Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Titanic/archive1

Add links
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) 00:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of accolades received by Titanic

[edit]

List of accolades received by Titanic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): GagaNutellatalk 03:59, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need to say that Titanic is one the greatest productions and had one of the biggest box office in film history. After a hard work, especially finding reliable sources (this was really difficult), and major changes, I am very happy and proud to nominate this list, which I believe deserves to have the FL status. GagaNutellatalk 03:59, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from User:ChrisTheDude
Comments
  • "Titanic grossed a worldwide total of over $2.200 billion" - two of those decimal places don't seem needed
 Done
  • "to reach the mark of one and two billion-dollar mark" - odd wording
 Done
  • "The film has received numerous awards and nominations upon its release" - don't think it received any of these awards "upon its release", they all came much later
 Done
  • "Titanic began its awards sweep starting at the 55th Golden Globe Awards" - a "sweep" implies it won every award for which it was nominated, which clearly isn't the case
 Done
  • "Cameron's original screenplay and DiCaprio were not nominees" - huh? Why are we mentioning things for which it wasn't even nominated in an article about its accolades?
 Done
  • "It spent sixteen weeks at number-one" - no hyphen needed in "number one"
 Done
  • In the table:
    • The soundtrack album is shown once as "Titanic (Soundtrack)" but other times just as "Titanic"
    • "Hugh Brown, Al Quattrocchi, and Jeff Smith for Titanic – Music as Heard on the Fateful Voyage" - this album doesn't actually appear to have any official connection to the film, so should not be on a list of its accolades
 Done
    • Same with Kenny G's cover version of "My Heart Will Go On" - as far as I can see this version was not in the film so shouldn't be listed here
 Done
    • "Most Oscar Won by a Film" - most Oscars (plural) surely?
 Done
    • "Largest Camera Crane Used on Film on a Film Set" - "on film on a film set"? Is that really correct?
 Done
  • Titles of refs 19 and 20 are not "Billboard Newspaper"
 Done
  • I can't view ref 63 as it is blocked in my country, but I suspect the title as shown here is not correct - the wording seems very mangled
 Done

Support - apologies for forgetting to return -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:29, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:26, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
;Comments
  • "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" – quotes need sources
  • The table shows that it is in the National Film Registry; that's not my concern. The direct quote that the film is "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" either should be cited or removed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "one of fewer than 60 films in the history of the service" – the CinemaScore page lists at least 88 films and counting.
 Done
This is my mistake; I should have clarified better. I think it's better to say either how many films had received an A+ grade at the time (and source that statement) or cut that element entirely. Otherwise, we'll have to be constantly updating that line every time a new film gets an A+. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • "The film won the 55th Golden Globe Awards..." – weird wording. I would say "The film won at the 55th Golden Globe Awards..." or just "The film won Golden Globe Awards..."
 Done
  • "Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet and Gloria Stuart were also nominated." – no need to wikilink DiCaprio and Winslet again; also, you can just use their last names, and you should note that they were nominated for their acting performances.
 Done
  • "the second film about the Titanic to win that award, after 1933's Cavalcade" – citation needed
 Done
  • "Kate Winslet, Gloria Stuart, and the make-up artists..." – no need to wikilink Stuart again, and use last names here
 Done
  • "Other recognitions came from numerous North American critics' associations..." – many of the listed groups are guilds, not critics' associations. Also, this sentence should name the groups, not the awards.
 Done
Quick fixes here: "guilds, sush as" → "guilds, such as the" and "SAG-AFTRA" to "Screen Actors Guild" (SAG and AFTRA didn't merge until 2012). RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • Table header: "Award nominations for Titanic" → "Accolades received by Titanic" (you can also use {{sronly}} here since it closely matches the section heading)
 Done
  • Dates that are just a year, or a month and a year, do not sort correctly.
  • IMDb for source 76 is not acceptable.
  • Not sure about MUBI, but I'm leaning against using it as a source.
  • I see, I gave my best and found some more references. The only awards I am failing are London Film Critics' Circle (MUBI) and Society of Texas Film Critics Awards (IMDb). As there was no victory, it is even more difficult to find any source. GagaNutellatalk 02:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would distinguish between links for Titanic (the film) and Titanic (the soundtrack) by writing the latter out fully. I think ChrisTheDude touched on this above, but I wanted to address it as well.
    • Also, I agree with ChrisTheDude that the soundtrack should use a consistent title, even if the source uses a slightly different name.
  • I don't know, I think it is better keep as the award was given and named it. I mean, there is a category beside saying "Soundtrack Album of the Year", "Favorite Soundtrack", so obvious it is about the soundtrack. GagaNutellatalk 01:31, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Make sure you have sources for nominees and winners. For example, source 61 is from before the MTV Awards were presented, so it can't verify the winners. I didn't check many others, but I suspect there may be similar issues elsewhere. (You don't need to find a source with an award ceremony's winners if the film didn't win any awards.)
 Done
  • I would list the Grammys for Record of the Year and Song of the Year before the other Grammys, since those two are major awards.
 Done
  • You don't really "win" a Guinness World Record – maybe "Recognized" is a better term? (I'm open to suggestions here.)
    • Similarly, maybe "Selected" for the National Film Registry?
  • That note is to explain that other types of recognitions besides proper wins (i.e., 2nd place, runner-up, "honored", etc.) are counted as wins in the infobox. You can display whatever text you want in the cell using {{won|''your text here''}}. I'm not as concerned about the Guinness wins (I did some research and the Game of Thrones awards list uses "Won"), but I do think the National Film Registry should be changed. It would be like saying a sports player "won" by being inducted into a hall of fame; it doesn't quite make sense. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • "No.1" → "Number 1" or "No. 1"
 Done

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To make it easier to track what's left, I'll put my replies here.

  • Source 7 only discusses films since 2000, which leaves out Titanic and makes it rather unhelpful. I think cutting that sentence at this point is the best call; readers should be able to understand that an A+ CinemaScore is good without further explanation.
  • If you still can't find non-IMDb or MUBI sources, those awards should be cut. I'd rather see a slightly less comprehensive list than allow sourcing standards to slip.
  • For sorting, try Template:Date table sorting. If that doesn't work, you'll have to assign data-sort-value to each cell in that column using YYYY-MM-DD formatting.

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:52, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support – the table is now sorting correctly, and it was quite a pain; I fully sympathize with your struggles now. (Wikipedia's auto-sorting features were trying to be helpful but ultimately caused more problems in this case. I even had to put in a "wrong" date to get everything to sort correctly... definitely not fun.) Thanks for sticking with the nomination through all of my comments! RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:26, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from User:SNUGGUMS
  • No qualms with File:JamesCameronStarDec09.jpg
  • "The film won the 55th Golden Globe Awards for" doesn't read well and makes it sound like this won the rights to a ceremony. I understand wanting a different sentence structure from the Oscars, but we should opt for something else.
 Done
  • "numerous North American critics' associations, sush as"..... such as
 Done
  • Brit Awards (the UK equivalent of what Grammys are to the US) are worth mentioning in the prose. Same with Junos since those are Canada's biggest music accolade.
 Done
  • No discussion on the multiple Guinness World Records? That's a glaring omission!
 Done
  • You could add the wins for Satellite Awards as well as how Gloria Stuart received a Saturn Award
  • I said that because it could help flesh out the lead once you removed how many soundtrack copies were sold, plus it seemed to be a common mention among wins when one doesn't get an Oscar, BAFTA, Golden Globe, or Screen Actors Guild Award for their performance in a film. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:37, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Albums sales seem better for the soundtrack's article.
 Done
  • Italicize Billboard for Billboard Music Awards within the citations
 Done

Give me a ping after you go through these. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 23:35, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You still should add Juno Award nominations to prose (Canadian equivalent of Grammys in US), but the improvements so far are enough for me to extend my support. Good work here! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review – Pass

[edit]

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 22:26, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting
  • You might want to add url-access=limited to the NYT ref, as you have a subscription marking on the Rolling stones ref
 Done
  • LA times could be marked with as needing a subscription as well
  • ref 75 missing author
 Done
Reliability
  • My reliabillity script has PR Newswire (ref 21) as a generally unreliable source. Is there a better ref for this information available?
  • Sorry, I can't find anything better, but as it's just an award list and not something more complex, I believe that's okay in this case. The award is very old, so it's hard to find something on the internet from that time. GagaNutellatalk 21:44, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • seems fine otherwise
Verifiability
  • recommendation: add "trans-title=" to non-english sources
 Done
  • recommend using the archive bot on the links
 Done
  • perhaps add a page number(s) for ref 70?
 Done I added the page number to all PDF references. GagaNutellatalk 21:44, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done

Promoting. --PresN 22:57, 10 June 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_accolades_received_by_Titanic/archive1&oldid=1027955863"