other comments or concerns. I fully support the nomination for featured status. BeatlesLedTV (talk) 18:19, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Argh, I was going to promote, then saw that the tables are missing col and rowscopes. These are required as per WP:ACCESS so that screen-readers can parse the tables; it's not an aesthetic change. Please add to all tables; ping me if you don't know how to or want to undo any aesthetic changes and don't know how. --PresN 20:13, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Argh, I never had to do that to any of the other filmographies I created that made FA status! However, I've gone and added them in. Check them out and please see if I've done them correctly. Jimknut (talk) 16:09, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, FA doesn't bother with technicalities like MOS:ACCESS! I think you're nearly there, the row scope should be the film name rather than the year of release though. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:59, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Jimknut (talk) 20:48, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, FA doesn't bother with technicalities like MOS:ACCESS! I think you're nearly there, the row scope should be the film name rather than the year of release though. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:59, 10 October 2017 (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.
Thank you to everyone who helped me with this list. Jimknut (talk) 14:49, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.