Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Priyanka Chopra 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 not promoted by Hahc21 10:01, 23 July 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Priyanka Chopra filmography

Nominator(s): —Prashant 03:09, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because Priyanka Chopra is one of the most popular and versatile actresses in Hindi cinema. The article has been thoroughly researched and is a comprehensive and well-written account of her filmography. The lead covers the most important content from the table, which is sortable and people can see how much the film budget was and its theater gross.—Prashant 03:09, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Technically in terms of sourcing and the actual list I'd say this is approaching featured list quality. However, "The film was a critical and commercial success, and her performance received highly positive reviews from film critics" really grates with me when it is said so often throughout the lead, so repetitive and nutritionally empty if you know what I mean. I don't know if anybody else feels this way, but I think the way that the prose is written lets this otherwise fine article down. For a filmography I really don't want to see that sort of fluff and would prefer a shorter more concise summary which highlights her most notable performances and films which won her awards. I'm rather concerned with the peer review that you opened and closed within 24 hours on the talk page. It's pretty pointless to do that and to not request more input over a more prolonged period. I expressed concern of the repetition and the neutrality of the lead there which you didn't address. If you disagreed with me, I think it would have been more constructive for you to request wider input from the Indian project from editors like Dwai and Vensatry. But you came here within 48 hours and nominated it for FA anyway.Tibetan Prayer^᧾ 10:51, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I agree with TB. For such a short list, this has a huge (and poorly written) lead. I have picked these out at first glance:

" has appeared in many motion pictures and television programmes." -- One television programme is not "many". Either that, or this list is incomplete.
"The same year" -- What year? Why let the reader do the maths?
"The same year, Chopra played a supporting role alongside Akshay Kumar and Lara Dutta in the romantic musical drama Andaaz. The film was a major box office success described as the "first universal hit of the year. Her role of a vivacious young girl received praise". -- Who? Kumar, Dutta or Chopra?
There is another "the same year". What year?
Inconsistant formatting of box-office and box office
"This changed in October 2008..." -- It's not good starting off a paragraph which is related to the final sentence of the last.

These comments are just from the first two paragraphs alone! I won't go on, but I'm sure that there will be many more. I would suggest a withdrawal and a peer review. -- Cassianto ^Talk 12:18, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tweaked and corrected everything. Re-worked on the prose.—Prashant 19:24, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Fails FLC criteria #1 as above. It needs a good copy edit and shakedown before it is up to scratch. Also fails criteria #4 on the sort, which doesn't work: apart from the obvious errors of sorting on "The" in the title, when it shouldn't, the figures don't sort properly: INR80 million is less than INR700 million, and should sort as such, not just sort on the "8" being larger than the "7". The roles and directors both sort on the first name, rather than the surname, which they should. Finally, what are "USD$"? This should either be USD or US$. As a help to your readers, a translation of the titles could also be provided? - SchroCat (talk) 21:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw: I have withdrawn the nomination and will nominate again after a long Peer Review.—Prashant 02:55, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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