Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/October 2020

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) 00:26, 29 October 2020 (UTC) [1].

---

List of medieval churches on Gotland

Nominator(s): Yakikaki (talk) 09:30, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria and would be an interesting addition; there are some featured lists about churches, but mostly in the UK. I should also briefly explain the background to the article. I started a List of churches on Gotland back in 2014. Recently, I put in a lot of efforts on my sandbox2 to increase the quality. Noting how the medieval churches are almost always treated apart from the other churches on Gotland I figured it would sense to put them in their own, clearly defined list. Hence the list looks completely new. Yakikaki (talk) 09:30, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 22:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

;Comments What was the inclusion criteria for the list? Shouldn't it be a list of all medieval churches on Gotland, not just ones which are well preserved? There are 92 medieval churches on Gotland, so that's the inclusion criteria. They're all well-preserved, unusually. So there's no discrepancy here, sorry if it looks that way. Tried adding an "and" in In no other part of Sweden are there so many and so well-preserved medieval parish churches in the Background section to clarify this a bit, hope it helps? I was wondering about mildly-preserved or poorly-preserved medieval parish churches, but I just noticed the link to the FL in the See Also section. That makes more sense now. ~ HAL333 04:55, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Why are there no notes for the Slite Church? Oops, my bad! Slite Church should not be in the list at all since it's from the 20th century, I managed to mix it up with Silte Church when I made the list. Fixed now. The presently visible church was however built during the early 13th century; the tower was added at the end of the same century. This sentence seems a little awkward. Thanks, changed the wording. Hope it's smoother now. The interior of the church was substantially altered in 1839–1840. You should clarify the time at the end of that sentence. Was it around that period (circa) or was it altered from 1839 to 1840. etc Gotcha, changed to between 1839 and 1840. I noticed some others areas for improvement in the prose. I just don't have the time to disect it all right now. I'll be back. Nice job overall though. ~ HAL333 17:52, 8 July 2020 (UTC) Thanks HAL333! I've addressed the issues above for now, I think. I'll be happy to address any further issues. Yakikaki (talk) 18:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC) Sorry I couldn't get back quicker - I've been working 14-hour shifts outside (i.e. without A.C. in Texas) the last few days and it's physically and mentally exhausting. This is everything else I could notice: The first paragraph of the Background section seems slightly repetitive after reading the lede. The only information which is not present in the lede is the church concentration compared to the rest of Europe, which could easily be moved to the lede. Removed, fixed the lede accordingly. On Gotland, Norse religion was gradually abandoned and Christianity was more firmly adopted during the 11th century. This sentence is a little confusing. Did the Norse Religion already receding when Christianity cemented itself in the 11th century or did it only decline in the 11th? Tried to clarify and fix the wording of this. The most well-preserved remains are those of Hemse stave church, where timber had been re-used as floor boards in a later stone church. Maybe replace "where" with "whose" or rework it some other way. Replaced with whose. The captions for the second and third images are both complete sentences and require periods. Fixed. You should wikilink "apses" in the first paragraph of the "architecture" section. Fixed. In the second paragraph of the architecture section The architecture is clearly influenced by architecture... seems somewhat repetitive. Replaced with "Influences came from" which is also more straightforward. At the end of this period, Gotland entered a period... also seems repetitive. Changed to "At the middle of the 14th century, Gotland entered a period of economic decline and a loss in trade from which it would never recover." The brevity of the next sentence The Black Death struck Gotland in 1350. makes it feel kind of choppy. Could you combine this with the previous sentence? Was the plague the beginning of the end? Reworked the structure and sequence of sentences here, I think it makes more sense now. At the same time, the island entered an economic decline and a loss in trade from which it would never recover. Was this a separate phenomenon or was a direct result of the plague and invasion? Moved some of this as well. Many churches were left unfinished, and the abrupt stop is often still clearly visible, "as if the stone masons had left the construction site for the day and never returned" as archaeologist Anders Andrén has phrased it. strikes me as somewhat awkward, particularly the latter half. It might be the repetition of "as". as archaeologist Anders Andrén has phrased it. could also be simplified (maybe "according to archeologist Anders André"). Changed and reworked to: Many churches were left unfinished, and the abrupt halt in construction is often still visible in the buildings. Archaeologist Anders Andrén writes that is is "as if the stone masons had left the construction site for the day and never returned" ...a systematic examination of them started only during the 19th century, and especially art historian Johnny Roosval presented a systematic study in Die Kirchen Gotlands ("The churches of Gotland"), published in German in 1911. I think you're missing a few words around the "and especially" part. Changed all of it to: "While the churches on Gotland have attracted interest since at least the 17th century, a more scientific approach to them started only during the 19th century. Art historian Johnny Roosval presented a first systematic study in Die Kirchen Gotlands ("The churches of Gotland"), published in German in 1911." Roosval dated the different churches on Gotland mainly on stylistic grounds. The timeline he established has subsequently been revised in individual cases, also by Roosval himself. could use clarification. Did Roosval make all of the individual revisions himself or only some? Changed to "both by Roosval and by others". A lot of those aren't even really necessary and feel free to ignore some of the more stylistic ones. Sorry I couldn't look over the rest, but I'll check the table section tomorrow. ~ HAL333 04:55, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Thanks a lot for these excellent comments! I'll try to address them all today, if I can. Please don't exhaust yourself with this if you're having a hectic time off-line, it's really no rush with anything on my account. I've been wanting to fix this since 2014, so I can wait a bit more... Yakikaki (talk) 13:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC) OK, I think I've addressed all of these now, and hope I didn't make matter worse! Take a look when you have time. Stay safe in the heat! Yakikaki (talk) 15:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Ok, this should be my final round: Just clarify The nave and chancel of Alva Church are in a late Romanesque style, from the early 13th century. Are the nave and chancel from the 13th century, or is it that the style is from that period, or both? Changed to "The nave and chancel of Alva Church are in a late Romanesque style, built in the early 13th century." I would wikilink "Madonna" in the notes for Ardre Church. Wikilined to Madonna (art). I would rewrite The Gutasaga mentions a church in Atlingbo and probably there was a wooden church here as early as the 11th century., particularly the "and probably there was a..." part. I would also replace "here" with "there" or "site", etc. Changed to "The Gutasaga mentions a church in Atlingbo. A first, wooden church was probably constructed in the 11th century." Simplify was destroyed in a storm in 1857 to "was destroyed in a 1857 storm". To keep the same tense in that sentence, insert "was" before built in a new tower built between 1867 and 1892. Done The large tower, with supported by unusually shaped buttresses, dates from the middle of the same century Should be "with support from" or "supported by". Changed to "supported by". made in memory of seal hunters who had became isolated on drifting ice sheets but who were ultimately saved. I'm not sure if the second "who" is necessary. Removed. It was replaced by a stone church during the late 12th century, of with the nave is still preserved. Was "of with" meant to be "of which" - I'm confused. Yes, changed to "of which". In the notes for Rone Church, "indicate" is misspelled. Fixed. Could you wikilink the battle described in the notes of "Östergarn Church", if possible. Fixed Throughout the article you repeated "presently visible" a decent amount. You could diversify the text a little bit by sprinkling in "extant". You also used "built" over 130 times vs less than ten for "constructed" and "erected". You could also replace some of the "took place"s with "occurred". Lol, that is a bit repetetive. I've tried changing some as you suggest. Do you think it's OK like this? That's about it. Looking good! ~ HAL333 01:33, 11 July 2020 (UTC) Thank you so much, again, for your hard work with this and all these excellent comments and suggestions, I think the article has gained a lot from it. For now, I think I've addressed all issues. Yakikaki (talk) 18:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

• Support All of my comments were addressed - nice work. If you have the time, I would really appreciate if you could check one of my FLCs (here or there). Thanks! ~ HAL333 22:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Comment from Shearonink

• Found a small typo - The church was pillaged by Russian tropps in 1717. should be The church was pillaged by Russian troops in 1717. Shearonink (talk) 18:07, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you, fixed it! Yakikaki (talk) 18:12, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Yakikaki Just an aside to the FLC...these ancient churches look very similar to Lutheran churches that I've seen in Minnesota and North Dakota...it was eerie to me to see these ca1300-1500 churches looking like close architectural cousins to churches built 1870-1920 in the US. Shearonink (talk) 02:43, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Shearonink That's interesting, I think a lot of Swedish people emigrated at least to Minnesota, and many people emigrated from Gotland. Perhaps they brought with them some memories, who knows? Thank you for letting me know. This kind of things always fascinate me. Yakikaki (talk) 07:18, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 22:10, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
refs

• Looking at the article from an overview, I think I will come back to this separately for some comments on the prose and such
• Ref 1 needs a "|language=Swedish"
• Ref 39 should be ISBN 13 (use the converter)
• ref 116 missing "Church of Sweden" link

works cited

• Andersson need an ISBN or OCLC (looking it up on Worldcat might help)
• Augustsson, Jacobsson, Jonsson, Karlsson, Lagerlöf should all be ISBN 13s Aza24 (talk) 22:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
• The further reading entry could also do with an OCLC Aza24 (talk) 22:24, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for these comments! I have fixed what I could so far, but I would need some guidance regarding the ISBN-question (which certainly isn't my area of expertise). With ISBN 13s, I assume you mean ISBN-numbers beginning with 13? I could not find any such numbers for any of the books you mentioned, neither in WorldCat nor the catalogue of the Swedish national library libris.kb.se, and could not produce them by using the converter you linked to. Could you please point me in the direction where I should go with this, what am I missing or doing wrong here? Many thanks, Yakikaki (talk) 12:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Yakikaki, ISBN 13s are the "newer" ISBNS as opposed to the "older" ISBN 10s which some of your ISBNs are at the moment. If the ISBN number begins with 978 it is an ISBN 13, otherwise it's an ISBN 10 – Wikipedia requires all ISBNs to be ISBN 13 (The number 13 itself has nothing to do with the actual ISBN) All you have to do is take any ISBNs that don't begin with 978 (since that would mean they are not ISBN 13s) and put them in the converter and then replace the ISBN 10 with what you get. Let me know if you have further questions on this. BTW I plan to come back to read through the prose. Aza24 (talk) 06:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Aza24 for taking the time to explain this to me, I've learned something new and useful and will change the ISBN:s accordingly, and keep this in mind for the future as well. I'll try to fix this during the day and get back here when I'm done. Kind regards, Yakikaki (talk) 08:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Fixed it! Yakikaki (talk) 11:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Good work, pass for source review Aza24 (talk) 20:02, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments:

• Not doing a full review; wanted to comment first to import the discussion here confirming that there is no issue with how much prose is in this list in regards to FLC. In addition to that, however, I wanted to briefly comment on the table being split up into chunks- it should not be, as that breaks sortability (not to mention the breaks are arbitrary beyond how many churches start with a given letter). They should be combined into one table. --PresN 19:24, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you PesN for the comment and also for the point about the list being split into chunks. I've changed it into a single, long list. Kind regards, Yakikaki (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

;Comments Lead Apologies for missing this one prior to now. I will review this in chunks..... No problem at all, I'm happy for the comments. "and unusual also compared with other parts of Europe" => "and also unusual compared with other parts of Europe" Fixed "between the early 12th century to the middle of the 14th century" => "between the early 12th century and the middle of the 14th century" Fixed "The churches were often decorated with paintings of walls and vaults" => "The churches were often decorated with paintings on walls and vaults" (I presume they aren't paintings of walls) Fixed "Workshops specialised in the production" => "Workshops specialising in the production" Fixed More to come....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Background No issues with this section -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Architecture "with a straight east walls" - "a walls"? Removed "a" BTW, what do you actually mean by "straight east walls"? This isn't really a valid English expression. Do you mean "walls facing to the east"? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:26, 13 October 2020 (UTC) Yeah, that was what I meant, sorry for the messy sentence. Changed it. "Workshops specialised in making" - as above Fixed "and supplied not only the churches on Gotland with decorated fonts, but also exported fonts to entire Baltic region" => "and not only supplied the churches on Gotland with decorated fonts, but also exported fonts to the entire Baltic region" Fixed "this decoration often consisted in" => "this decoration often consisted of" Fixed "often depicting religious of mythological scenes" - presume this is meant to say "often depicting religious or mythological scenes" Yes, changed of to or "At the middle of the 14th century" => "In the middle of the 14th century" Changed "into the 15th and 16th century" => "into the 15th and 16th centuries" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Fixed "Archaeological examinations in connections with" => "Archaeological examinations in connection with" Fixed Table A-G "The oldest part of the now visible church" => "The oldest part of the now-visible church" (in a couple of places) Fixed "The presently visible church" => "The presently-visible church" (in a couple of places) Fixed "a church were persons accused of having committed crimes were entitled" => "a church where persons accused of having committed crimes were entitled" Fixed "the church door still bears marks after crossbow bolts" => "the church door still bears marks from crossbow bolts" Fixed "unusually shaped buttresses" => "unusually-shaped buttresses" Fixed "how the surroundings of many of the churches on Gotland may originally have looked like" => "how the surroundings of many of the churches on Gotland may originally have looked" Fixed "one of the oldest still working church bells" => "one of the oldest still-working church bells" Fixed "preserved in the currently visible church" => "preserved in the currently-visible church" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC) Fixed Yakikaki (talk) 12:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC) Table H-Ö "Hall Church built in the early 13th century" => "Hall Church was built in the early 13th century" Fixed "The rood cross is a from the 16th century" => "The rood cross is from the 16th century" Fixed "The sandstone altarpiece is from 1684 and made in Burgsvik" => "The sandstone altarpiece is from 1684 and was made in Burgsvik" Fixed "Sculpted reliefs from this church has been" => "Sculpted reliefs from this church have been" Fixed "erectedat the early 13th century" - missing space between the first two words, but it should actually be "erected in" (not at) Fixed "and the nave during first half of the 14th century" => "and the nave during the first half of the 14th century" Fixed "in the first half the 12th century" => "in the first half of the 12th century" Fixed "The atarpiece bears the date 1521" - typo in second word Fixed "The chancel and apse had were rebuilt" => "The chancel and apse were rebuilt" Fixed I presume it's standard practice to have entries beginning with Ö appear at the end of an alphabetical list in Swedish? Yes, in Swedish Ö is considered a letter of its own (unlike in German) and appears at the end of the alphabet, after the possibly even quaniter å and ä. Think that's it from me. This is an excellent list and I definitely enjoyed reading it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2020 (UTC) Thank you for the thorough review, it has done a lot for the quality of the article! And thanks for your kind words! Yakikaki (talk) 17:55, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments Support from Aza24

Ok well I'm sure what this one is still waiting on but some (minor) comments below:

• "and also" seems redundant in "and also unusual compared..."

• Removed "also".

• "date from a period between the early..." – "date from between the early..." may be more to the point

• Fixed.

• Could "still preserved" be something clearer like "fully preserved" to contrast with the fragmented ones better?

• Changed to "substantially preserved" since completely preserved medieval churches hardly exist anywhere. I hope it works?

• Yes, good call

• I would add a language template to Swedish words {{lang|sv|''kontragotik''}} to that the system doesn't detect them as typos

• Thanks for the suggestion, I've done it.

• "and with decorative sculptures..." may work better as "as well as decorative sculptures..." to avoid the triple "and"

• Changed.

• you link Western Europe in the lead but not the first mention in the text (same with middle ages)

• Fixed.

• link parish churches

• Fixed.

• not required but I would recommend linking baptismal fonts in the image caption – I read the caption and saw the word before I got to it in the text

• Added link.

• assuming rod should link like rood crosses not "rood crosses"?

• Yes, fixed.

• High Gothic has a link, as does Early Gothic architecture

• Added wikilinks.

• The invasion of Gotland by Valdemar IV of Denmark and the Battle of Visby this sounds like two separate events, but isn't the Battle of Visby the invasion of Denmark?

• One could absolutely argue that it's more or less the same thing, however my reasoning was that the battle is stricly speaking a consequence of the invasion (he first had to land his troops somewhere and then fight, so to speak) but mostly I added it because I wanted to give some context. Just mentioning the battle could be a bit confusing to the reader who doesn't know why there was a battle there, I was thinking. But I can remove it if you think it doesn't add anything. Let me know.

• I think your reasoning makes sense – fine with me how it is

• You may want to consider switching your two links to Baroque to Baroque architecture instead, which is likely more helpful to the reader

• I intentionally made the link to Baroque since I was writing about the furnishings of the churches, not the buildings per se. But perhaps it misses the mark - I can change if you think it's better?

• Ah yes I seem to have missed that. Good how it is then.

• I glanced through the text in the table and found no major issues. Overall well written and a very fascinating read! Aza24 (talk) 00:37, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot Aza24! Your comments and suggestions were very helpful, I'm grateful for the review! Yakikaki (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• Happy to help and I'm happy to support this nomination. Aza24 (talk) 07:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 22:30, 28 October 2020 (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) 00:26, 29 October 2020 (UTC) [2].

---

List of Broadway theaters

Nominator(s): Found5dollar (talk) 15:52, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because "Broadway Theater" is a well known term without a historically well-defined meaning. Over time what has defined a Broadway Theater has changed and marking out the fluidity of the category is not something easily found elsewhere on the internet. I passed this list through Peer Review and was encourage to directly nominate it here. I look forward to everyone's feedback.Found5dollar (talk) 15:52, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Chidgk1

• Add an article description

• added a short description template.--Found5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• "Early variety, burlesque, and minstrelsy halls were built along Broadway below Houston Street, and as the city expanded north new theaters were constructed along the thoroughfare with family friendly vaudeville, developed by Tony Pastor, clustering around Union Square in the 1860s and 1870s, larger opera houses, hippodromes, and theaters populating Broadway between Union Square and Times Square later in the century, and Times Square itself becoming the epicenter for large scale theater productions between 1900 and the Great Depression." is confusing. Maybe it should be two sentences.

• re-worded it as: "Early variety, burlesque, and minstrelsy halls were built along Broadway below Houston Street. As the city expanded north new theaters were constructed along the thoroughfare with family friendly vaudeville, developed by Tony Pastor, clustering around Union Square in the 1860s and 1870s, and larger opera houses, hippodromes, and theaters populating Broadway between Union Square and Times Square later in the century. Times Square became the epicenter for large scale theater productions between 1900 and the Great Depression."--Found5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• If possible add a pic of Circle in the Square Theatre

• there isn't one on commons and I did all my normal searching for a freely licensed one but couldn't find any. I normally would just go take a picture but with COVID I can't make it to mid town right now...--Found5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• No need for image and refs columns to be sortable.

• doneFound5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• I am not familiar with US addresses so not sure if that column sort is useful. Belasco Theatre address looks odd.

• it is all address in Manhattan that are odd. Belasco's address of "111 W. 44th St." breaks down to Building Number (111), side of Manhattan (East or West, here it is "W" for West), then the street or avenue (44th St.). Lots of numbers and abbreviations, I know but that is how it is laid out here.Found5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• "The following lists organize all demolished venues which hosted legitimate theater that appear on the Database based on when their last theatrical production was compared to the three moments that can be considered the begging of Broadway theatre." is confusing even if "begging" is a typo for "beginning".

• re-worded it to "The following lists organize all demolished venues which hosted legitimate theater and appear on the Database. The theaters are organized into 4 lists based on when their last theatrical production opened compared to the three moments that may be considered the begining of Broadway theatre."Found5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Use of "still" in "Before the advent of the musical there were still multiple theaters in New York that claimed the moniker of "Broadway", including an 1847 theater named the Broadway Theatre." reads odd to me but perhaps it is normal in US English?

• removed the "still"Found5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Barnum's American Museum seems to say it opened in 1841 so do you think the "built" columns should be titled "opened"?

• 1841 is when Barnum acquired the building, not when the theater opened. I have not been able to find that information anywhere. changing the column to "opened" would sold this because we know the Chinese rooms opened in 1850 per the source. Changed all "Built" headers to "opened" and filled in Barnum's cell.Found5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Do you think "buildings" would be better than "structures"?

• I went with the word "structures" in the lead because not all of the theaters through history were encloses. A handfull were open air roof top spaces and 1 was an outdoor amphitheater. Because of this "building" doest cover all of the theaters through history, while "structure" does.Found5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

If you have time could you take a quick look at List of active coal-fired power stations in Turkey and comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of active coal fired power stations in Turkey/archive1. Assuming you know nothing about the subject it will be valuable if you could point out anything which is difficult to understand for a first time reader. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

• Chidgk1, thank you for the comments. Sorry it took a few days, when i submitted this i forgot about plans i had yesterday. If I find time, I'd be happy to take a look at List of active coal-fired power stations in Turkey.Found5dollar (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

;Drive-by comment The size at which the map is being displayed is far far too large. Also, could it be zoomed in? Currently all the red dots are crammed into about 2% of the map, and it shows a huge area, including parts of a different state, which don't seem relevant to this article -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:24, 18 June 2020 (UTC) Yes, that map has been an issue for me as well. Below, Guerillero is helping move the coord infor into commons and i will replace the maps with a maplink version once that is completedFound5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) Further comments on the lead The photo caption looks really weird with the "(from far left)" bit at the start. That should go after the list of names. I just completely got rid of the "from far left" as the theaters have large signs in the image showing the order they are in. Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "the first large, long-term theater" - don't think there should be a comma there removed Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "The current, legal definition" - ......or there also removed Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "based off a 1949 Actors' Equity agreement" => "based on a 1949 Actors' Equity agreement" (unless "based off" is American English - it certainly isn't a valid usage in the British English I speak) fixed.Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "we see today" => "seen today" done Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "the general rule is any venue" => "the general rule is that any venue" doneFound5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "only 3 active Broadway theaters" => "only three active Broadway theaters" doneFound5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "The Vivian Beaumont Theater, located in Lincoln Center is" => "The Vivian Beaumont Theater, located in Lincoln Center, is" done Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "Southernmost" and "westernmost" are each one word, not two done Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "the 1933 seat" => "the 1933-seat" (and the same later in the sentence) done Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) The sentence starting "early variety" is way too long and should be broken up re-worded it as: "Early variety, burlesque, and minstrelsy halls were built along Broadway below Houston Street. As the city expanded north new theaters were constructed along the thoroughfare with family friendly vaudeville, developed by Tony Pastor, clustering around Union Square in the 1860s and 1870s, and larger opera houses, hippodromes, and theaters populating Broadway between Union Square and Times Square later in the century. Times Square became the epicenter for large scale theater productions between 1900 and the Great Depression."--Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "Broadway style theatre" => "Broadway-style theatre" done --Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) That also makes me think.....why is theater/theatre spelt two different ways? in American English, at least from what I have been taught and experience, "theater" and "theatre" have two different meanings. "Theater" references the physical space, while "theatre" references the art form. It gets a little squishy in this article because most of the Broadway theaters, use the "re" version in their official names. On the main Broadway Theatre page they even have a foot note trying to explain this out reading "Although theater is the generally preferred spelling in the United States (see American and British English spelling differences), many Broadway venues, performers and trade groups for live dramatic presentations use the spelling theatre." --Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) "began with the previously discussed" - don't think the phrase "previously discussed" is appropriate in an encyclopedia article removed. Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC) I'll look at the rest of the article later..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC) ChrisTheDude, thank you for your comments. I knwo that spelling and grammar are not my strong suits so all the comma and hyphen notes are very much appreciated. I look forward to the rest of your notes.Found5dollar (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Guerillero

• Map nerd comment: It might be worth thinking about using Template:Maplink or a closer view of southern Manhattan than the giant static map --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 17:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
  • I think my comment was unfair {{maplink|frame=yes|frame-width=600|frame-height=600|frame-align=center|from=BroadwayTheaters.map}} will display the map. I am working on moving everything to commons here --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 18:04, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Guerillero, THANK YOU! The map was a tough sticking point for me, I know we need it, but I tried both Location map and OSM Location map but neither seemd to be the right answer. I have never used Maplink before. Thank you for creating this and I'm going to read up on how this style of map works.Found5dollar (talk) 18:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• @Guerillero and Found5dollar: I converted the whole thing to Maplink without reading this first. Feel free to modify/change it, or revert it if you don't like the appearance. epicgenius (talk) 22:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

;Comments on the first section/table "the list of Tony eligible houses" => "the list of Tony-eligible houses" doneFound5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) In the first/longest/current columns, any production that starts with "A" or "The" should sort based on the next word done. I left "La Boheme" and "La Belle Paree" sorting by "La" even though that is French for "the".Found5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) The tiny dash in the current column for some theatres is so small it's easy to miss. I would replace it with the {{N/A}} template doneFound5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Some of the former names do not have a space between the last word and the brackets Fixed for this section and the following section. I did not list dates for former names of demolished spaces.Found5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Robert F. Kennedy Children's' Theatre should not have an apostrophe both before and after the S Fixed per source.Found5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Back for more later :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:34, 23 June 2020 (UTC) Comments on the second section/table Headers of image and ref columns should have capitals fixed for all sectionsFound5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Again, some missing spaces between the last word and the brackets fixedFound5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) In the first row, auditorium should not have a capital A fixed.Found5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Second row - when was it the Hotel Edison's ballroom? Was that before/after/at the same time as the names shown below it? fixed.Found5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Third row - no reason for capital S on studio Fixed.Found5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Think that's it on that table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 25 June 2020 (UTC) ChrisTheDude, thank you for your fine-toothed combing though this to catch all my formatting and capitalization errors. I know I am prone to lots of little errors like that so I truly appreciate the responses.Found5dollar (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Comments on the next bit "The newly formed actors union" => "The newly-formed actors' union fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "month long strike" should also have a dash fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "to allow union member to perform" => members fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "4 lists" => "four lists" fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "All theaters are listed by the name in use when their last theatrical production took place in them" - no need for the last two words fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "Post 1949 agreement" => "Post-1949 agreement" Found5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) The former names for the demolished theatres don't list dates, as the other tables do. Is this info not available? it is available, but I figured in these demolished sections the dates were not important as the building no longer stands. When a demolished building changed names seem moot to me. I'd be happy to add in this info if it seems valuable and like it won't muddy the table.Found5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "Post 1919 Actors strike" - this should probably either be "Post-1919 Actors' Equity strike" or "Post-1919 actors' strike" changed to "Post-1919 actors' strike".Found5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "month long strike" again needs a dash fixed.... i really don't like hyphens hu?Found5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "now official industry" => "now-official industry" fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "before the 1949 actors equity agreement" => "before the 1949 Actors' Equity agreement" fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) Again, are the dates for former names not available? see reasoning above. happy to add in if it feels needed.Found5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "Post 1866 Black Crook Production" => "Post-1866 Black Crook Production" fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "In 1866 The Black Crook, opened at Niblo's Garden" - don't need that comma fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "the first piece of American style" - American-style needs a hyphen fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "large scale book musical" => "large-scale book musical" fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "closed before the 1919 Actors Equity strike." needs an apostrophe on Actors' fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) Dates again in the last table? see reasoning above. happy to add in if it feels needed.Found5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "While most early theaters were short lived" - short-lived needs a dash fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "These newly constructed, long term theaters" - newly-constructed and long-term both need dashes fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) Nineteenth century, conversely, doesn't fixedFound5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) "since the beginning of theater in New York City and the opening of The Black Crook." - between the beginning of theater and the opening of The Black Crook, surely? oof. yes. that is what i meant to say. fixed.Found5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) Dates for former names again? see reasoning above. happy to add in if it feels needed.Found5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

• Think that's it. Great work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:59, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

• ChrisTheDude, thank you for such a through review and pointing out that I have absolutely no idea when a hyphen is necessary ;-P. The only note that I think needs discussion is the addition of dates for the former names of demolished theaters. As i stated above this information is available, but i chose not to include it. I figured in these demolished sections the dates were not important as the building no longer stands. When a demolished building changed names seem moot to me. I'd be happy to add in this info if it seems valuable and like it won't muddy the table. Please let me know if it seem pertinent to you or not. Thanks again for the review!Found5dollar (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

• I think it would be worth putting the dates in, personally..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:35, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

• ChrisTheDude, It took a while but I got all the past names dated in the demolished theater sections. the only issue is with "Princess Theatre" where there are 3 previous names but no dates attached in the reference. please let me know if there are anyother issues you see and thank you for all the suggestions so far!Found5dollar (talk) 21:41, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• Juset one (hopefully final) comment - based on the source I believe the entry for the Bijou Theatre should list its second spell of being known by that name as 1965-1982, not just 1965 -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

• ChrisTheDude, Oh weird. I ran into that a few other times where the listed names for the same year were inverted in the source and I just apparently missed this one. Thanks for catching it. fixed.Found5dollar (talk) 18:09, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:28, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now Aza24 (talk) 06:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Would link New York City College of Technology

• Done. also added link to CUNY.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Nielsen Holdings is Nielsen Business Media, not sure if it should be linked though

• added the link just to be safe.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ref 4 Feb 08 should be February 8

• Done.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ref 8 needs ISBN (find it here), can link to Rowman & Littlefield

• Done for both. --Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Refs 2, 3, 6, 8 and 63 should have a space after the "p." (e.g. "p. 40")

• Done.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ref 6 should be "pp. 6–7" (note the em – dash)

• added em dash.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ref 63 McFarland & Company can be linked

• linked.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• What is "Jefferson, London." in ref 63?

• It looks like I made a mistake. That should read "Jefferson, N.C." as the location of the publisher. Fixed and added an ISBN for it.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• "Kaiser, DJ," in refs in 2 and 6 should be "Kaiser, DJ." (with a period) I'm assuming? Aza24 (talk) 06:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Yes! thanks for catching that. Fixed.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Aza24 Thank you for taking the time to review these refs! Please let me know if there are any other issues you see.--Found5dollar (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• @Found5dollar: Everything looks good now, tweaked a couple of things. Nice to see this list getting so much attention, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 21:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

WikiCup entry

• Don't use "currently" - see WP:Currently.

• removed the word from the article completely.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Broadway is overlinked twice in the lead.

• reduced the links to the street, Broadway, to just once in the lead.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Image caption is a fragment, doesn't need a period.

• fixed--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Should Off-off-Broadway be mentioned?

• I toyed with this for a little bit, but Off-Off has no true relationship to Broadway theaters as structures. Off-Off was realy created as a response to Off-Broadway becoming too commercial, not Broadway which always was. If this was a list of Off-Broadway theaters I would 100% talk about Off-Off as it is the next tier of theater in NYC, but it has very little bearing historically to the theater buildings that make up Broadway.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Most of the second paragraph isn't referenced, like those at geographical extremities.

• It is my understanding that summarizing what the chart says does not need to be cited. These items including geographic extremities, youngest and oldest, largest and smallest, etc. are fully cited and explained in the chart and derive from it. I'd be happy to cite them here as well if my understanding is incorrect, but I am unsure how to cite that.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Actor's Equity (Association) is overlinked.

• reduced to once in the lead and once in the "Demolished" section--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• In the "Active..." section, Actor's Equity (Association) is linked on its second mention.

• fixed--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• The Broadway League is overlinked.

• Reduced to once in the lead, and once in the "Active" section--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• "organizations currently use" avoid "currently" again.

• Fixed--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• No. of seats in that source appears to be "approximate" so that needs to be reflected in the list somehow.

• Just as an interesting aside, capacity for venues in America are almost always approximate due to the Americans with Disabilities Act. One wheelchair takes up two "seats" so capacity and seat numbers will fluctuate based upon the amount of wheelchair uses at each performance. I have added a note referencing that all capacity numbers are approximate, and now since there are 2 notes in the article i started a new "Notes" section.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• As a non-expert, can you explain how the "address" column sorts please?

• The address column sorts by the number of the street the theater is on, then the building number. It sorts theaters on 41st street first, then 42nd, then 43rd, etc. with the theaters on Broadway sorted last.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• "are 9 theaters" nine.

• fixed--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• "W Hotel"->"W Hotels"

• Fixed--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Why isn't Central Theatre referred to as Movieland, per the ref? Suddenly now using the original names?

• Picking which name to use for each theater was a challenge as some have gone through so many names. My general rule is to list theaters under the name they went by when they last hosted a legitimate theatrical production. Central Theater is a special case though because it did have legitimate theater from 1951-1956 under the "Holiday Theatre" name, but the wiki page, and one of the sources still called it the "Central Theater." I made an exception here because it seems "Central Theater" is the popular name for it, but understand if people disagree and feel that it should be listed as "Holiday Theater" for sake of consistency. It shoudlt be listed under "Movieland" because no theatrical productions took place under that moniker.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• "Theater" v "Theatre"... interesting issues (e.g. Ed Sullivan Theater reference calls it Ed Sullivan Theatre...)

• "Theater" v "Theatre" is incredibly hard to parse out and is often contridicted by sources for the same places. We even have a disclaimer on the main Broadway theatre page which states: "Although theater is the generally preferred spelling in the United States (see American and British English spelling differences), many Broadway venues, performers and trade groups for live dramatic presentations use the spelling theatre." I tended to base how to spell each buildings name here based first off what the IBDB source says, but then if the article for the theater has a different spelling of "theater" I went with it instead. I figured that the editors working on the individual theater spent more time with varied sources for that specific building so deferred to it.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• No need to link common terms like "hotel" or "storefront"...

• unlined those two--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Actors' Equity is overlinked several times.

• fixed above--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Internet Broadway Database is overlinked.

• it is only linked twice int eh article, should I remove it from all of the cites?--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Why isn't "President Theatre" referred to as "Erwin Piscator's Dramatic Workshop" per its source? There seem to be a few discrepancies of this nature.

• My general rule is to list theaters under the name they went by when they last hosted a legitimate theatrical production. The Dramatic Workshop was a school in multiple locations, had no public performances from what I can tell, and has no productions listed on the IBDB source. The last legitimate theatrical production in the space was under the "President Theatre" moniker. These discrepancies you may be findings are likey similiar issues to this one. Often a theater space is turned into another kind of theater before it is knocked down.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Tynan caption is fragment, no period.

• fixed--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• " variety, burlesque, and minstrel " all overlinked.

• Reduced to once in the lead, and once in the "Demolished" section--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• "Whether or not it is truly the first musical, The Black Crook marks a turning point where Broadway became less about the variety, burlesque, and minstrel shows of the past, and began to be known more for the large-scale book musical which still reigns today. T" claims like this need reference and attribution.

• you are totally right, i just completely missed adding in that cite. thank you for catching it. Original cite added.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Nibio's Garden caption is a frag, no period.

• fixed--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ref 7 title is missing an apostrophe.

Fixed--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• Park Theatre caption, same again, no period.

• fixed--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

That's a first pass. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:51, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

• The Rambling Man, Thank you for taking the time to review this list! Please let me know if you find any additional issues or if any of my answers to your questions need further clarification.--Found5dollar (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Sdkb

I haven't done a featured list review before, so take my comments with a grain of salt, but I've been reviewing some nominations in preparation for submitting a candidate page I've been working on, and wanted to leave a few thoughts about this page. Overall, it looks quite good — the images are quite nice, and the map is a very useful addition. The main source, IBDB, looks reliable.

There are a few tweaks that could be made to improve the formatting of the tables. When abbreviations are used for headers, they should be accompanied by {{abbr}}, as I demonstrated here. Some columns for things like years might also benefit from being centered rather than left-justified.

• I have updated all the abbreviations in the headers to say what the abbr stands for. I previously considered centering the date columns, but it began to look weird in my opinion in the demolished theater sections because you had a centered year, a not centered year and title of of play, then a centered year again. I felt if years are centered in one table they should be in all of them. I'm happy to do this if other people think it would make legibility of the tables better but i just felt it looked awkward.--Found5dollar (talk) 17:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Per criterion 5's expectation that minimal proportion of items are redlinked, I do notice that there are quite a few redlinked items, mostly historical plays. I'm not sure why that's a criterion, since I don't think it'd be fair to force the creation of a gazillion small stubs in order for this page to be listed. The thing that does matter for redlinks, though, is making sure that all redlinked pages are notable. It looks like we don't have a specific notability guideline for plays, so I'd be curious to hear your thoughts regarding whether we're safe assuming that any play that has been on Broadway is sure to meet the General Notability Guideline, and if we're not, which redlinks we might want to unlink.

• IMHO a play or musical that has had a Broadway run is inherently notable. Unfortunately theater coverage in Wikipedia is not as good as it could be so many notable pieces are still missing articles. I agree there is an above average number of redlinks in some columns (namely the playas in the theaters), but I do not feel like they overwhelm. Of the actual items the list is about, theater buildings, only 16 out of almost 150 entries are redlinked which feels minimal to me. I'm happy to unlink the plays that are relinked if it is distracting but also hope that by them being redlinked it may open the doors for another editior to create the pages.--Found5dollar (talk) 17:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Once the above things are addressed, I will be happy to offer my support, although again with the caveat that I am not the most experienced reviewer. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

• Sdkb, sorry for the delayed response to your questions, and thank you for taking the time to review this list. Please let me knwo if any of my answers are not satisfactory to you or if you see any additional issues.--Found5dollar (talk) 17:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

  I asked for clarification at MOS about the column alignments, but I won't hold up my !vote over that. Support. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: did you have any more comments to add to the batch from before? Giants2008 (Talk) 22:09, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

• No, my major issues have been addressed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 10:40, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 21:19, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments – Active Broadway theaters: For some reason, Grand Army Man isn't sorting in the right order in the Productions column. that was weird. I fixed it.--Found5dollar (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC) Post-1949 agreement: You probably don't need an Off-Broadway link here, since there's already one in the previous section. removed the link--Found5dollar (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC) The all caps in the title of ref 4 should be removed. Also, it looks like you need a space before the publisher in that cite. fixed --Found5dollar (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC) Giants2008 (Talk) 18:52, 8 October 2020 (UTC) @Giants2008:, Thank you for reviewing this list! please let me know if you see anything else that need to be updated or changed.--Found5dollar (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support – My concerns have been addressed. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:19, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 22:30, 28 October 2020 (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) 00:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC) [3].

---

Grammy Award for Best Mexican/Mexican-American Album

Nominator(s): Javier Espinoza (talk) 19:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it is fact checked and part of a project for the Grammy Award list; is been a while since I have started working on it, and now thanks to the assistance of @Another Believer and Magiciandude: I finally present it for nomination. I will be following closely all your comments. Thank you. Javier Espinoza (talk) 19:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• Ref for all the name changes in the category's history?

Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:21, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• "most awarded performer" => "most-awarded performer"

Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:21, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• It seems like for much of the award's history it could be given to either an individual song or an album - maybe clarify/mention this?

The first years of the award they did that, but there is no reference to explain this other than the nominations list, that would be enough?. Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:21, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• For English-language awards, we would expect any title that starts with "The" to sort based on the next word, so I would say that the same should apply here to any title or band name starting with La/Los/etc.

Fixed.Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:35, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Think that's it from me - great work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jaespinoza: - let me know when you get a chance to make the other changes and I will re-visit..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:40, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: I did some of the changes, I will wait for your re-visit. Thank you. Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:21, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

I'll be back to do a source review but some drive by issues:

• The "note" in the year column, doesn't go to anything? Presumably it meant to go to the same place as the note in Grammy Award for Best Solo Rock Vocal Performance

Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 19:40, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• There are no refs for the entire second paragraph of the lead and it's not covered anywhere else... Aza24 (talk) 08:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 20:21, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• Comments:
• Would link The Daily Gazette Company and Deseret News Publishing Company

Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:00, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• I would remove the locations from refs 10 and 11, or you have to add locations to the rest

Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:00, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• 17 missing link to Los Angeles Times

Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:00, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• Everything else is good but the two points at the top still remain extant Aza24 (talk) 08:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
• Courtesy ping @Jaespinoza: Aza24 (talk) 20:42, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

  @Aza24:. Thank you. I am working on your comments. Javier Espinoza (talk) 19:39, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

  Looks much better now. Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 01:28, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Some stuff

@Jaespinoza:

• Remove the "Each year is linked to the article about the Grammy Awards held that year" note. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:43, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:42, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

• Optional: Add one or multiple more images to the page. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:43, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Fixed. Javier Espinoza (talk) 21:42, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Votes

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support – Didn't spot any issues with this one. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:41, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 22:30, 28 October 2020 (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) 00:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC) [4].

---

Ray Bradbury Award

Nominator(s): PresN 02:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Way back in 2012, I took the then-five categories of the Nebula Awards through FLC, following the 15+ lists on scifi/fantasy awards I'd already done. At the time, I thought I was done, but now not only has the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America SFWA started a new category for game writing, which I was waiting to get to a decent length before nominating, they've gone and retroactively made their two "not an official category" categories into official categories. So, I've got some lists to polish up, and here's the first: the Ray Bradbury Nebula Award for Outstanding Dramatic Presentation, now with "Nebula" stuck into the name to make it extra-official. It's a bit of an odd award- unlike the other categories that got voted on, the president of SFWA just gave it out to whatever 4 times in 17 years, and when SFWA retired the Best Script category they converted it to the "normal" process but left it as a separate thing form the regular categories. They also give it to the "primary" "director and writer(s)", which don't always match the screen credits (and the past couple of years they've just said "writer" even if the person also directed). Until this year, like I said, when they decided it was official (not with anything so crass as a public announcement, but just by changing the rules to say it was official and telling former winners that they counted). Anyway, here it is- it's modeled heavily on the existing 5 Nebula FLs, as well as the other 20+ SFF award lists I did between 2010 and 2016, so hopefully the format is still solid. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 02:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• Consider noting that "short miniseries of no more than three connected episodes" may be nominated per reference 1

• added

• Reference 6 is not great for this specific award (applies more directly to the Andre Norton Award) – if possible, find a better source

• Frustratingly, I can't- they never made an announcement, even on their own blog. They just... renamed the award, and updated the rules.

• While the listed sources indicate that the award was not originally a Nebula Award, they do not directly indicate that the name was changed from "Ray Bradbury Award…" to "Ray Bradbury Nebula Award…"; consider finding a source for this

• See above; I've added a source to the archived rules page from June 2019 where the old name was used

• Citation needed to explain the changes in 2010 following the retirement of the Nebula Award for Best Script – check other article for sources (this one seems pretty good)

• Added

• Rules in second paragraph are from 2011 and do not align with the current Nebula website

Oh for stars' sake, would it kill them to actually announce these changes outside of their internal mailing list? Fixed, and now I have to go fix all the other lists too; apparently they tweaked rules for the nominations dates in 2017.

• Reference 7 seems moot, as the award was only regularly awarded after the rules change, but I'm torn as to whether or not you should remove it. A second opinion here would be nice.

• I left it (and the pre-2009 rules text it supports) there specifically because of the 3 "selected" winners that would have been before the rules change; assuming we count Babylon 5 from the main series air date (Jan 26, 1994) and not the test pilot airing (Feb 22, 1993) it didn't apply to any of them so I'm easily persuaded to drop it.

• Sources used for awards do not appear to be entirely accurate – for instance, reference 14 omits Orci and Kurtzman as nominees for Star Trek and Doctor and McCarthy for Up, while reference 21 includes Rich Moore and Jared Bush as nominees. Find better sources or use the SFWA's website (i.e. for 2010, consider using this link for the source).

• I can't replace Locus because I need to cite something that's not SFWA itself to justify that the subject matters; I used SFWA's site to actually get the names/positions and so missed the discrepancies. Added SFWA's pages as secondary sources, as I believe them to be more authoritative, although this is the first time I've ever seen a data issue with Locus so I don't know what caused it.

• • Follow-up: After rereading the document, I noticed reference 11, which seems to be more accurate. However, because of its position, it doesn't seem like the source for the entire table. Is this what you're using for your source? If so, I don't know why you've included the other references that contradict it.
• Reference 12 does not mention the Ray Bradbury Award at all

• Dropped in favor of citing SFWA directly

• 2010 nominees should include Moon

• Fixed

• 2013 nominees should include The Hunger Games

• Fixed

• Alphabetize 2010 and 2019 nominees to align with other years' entries

• Done

• SFWA's website lists Paramount as publisher for How to Train Your Dragon, not DreamWorks

• Fixed

• Remove teleplay note for "AKA Smile"

• Fixed

• Drew Goddard wrote The Martian, not Lawrence Kasdan

• Fixed

• James Gilroy is not a writer for Logan; James Mangold should be credited as director and writer

• Fixed

• Italicize Good Omens in infobox

• Fixed

• Consider adding sort function to Creators and Publishers columns

• Done for publishers; I've not done this for creators in this and similar lists because a) it gives the weight to the director (that's listed first) over the other creators and b) it gets weird when SFWA only lists writers- the sorting, as a result, is not predictable by readers in the same way sorting by title or year is.

Overall, the formatting and lead seem solid, but the referencing is shaky and needs to be seriously overhauled. RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:19, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

@RunningTiger123: Finally got to this; my sincere apologies for taking so long (covid+work+homeschooling wiped out my energy for big tasks on wiki). Apologies also for the amount of work- this was an incredibly thorough review, and I'm frankly embarrassed that you found some of these fairly severe problems with the list. Thank you so much for doing so and finding these flaws. I've responded inline, but hopefully everything is fixed now. --PresN 03:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Support — The edits look good and are well integrated into the article; thank you for addressing them! RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Additional note: I'm not changing my decision to support; this is just something to consider. If you need non-SFWA sources, there are options from other websites for recent years (for instance: 2020, 2019, 2018, another 2018, and 2017). These sources could replace Lotus, as they seem to be more accurate. Even if you can't find sources going all the way back to the earliest awards, I would be okay with some years using secondary sources and the rest using SFWA sources. This would establish that the award is meaningful while ensuring the citations are valid. Again, this is just something to consider; the call here is yours. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:15, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing.
• I'm confused by the lack of an asterisk in the 2001 row.

• Fixed

• FLC criteria:
  • 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. The prose looks good.
  • 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
  • 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
  • 3b. The sources appear to be reliable, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present. For this review, I'm not taking a position on the points raised above.
  • 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
  • 4. It is navigable.
  • 5. It meets style requirements. It doesn't use images, but I'm weak in that area so I don't have an opinion.
  • 6. It is stable.
  • The table coding looks good. Some people prefer to avoid redirects for names of people and companies (for instance, Warner Bros. Domestic Television redirects to Warner Bros. Television Studios). I'll be happy to go through the table avoiding such redirects if you like.
• Support, with the caveat that I'm not taking a position on things the previous reviewer said. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 00:00, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Reliability is good, based on the reliance on a few sources. Formatting good as well – Pass for source review Aza24 (talk) 07:54, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Harrias

NB: I am competing in the WikiCup, and may claim points for this review.

• What is the source for "with the Marvel Cinematic Universe earning the most nominations with seven films and one television episode"? There are only six entries in the list crediting Marvel? Counting things that might be MCU on the list (OR) I get to nine (ten if Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is MCU).

• Counting is not OR; some of them say Disney/Paramount instead of Marvel because the publisher is according to SFWA, not the full credits, but the Marvel Cinematic Universe is an actual thing, not a category open to interpretation, any more than counting Star Wars films/series is OR. That said, I definitely miscounted to get 7+1. If I'm counting right now: Captain America: The First Avenger, The Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Doctor Strange, Black Panther, Avengers: Endgame, Captain Marvel, and Jessica Jones: "AKA Smile", so 8+1. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, which wasn't produced by Marvel or its owner, is not MCU.

• Sure, counting isn't OR, but knowing which films and TV series are or are not MCU is OR. You are using your specialist knowledge to determine that. If the films being part of the MCU was defined and sourced in the list, then we could simply count it and include it. But realistically, without an external reliable source backing up the claim that the MCU has the most nominations, it falls short of the requirements of WP:V as laid out in WP:OR. And yes, this also applies to the Star Wars films and series. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 10:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
• I take on board the point that the MCU "is an actual thing, not a category open to interpretation"; I missed this on my first read of your response. I can see this both ways. Most things we cite are facts which aren't open to interpretation (who won this award in 2019, for example), but we still have to cite them. Ultimately, the Featured list criteria only require content to meet WP:BURDEN and WP:MINREF, so the question is whether it is likely to be challenged. In theory, I guess that I'm challenging it, but I'm not really. I'm willing to stand down on this, but if anyone does query the figure via an edit or on the talk page, then it would need a source. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 11:16, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

• Avoid Noun plus-ing: "..with 11 of those winning..", "..with the Marvel Cinematic Universe earning.." and "..with one film winning."

• Fixed

• The leads says that "Only individual works are eligible, not serials such as television series.." and yet in 1999, the president chose Babylon 5, maybe add that to the exceptions list at the end of the lead?

• Added

Otherwise, this looks good. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 09:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Harrias: Thanks for reviewing! Responded inline. --PresN 16:45, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support my concerns have been resolved. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 11:16, 20 October 2020 (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) 22:16, 25 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC) [5].

---

List of World Heritage Sites in Sweden

Nominator(s): Tone 19:00, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

So, this is the last from the set of UNESCO lists from Northern Europe, and it is also the longest (probably this is the reason this came last...) Style is consistent with other lists, text usually gets some polishing during the nomination. Thank you in advance for comments. Tone 19:00, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 23:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Comments – For accessibility per MOS:DTT, replace all the asterisks with the {{asterisk}} template (or any other accessible symbol like {{dagger}}, {{double-dagger}}, {{&}}, {{Number sign}}, etc.) The !scope="row"| parameter should be included (like it is in List of World Heritage Sites in Lithuania) In light of the recent RFC on table captions (closed back in May) and how FLCs have to follow MOS:ACCESS, a table caption should be included. This quote by PresN might apply to this list: "In the case that the table is the first thing in a section where the section header is essentially the same as what the caption would be, and therefore looks duplicative visually, you can make the caption screen reader-only with the {{sronly}} template, e.g. "|+ {{sronly|Example table caption}}" instead of "|+ Example table caption"." Might want to add a comma in between "Finland" and "while" (in the final paragraph) Images utilized are licensed and tagged, with appropriate alt text. "located on an island Lovön in Lake Mälaren in a suburb of Stockholm" – either put Lovön in brackets or reword it to "on the island of Lovön "The first blast furnace was built in 1681 to produce pig iron, the present one, which incorporated a number of technological innovations, in 1778-79." – something's missing in the second half of the sentence (I'm assuming you meant that the present one was built in 1778–79). Also, replace hyphen with en dash between the years. Finally, you can split the sentence into two (after "pig iron" and before "the present one") or place a semicolon instead of a comma. "a practice which has drawn criticism" – replace "which" with "that" Again, replace hyphen with en dash for "1917-20" and "1922-24" "Skogskyrkogården is a significant example of successful application of the architecture wholly integrated into its environment and has had a profound influence on cemetery design in many countries of the world." – the wording here seems a bit convoluted. "Originally a Viking settlement on a strategic location on a shore" – perhaps "settlement at a strategic location" would be better "changes of trade routes" – replace "of" with "to" Add comma in between "von Struve" and "who" —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:48, 5 July 2020 (UTC) @Bloom6132: Done, please have a look. --Tone 16:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

• Support – I made two minor tweaks and everything now checks out fine. Looks to me like it meets all 6 FL criteria. Great work! —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Note: I am participating in the WikiCup, and intend to claim points from the above review. —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

;Comments "The last site added to the current list are" - "site" is singular, so the verb should be "is" "The palace ensemble" - what's a "palace ensemble"? "one of the strongest powers in the 17th century Europe" => "one of the strongest powers in 17th century Europe" "Visby's role started declining in the second half of 14th century" => "Visby's role started declining in the second half of the 14th century" "The city declined in 1525, when it was sacked by an army from Lübeck." - I think it's unlikely that the city declined in the space of a single year, so it's probably more appropriate to say "The city declined after it was sacked by an army from Lübeck in 1525." "is currently being considered as to be added to the site" => "is currently being considered for addition to the site" "Relocating from Stockholm, Karlskrona" - this reads as if Karlskrona relocated, which obviously isn't true. Better to say "Karlskrona was to replace Stockholm as the new naval base for Swedish Navy, a major naval power of the era" "The site comprises of" => either "The site comprises" or "The site consists of" but not "The site comprises of" "The paintings represent a fusion of folk styles with the influences from Baroque and Rococo" => "The paintings represent a fusion of folk styles with influences from Baroque and Rococo" Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 9 July 2020 (UTC) @ChrisTheDude: Fixed, thanks! --Tone 17:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Further comments

• The listing for the Royal Domain still uses the word "ensemble" without explaining it. I have literally no idea what the word means in this context.
• Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments Wow, huuuuge whitespace in the lead. Not a good start. Any way of addressing that? "As of 2016" why 2016? That's really "as of 2020". Especially curious as that source has an accessdate of 2011! "has one property" strange wording, why not "one site"? " still-functioning Theatre, a" we've had this before, in this context Theatre shouldn't be capitalised. Fine to capitalise it if you're using its full formal title, but not here, looks odd. "The architecture of the ensemble can be viewed as the legacy of the influences of the Palace of Versailles" according to whom? " Saint Ansgar" put Saint inside the link. "the central function" what's that? "They reveal the life and beliefs of people who made them," again, according to whom? Reads a little like a travel guide rather than an encyclopedic treatment of the topic. 1917–20 -> 1917–1920 per MOS. " in the Baltic from" region? "resulted in unique adaptations." such as? Kvarken has two dates per the official site, 2000 and 2006, why isn't that reflected here? I would expect some reference to the trans-national nature of Kvarken in its notes section. "The most striking feature" guidebook. "antenna" is a dab. " Biology *" previous trans-national sites didn't have a space between their name and the asterisk. Refs 3 and 15 have spaced hyphens, should be en-dashes. "World Heritage Sites in Sweden" template, several redirects which shouldn't really be in a navigational template. That's about all I have, this is a WikiCup review by the way. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:30, 12 July 2020 (UTC) @The Rambling Man: I'm through! Thanks for the comments. The white space at the intro is due to the vertical geography of Sweden. I could omit the break but that would mess with the table setting on some screens. Regarding Kvarken, the expansion is mentioned in the description, the year in the table is when the Swedish property was listed (for Finland article, I used 2006). A bunch of "guidebook" wording is from the source, but I changed to more neutral nevertheless. Sometimes the UNESCO descriptions are over-hyped. Thanks for spotting some issues that I missed earlier. --Tone 14:55, 18 July 2020 (UTC) I'm still not comfortable with that huge whitespace and very short lead. The other issues are satisfactorily resolved. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 09:08, 31 August 2020 (UTC) I know. The lead is about the length of other lists that were promoted, but the image makes it look short. I don't have a good solution here, without repeating the content of the list. --Tone 09:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC) This is an interesting issue... I would agree that the current state is rather awkward, I have inquired at the help desk. Aza24 (talk) 20:42, 9 October 2020 (UTC) The Rambling Man and Tone, following the help desk request, Maproom has tried out some new formatting to reduce the white space. I think it looks better – but of course still not ideal – and it might be the best solution. The only other thing I can think of is perhaps adding some additional pictures in the white space of heritage sites, although this would be different then must UNESCO lists. Aza24 (talk) 22:37, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support good enough now, cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now. I'll try to come back later for additional comments on the prose to get this nomination moving. Aza24 (talk) 22:32, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

• Ref 9 could do with some kind of identifier. Url, doi, JSTOR number, oclc or ISSN (although I'm not sure journals have these two)
• Ref 10 needs ISBN 13 (use the converter)
• OUP really should be spelled out as Oxford University Press
• Given that so many sources are Unesco, reliability is fine. The other 3 are good as well. Aza24 (talk) 22:32, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Aza24: done! @The Rambling Man: could you check my fixes from the previous round? --Tone 15:00, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Good work, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 05:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments Support from Aza24

Some comments to get this one moving:

• "The property dates back to the 17th and 18th century" – shouldn't it just be 17th? Or is this referencing some additions that were made in the 18th century
• I'm not sure that "Nevertheless, the royal residence" makes sense since the sentence proceeding it is referring to Birka and the new one is reffering to Hovgården – they aren't seemingly related except by proximity, right?
• in the Engelsberg Ironworks section, three sentences in a row start with "The" and one sentence after another one does as well – try to add a little variation here
• BCE is used and so is AD, it should be either BCE and CE or BC and AD
• Could "They depict humans, animals, weapons, tools, and other subjects. There are around 1500 known sites with carvings." be combined - might flow better?(e.g. "There are around 1500 known sites with carvings depicting humans, animals...")
• "Skogskyrkogården is a significant example of how architectural features can be wholly integrated into the environment. Skogskyrkogården has had a profound influence on cemetery design in many countries worldwide" may flow better combined too, but this one seems less obvious than my suggestion above (e.g. "Skogskyrkogården is a significant example of how architectural features can be wholly integrated into the environment and has had...")
• "Swedish Baroque city" sounds like a historical time period when it refers to an artistic one, this should be rephrased to something like "Swedish city in the Baroque style" (like how its done with NeoClassical later)
• It was founded in 1680, during the reign of king Charles XI to replace Stockholm as the new naval base for Swedish Navy, a major naval power of the era. – combining would make sense since surely this is the reason the king founded it? – King should be capitalized as well
• The rest of the prose looks great, just these things and hopefully a solution for the above issue on map size... Aza24 (talk) 21:43, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

@Aza24: Fixed, thanks for great comments. Also, I think that the fix to the space works nice - the laptop screen does not show excessively large white space now. I will let @The Rambling Man: decide if this is ok or if we should add perhaps a gallery or something. --Tone 11:51, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes I think the way it stands right now or with a gallery is enough for me to support, great work here. Aza24 (talk) 19:50, 11 October 2020 (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) 22:10, 25 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 26 October 2020 (UTC) [6].

---

List of Most Played Juke Box Folk Records number ones of 1945

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Here's the next list of number-one U.S. country songs (known as folk songs at the time - the term country music wasn't in use at the time). With 54 such lists already promoted to FL, for the next one let's jump back to the era of Western swing and singing cowboys....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333([7]) 21:11, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments I'm not sure if the comma is necessary after "1944" in At the start of the year, the song in the number one position was "I'm Wastin' My Tears on You" by Tex Ritter, which had been in the top spot since the issue of Billboard dated December 23, 1944, and remained at the top of the chart for four weeks in 1945. Change non-consecutive to nonconsecutive You should clarify the sentence As the chart was still in its infancy, the majority of the acts to top the chart in 1945 did so for the first time, including Jimmie Davis, who combined his singing career with serving as Governor of Louisiana. It's not clear that he was governor simultaneously. As usual, it's a real struggle to find anything. ~ HAL333([8]) 20:15, 10 October 2020 (UTC) All addressed, hopefully to your satisfaction -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:44, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333([9]) 21:11, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• Added a table caption with {{sronly}}. Avoided one redirect in the table (x2).
• FLC criteria:
• 1. The prose is fine. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. The coding in the table seems fine.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. You make excellent use of images (but that's about all I'm qualified to say).
• 6. It is stable.
• Support - Dank (push to talk) 22:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support - ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 12:22, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Nothing to say here as formatting follows other FL lists in a very similar fashion. All reliable sources and consistent formatting. Mostly a procedural thing at this point! Pass for source review - Aza24 (talk) 00:39, 13 October 2020 (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) 22:27, 25 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 26 October 2020 (UTC) [10].

---

List of awards and nominations received by RuPaul

Nominator(s): --Leo Mercury (talk) 10:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it meets the criteria and I did all the corrections necessary. --Leo Mercury (talk) 10:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• Wikilink drag queen - I don't think we can assume that every reader will know what this means
• "RuPaul's Drag Race and its various spin-off" - missing S on the end
• "The series was met with critical acclaim" - which series? The last sentence mentioned four different (albeit related) series
• "(becoming the person with the most wins in the category of Outstanding Host for a Competition Program)" => I would say "making him the person with the most wins in the category of Outstanding Host for a Competition Program" (and lose the brackets)
• "He was nominated for a BAFTA TV Award for the first season of Drag Race UK." - was he nominated, or was the show nominated?
• "the release of his debut single, "Supermodel (You Better Work)"" - it was not his debut single according to the song's article
• Many of the awards in the table were presented to shows rather then to RuPaul himself. In some cases the award was to one or more named people, including him (eg the Producers Guild Award was given jointly to RuPaul, Fenton Bailey, Randy Barbato, Tom Campbell, Mandy Salangsang, and Steven Corfe). When RuPaul was named a joint winner with other people, that should be noted. When an award was made simply to the show and RuPaul was not specifically named as a winner, I think it's debatable whether it should be listed here at all. I'll see what other editors think on this point.
• Refs look OK, but the title of the Logo TV one should not be shown in all caps.
• Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:50, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Done. I think we can leave all the awards received by the show on his page because as a creator, host and producer of the series I think it is safe to assume that he is the main recipient of most of them, but I would like to know what the other editors think about this matter. --Leo Mercury (talk) 09:07, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
    • I'm cool with seeking a wider view. I'll check back here later but in the meantime I will sashay away :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:58, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
      • It's a fair point, and not dissimilar to one I made at the Brad Pitt awards FLC on this page where a film he was in won an Oscar and the list claimed Pitt himself had won two Oscars, that one, and one for his personal achievement. I'll take a look at this list in due course, but I'm tending to side with Chris on this... The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:35, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 04:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
;Comments Is there not an article for the GLAAD Media Awards which occurred in 1999? I would wiki link every show, because if you sort it, it’s hard to find the specific link. Nice job overall. ~ HAL333 12:22, 3 July 2020 (UTC) Done. --Leo Mercury (talk) 16:54, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333 02:47, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now Aza24 (talk) 00:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Refs missing authors: 7, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 20, 21, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33
• Ref 25 missing author and date
• Would link to see all the publishers linked rather than just some. I went ahead and linked most, double check that I got them all
• Why is 21 MTV news instead of just MTV?
• Why is Entertainment Weekly cited as a maganazene in refs 12 and 14 but not in 15?
• reliability looks fine Aza24 (talk) 00:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Done. --Leo Mercury (talk) 13:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Good work, pass for source review Aza24 (talk) 02:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments from GagaNutella

• Put all awards on infobox
• Wikilink everything you can on the Category column
• I recommend put work and then category (I see most articles are like this)
• Compact ToC isn't working
• All notes are missing "."
• Ref: 6: delete bafta.org. 16, 17, 19: Change GLAAD.org. to Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (as publisher). 28: change Emmys.com to Emmy Awards.

I will run AutoEd to clean up the article. GagaNutella^talk 19:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks, I've corrected everything. The only thing I did not edit is the compact ToC, because it seems to be working for me. --Leo Mercury (talk) 10:38, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
  • By the way, see Template:Compact ToC to remove unlinked letters. It helps. GagaNutella^talk 02:52, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the suggestion, GagaNutella, I've corrected it. --Leo Mercury (talk) 10:10, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude and GagaNutella, sorry for pinging, but since this is now one of the oldest candidates, I want to make sure to receive your support or opposition for this nomination so that we can finally close it. --Leo Mercury (talk) 21:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

• Apologies, I totally forgot about this one. Thinking about it, I guess I am OK with the awards given generically to the show appearing here given how intrinsically linked to the show RuPaul is. It's not like if Coronation Street won an award for best TV show and someone attempted to include it as an award for every single cast member. SO I guess I am OK to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
• Sorry! I support! GagaNutella^talk 17:27, 20 October 2020 (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) 22:05, 25 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC) [11].

---

Asin filmography

Nominator(s): 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣✅ 13:15, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating a fully-sourced and well-written listing of Asin's film. As usual, look forward to lots of constructive comments... 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣✅ 13:15, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:14, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

;Comments Her name should not be in bold at the start  Done "a former Indian actress" => "an Indian former actress" (she is still Indian)  Done "Asin made her acting debut at the age of 15 in Malayalam-language satirical comedy-drama" => "Asin made her acting debut at the age of 15 in the Malayalam-language satirical comedy-drama"  Done "Her performance as a Tamil girl subsequently fetched her Filmfare Best Telugu Actress Award." => "Her performance as a Tamil girl earned her the Filmfare Best Telugu Actress Award."  Done "Asin had two other Telugu releases viz. Lakshmi Narasimha (2004) and Gharshana (2004), both were successful ventures." => "Asin had two other Telugu releases: Lakshmi Narasimha (2004) and Gharshana (2004), both of which were successful ventures."  Done "Asin made her debut in Tamil film industry" => "Asin made her debut in the Tamil film industry"  Done "in 2004 action sports drama film" => "in the 2004 action sports drama film"  Done "Her role as a vivacious young model named Kalpana, won her Filmfare Best Tamil Actress Award" => "Her role as a vivacious young model named Kalpana won her the Filmfare Best Tamil Actress Award"  Done "the most notable being the action Sivakasi (2005)" - there's at least one word missing here. I presume you mean "the most notable being the action film Sivakasi (2005)"  Done "hence established herself as the leading actress of Tamil cinema" => "which established her as the leading actress of Tamil cinema"  Done "her role as a Brahmin girl from Chidambaram in" - in what? The film title is missing :-)  Done "earned her Vijay Award for Best Actress [a] nomination" => "earned her a Vijay Award for Best Actress [a] nomination"  Done "first Bollywood film to have collected more than ₹1 billion in the domestic box office" => "first Bollywood film to collect more than ₹1 billion at the domestic box office"  Done Title of London Dreams should be in italics  Done "London Dreams (2011), having ensemble cast film proved to be financially unsuccessful" - this doesn't make sense. I think what you mean to say is "London Dreams (2011), an ensemble cast film which proved to be financially unsuccessful" Exactly "Asin honoured by the Tamil Nadu government" => "Asin was honoured by the Tamil Nadu government"  Done What is SIIMA? An awards ceremony? Yes. term linked "Asin has been referred to as the "Queen of Kollywood" by online portals in 2007" - "in 2007" seems a bit unnecessarily specific. I would simply say "Asin has been referred to as the "Queen of Kollywood" by online portals during her acting career"  Done In the table, "Nominated- Filmfare" is written three different ways - space only before the dash, space only after the dash, and spaces both sides. Be consistent in how you write it.  Done The two refs against Sivanami have a space between them, delete that  Done The two notes should both start with a capital letter  Done The footnotes section is completely empty, so you may as well delete it  Done Some Entertainment Times refs have a lower case t on "times", others have a capital T. A capital would seem to be correct.  Done Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:58, 20 September 2020 (UTC) thanks a lot mate. All issues addressed. Appreciate your time.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣✅ 03:52, 21 September 2020 (UTC) Several are not actually done, eg it still says "Asin has been referred to as the "Queen of Kollywood" by online portals in 2007", and there is still random different spacing in the multiple uses of "Nominated -Filmfare Award". Can you give it another check and make sure you have addressed everything......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:00, 21 September 2020 (UTC) My apologies mate. I have made common spacing like Nominated- Filmfare....Let me know if still there is miss.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣✅ 12:45, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:14, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Ab207

Resolved comments from Ab207 (talk) 16:35, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

* Per 3 (b) of Featured list criteria. There seems to be a lack of inline citations, including but not limited to the following: "first commercial success with the Telugu film Amma Nanna O Tamila Ammayi"  Done "Lakshmi Narasimha (2004) and Gharshana (2004), both of which were successful ventures."  Done The source does not seem to mention them. You may leave out the "successful ventures" part if that is easier--Ab207 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC) I have added 2 new sources with modified sentence. Let me know if it's fine. Yeah, They'll do.--Ab207 (talk) 18:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC) "M. Kumaran Son of Mahalakshmi, a critical and commercial success."  Done Critical success part is not supported. --Ab207 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)  Fixed "She then played the lead female roles in many commercially successful films," (Here "lead female role" can be replaced with just "lead role", never seen someone using "lead male role" for instance)  Done "established herself as the leading actress of Tamil cinema."  Done Not sure if you have noticed but this is a case of WP:CIRCULAR. Content seems to be copied from Wikipedia itself. We would need a different source.--Ab207 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC) After working on several Tamil films she was casted as lead actress in movies. Could not this be a case of "her establishment of leading actress"? The claim that those four films are commercially successful, must be sourced. As East Cost Daily is a circular reference, it should be replaced. You may use this this HTimes source.--Ab207 (talk) 18:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC)  Fixed "Though it received mixed reviews"  Done Must be cited inline. --Ab207 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC) "first Bollywood film to collect more than ₹1 billion at the domestic box office, subsequently collecting ₹1.9 billion (US$27 million) worldwide."  Done "London Dreams (2011), an ensemble cast film which proved to be financially unsuccessful and received mixed reviews from critics."  Done "financially unsuccessful" has to be sourced. Avoid WP:SYNTH for critical response, the source must directly support that the film has received mixed reviews overall, as opposed to one or two critics.--Ab207 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)  Fixed Source has to directly say that the film has "received mixed reviews." For example, in Tamannaah filmography, Himmatwala's negative reception is sourced by this IBT report, which explicitly reports as such. You may also remove the review part if it's difficult to source it. There's not much value addition anyway, because most unsuccessful receive mixed or negative reviews. --Ab207 (talk) 18:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC) Thanks for the suggestion. I am not able to find one, so have removed. Will add if I get a source in future. "Asin found further success in romantic comedy Ready (2011)"  Done " Housefull 2, which collected more than ₹1 billion."  Done "Bol Bachchan (2012) and Khiladi 786 (2012), which were also commercially successful with both grossing over ₹1 billion"  Done Collecting 1 billion and commercial success are different things. BOI is okay for raw data per ICTF, but for the "success" part, we'd need a different source. --Ab207 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC) To my knowledge commercially successful is derived by how much money a movie has earned. Nevertheless, have added. If you don't mind. I suggest you use this Republic source for the commercial success of three films, and remove HT, DNA, and Indiaglitz (to comply with WP:CITEKILL). You can use this for London dreams' failure as well. --Ab207 (talk) 18:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC) Awesome. Thanks for this source. Added. 25 Cents FC, BOI gives Khiladi786 only 97 cr. Alternatively, you may write In 2012, Asin starred in the action comedies Housefull 2, Bol Bachchan and Khiladi 786, all of which were commercially successful, with the former two entering the 100 Crore Club; and cite this source as well.--Ab207 (talk) 15:50, 1 October 2020 (UTC) Awesome.  Fixed Dual roles and roles with more than one name may be clarified using a note. Trisha filmography can be used as a reference.  Done Its a dual role in Dasavathaaram IIRC. --Ab207 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)  Fixed Please confirm if it's done. Yeah, nicely done. Was it a dual role in Ready? It wasn't in the Telugu version. --Ab207 (talk) 18:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC) I have not seen the movie. Actually article claims so. The term "Queen of Kollywood" should preferably be attributed. Also, Filmibeat is not considered reliable per WP:ICTFSOURCES. Attributed, can you please elaborate? Yeah, says "by online portals," I guess that's fine. --Ab207 (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC) Image caption: Year and location are more significant than attire, IMO.  Done I'll follow up with the comments if I find anything else. Best wishes --Ab207 (talk) 14:10, 24 September 2020 (UTC) Thank you. Look forward.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣✅ 11:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC) I have tried to solve issues raised. Please let me know If I have missed to solve something.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣✅ 14:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support My concerns have been addressed. Good work overall. --Ab207 (talk) 16:35, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Kailash29792

• Asin is a former Indian actress who is known for her work in Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam and Hindi language films" - "language" may be removed since it is understood. Also, why did ChrisTheDude suggest "Indian former actress" and revert to "former Indian actress", even though he said it's because Asin is still Indian?
  • "Former Indian actress" makes it sound like she's a former Indian, which obviously isn't the case -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:43, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
• Asin made her debut in the Tamil film industry in the 2004 action sports drama film M. Kumaran Son of Mahalakshmi, a critical and commercial success. - change to Asin made her debut in Tamil cinema in the 2004 sports drama film M. Kumaran Son of Mahalakshmi, a critical and commercial success.

 Done

• She then played the lead female roles in many commercially successful films, the most notable being the action film Sivakasi (2005), the dramatic thriller Varalaru (2006), the action thriller Pokkiri (2007), the romantic drama Vel (2008) and Dasavathaaram (2008), which established herself as the leading actress of Tamil cinema. you can simply say "the female lead in many commercially successful films". Also, Vel was in the action genre rather than romance (or maybe masala, which mixes various genres, but romance was certainly not the main one). Conclude this sentence with "a leading actress of Tamil cinema".

Made changes to Vel genre. We need to check a or the with @ChrisTheDude:.

I'm sure she was not the leading actress at the time. That's why I suggested a instead of the. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:12, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed

• Though it received mixed reviews, her role as a Brahmin girl from Chidambaram in Dasavathaaram earned her a Vijay Award for Best Actress [a] nomination. change to Though Dasavathaaram received mixed reviews, her role as a Brahmin girl from Chidambaram earned her a Vijay Award for Best Actress nomination. I don't think you need a footnote describing what a Vijay Award is.

A person from USA/ Europe wouldn't know about Vijay Award, so just thought I should put a note.

We have wikilinks for that part. Tbh, they wouldn't know about Filmfare either.--Ab207 (talk) 15:06, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed

• She later played the female lead in musical drama film London Dreams (2011), an ensemble cast film which proved to be financially unsuccessful and received mixed reviews from critics. Change to She later played the female lead in the musical drama London Dreams (2011), which proved to be financially unsuccessful and received mixed reviews from critics. Since it has only three leads (Salman Khan, Ajay Devgn and Asin), I don't think ensemble applies here.

 Done

• Asin found further success in romantic comedy Ready (2011), in which she co-starred alongside Salman Khan. The film was a major hit at the box office, collecting ₹1.84 billion (US$26 million) worldwide. Change to "box office success". Also, when Salman is not mentioned for London Dreams, why is he mentioned here?

Asin played lead role for opposite Salman inReady. For London Dream she played leading lady opposite Ajay Devgan.

• In 2012, Asin first starred in multistarrer comedy Housefull 2, which collected more than ₹1 billion. She then featured in comedies Bol Bachchan (2012) and Khiladi 786 (2012), which were also commercially successful with both grossing over ₹1 billion. Try merging both sentences into one since all three films were released in 2012, were action comedies, and grossed over ₹1 billion each. --Kailash29792 (talk) 17:40, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Will be glad if you suggest a sentence please.

How about this? In 2012, Asin starred in the action comedies Housefull 2, Bol Bachchan and Khiladi 786, all of which were commercially successful, grossing over ₹1 billion each. Place the refs at the end of the sentence. Also seeking input from others in this FLC about this sentence. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:12, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

 Fixed Thanks.

Thank you for solving all these comments. Also, please do NOT use the publisher field for websites. Use website or work instead. All the Times of India refs must have The Times of India under work, and The Times Group under publisher. Because the publisher field is for the work's parent company. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:25, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I have added ref in manner you have advised here but some of them have been done by Economic Times, Entertainment Times etc. As a result I had to mention it in other way round. Please provide a suggestion what to include under work, publisher and agency in such case.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣✅ 14:42, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing them. Just a few more comments left: find a better source than IndiaGlitz (remove if it is redundant), and remove the awards mentioned in the table (this is because we already have List of awards and nominations received by Asin). Instead, mention any notable award in the lead section with source(s). After that this will have my support. Kailash29792 (talk) 09:13, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Filmfare nominations are not that significant to mention, in my view.--Ab207 (talk) 18:19, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

I have actually referred Deepika Padukone filmography, Shilpa Shetty filmography, Kareena Kapoor filmography, Vidya Balan filmography. Actually it won't be bad if we mention awards as it could give a reader quick idea that actress had been nominated or won so and so awards. Thoughts @Kailash29792: @Ab207: ?

Go ahead, but make sure all award statements are sourced, either in the lead section or the table. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:30, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: I have removed awards part in notes. To be honest, I don't feel too that Filmfare nominations are having really any significant. Rather I have a added a section See also, there I have added List of awards and nominations received by Asin. Let me know what you think.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣✅ 07:25, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Support: All my comments have been addressed. Please consider submitting future articles/lists at the GOCE before nominating them. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:34, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TamilMirchi

• "earned her a Vijay Award for Best Actress nomination" is unsourced.

Not able to find one so have replaced the sentence.

• "Her only release of 2015 was the romantic comedy All Is Well." is unsourced

 Done mentioned in table already. Adding source to each and every sentence seems strange. Anyway have added one.

• Replace all Bollywood Hungama and Filmibeat sources with reliable sources.

Yes, Filmibeat must be replaced. However, Bollywood Hungama passes WP:RS. Kailash29792 (talk) 16:30, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Yup. I have tried to fix it all. Let me know if something is missing.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣✅ 14:42, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

25 Cents FC, TamilMirchi has copied many badly formatted references from other articles. I hope you can fix/verify them. --Kailash29792 (talk) 18:27, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Just trying to help. Based on the comments below by Cowlibob, references are needed that state the name of the character. Since help was needed for the South Indian films, reviews were added.TamilMirchi (talk) 19:06, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Appreciate your help mate. I am not so good with respect to South Indian Cinema.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣✅ 12:07, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

• There's somewhere in the MOS that dictates titles shouldn't be all caps (ref 2)
• Some publishers are linked multiple times elsewhere but sometimes not linked – go through and standardize them (there isn't too many)
• Pass for source review. Since the changes were so minor I went through and did them myself real quick. Aza24 (talk) 18:45, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
• Checked for reliability, since Rotten Tomatoes is only used once for basic statistical information, I think it's fine, though I'm not well versed in the Rotten Tomatoes policy. Aza24 (talk) 18:46, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Cowlibob (talk) 09:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

*need ref for Ghajini being the first Bollywood film to make over 100 crore (1 billion rupees) at the domestic box office. Current ref does not support this. Same for it's final gross as the film's article seems to say it made 232 crore.  Done Added a new ref need ref for London Dreams being a box office flop, current ref does not support this.  Done "all of which were commercially successful, with the former two entering the 100 Crore Club". Per the reference it was Ready and Housefull 2 that grossed over 100 crore. The way it is written makes it look like Bol Bachchan also made over a 100 crore (which is currently not supported by reference).  Done New ref added. Ref for Pride of South Indian Cinema award in 2013  Done Added The whole "Queen of Kollywood" thing, I don't think should be included just sounds promotional. Queen of Kollywood because of her contribution to films. So, I think it's perfectly fine. need better ref than Rotten Tomatoes for M. Kumaran Son of Mahalakshmi role. Does not support character's name or her nomination for the award.  Done All character names need to be referenced. "Mugaambigaambaal (Chennai)" not referenced. "Kalpana" in Ghajini not referenced. "Rukhmini " in Lakshmi Narasimha not referenced. These are just examples, please check every film. Cowlibob (talk) 13:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC) Not getting. Can you please elaborate.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣✅ 11:38, 3 October 2020 (UTC) All information in the table needs to be verifiable. Her character's name in each film needs to be referenced. The current refs only prove that she was in the film, not the role she played. For example Sivamini, the refs only prove that she was in it not that her character's name was Vasantha. Cowlibob (talk) 11:08, 5 October 2020 (UTC) @Cowlibob: This is quite strange and something new. While working on Salman Khan filmography and Shilpa Shetty filmography no one asked me to add refs which could prove artist character in the film. On the other side, I referred other featured articles Deepika Padukone filmography, Kareena Kapoor filmography, Vidya Balan filmography, Sanjay Dutt filmography no such reference is there. And in fact if we refer all featured list of filmographies we wont find any such thing. Please confirm.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣✅ 08:27, 6 October 2020 (UTC) Information being verifiable is an important part of Wikipedia articles. I cannot comment on your previous nominations as I did not review them. A quick glance through the refs for Deepika Padukone, Kareena Kapoor and Vidya Balan lists shows they have refs verifying the role they played. Asin has started in very few films, it should be relatively straightforward to find the relevant refs and I'm happy to look as well. Good places are film review articles and film databases like Bollywood Hungama. Cowlibob (talk) 10:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC) Her Hindi films have Bollywood Hungama refs. For south films I am not sure if I will get one. Would be really helpful if you could help with her south films.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣✅ 11:27, 10 October 2020 (UTC) @Cowlibob: Please let me know if issues highlighted by you is addressed.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣✅ 14:11, 16 October 2020 (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) 22:22, 25 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 12 October 2020 (UTC) [12].

---

Wales national football team results 1900–1914

Nominator(s): Kosack (talk) 09:10, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Hot on the heels of the first list comes the next page. I've incorporated the comments from the previous FLC to hopefully make this one more streamlined. I look forward to any comments. Kosack (talk) 09:10, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments

• "recording two second place finishes" - I would say there should be a hyphen in "second-place"
• "However, this was followed" - don't think a sentence should start with "however", so redo as "This was followed, however"
• "A second place finish in the 1908–09 championship was the highest placed finish" - I think both "second-place" and "highest-placed" need hyphens
• "In the remaining 33 fixtures, Wales drew 11 and lost 23" 11 + 23 !=33
• Think that's it from me..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:32, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@ChrisTheDude: Thanks for the review, I've amended all of the points above. Kosack (talk) 11:32, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:13, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now Aza24 (talk) 22:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

• Minimal sources: No issues in formatting or reliability. I changed the "Bibliography" header to "General" since "Bibliography" would be an umbrella term used for the section heading (in place of "References" for example). Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 22:11, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments from TRM

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:15, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

*Put (FAW) after Football Association of Wales. "within the first seven years. Their victory came in the 1906–07 tournament in " I would ditch "within the first seven years. Their victory came" as it's all unnecessary verbiage. "A second-place finish in the 1908–09 championship was the highest-placed finish" finish, finish. Wasn't Tynecastle Stadium known as Tynecastle Park back then? It seems Park is the correct name either way, I'm not sure where I got stadium from! Kosack (talk) 18:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC) St James Park, Newcastle -> St James' Park, Newcastle. I'm not mad keen on having different targets for each edition of the British Home Championship but all piped to "British Home Championship". "Grosvenor Park" not notable enough for an article, despite it hosting an international football match? There is a link for Grosvenor Park, but it's redirected back to Lisburn Distillery F.C.. I've added that in. Kosack (talk) 18:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC) Similar for "Penrhyn Park"? Penrhyn Park is the name given to he location, but it was really just a makeshift field in the grounds of Penrhyn Castle. I'm not really sure if there's really a chance of it getting an article. Kosack (talk) 18:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC) That's all I have, probably claiming WikiCup points (for what it's worth nowadays!) for this, cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 13:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC) @The Rambling Man: Thanks for taking a look, I've addressed all of the comments above. Kosack (talk) 18:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:15, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments from HawkAussie

Resolved comments from HawkAussie

Two slight errors I picked up while reading the prose ...Wales achieved after this during the time period - A slight rewording here so it flows better. - Reworded ...first victory over the Scots at the 30th attempt. - This might be just me but what about changing to 'over Scotland'. Other than that I think it might look good here for a FL. HawkAussie (talk) 01:11, 7 October 2020 (UTC) I was deliberately trying to avoid using Scotland again so to avoid quick repetition as it's used immediately beforehand. I've changed to "the latter" now to hopefully make it sound better. Both points addressed @HawkAussie:, thanks for taking a look. Kosack (talk) 06:19, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Support My thoughts have been addressed and I think this looks good to go. HawkAussie (talk) 12:29, 7 October 2020 (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) 21:16, 11 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 12 October 2020 (UTC) [13].

---

List of Hot C&W Sides number ones of 1960

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Here is the latest in the seemingly never-ending run of country number one song lists - 1944, 1959, and all 50 years from 1962 to 2011 inclusive are at FL and 1961 currently has four supports, a completed source review, and no outstanding issues, so should be good to go. So here's the last remaining one for the 1960s...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• FLC criteria:
• 1. The prose is fine. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. The coding in the table seems fine.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. You make excellent use of images (but that's about all I'm qualified to say).
• 6. It is stable.
• Support. - Dank (push to talk) 01:49, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 11:42, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

• Consistent formatting and reliability, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 01:53, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333([14]) 21:15, 10 October 2020 (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) 21:22, 11 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 12 October 2020 (UTC) [15].

---

List of hill stations in Malaysia

Nominator(s): WPSamson (talk) 02:29, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for the featured list as this list and lead introduction has been recently edited to meet the FL criteria and were properly referenced for each statements and this is my first nomination for the list which is also the list I am heavily edited along with several copyeditors who fixed several grammatical in some of the sentences. Hill station in Malaysia is unique due to not only the colonial era hill station has been properly maintained that makes it’s hill station authentic like during the British colonial era, but also the Genting Highlands which constructed since post-independence era that makes this hill station popular among tourists due to modernity, the only casino in Malaysia, and the place for entertainment for families. I am looking forward for the improvement for this list that I am nominated. Thank you. WPSamson (talk) 02:29, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:48, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

;Comments "Of the 10 hill stations, 4 are in Pahang state, two" - all the numbers should be written as words  Done fixed Wikilink hill station the first time it's used, not the third  Done The second sentence of the second paragraph is extremely long, it might be better split in two  Done "According to Crossette" - who is Crossette? Nobody of this name has been mentioned up to this point......  Done rewrote this section since just discovered there is an existing author's Wikipedia page at Barbara Crossette. "these colonial era hill station in Malaysia are considered unique" => "these colonial era hill stations in Malaysia are considered unique"  Done "these colonial era hill station in Malaysia are considered unique and well protected authenticity due to these hill stations were maintained carefully and consciously" - sorry, literally no idea what this means, the wording is horribly mangled  Partly done I tried rewrote this sentence for better clarity. Is the sentence looks better now? Sea level is two words, not one  Done "another 3 hill stations were built" - number should be written as a word  Done fixed "which contains attractions with licensing agreement from 20th Century Studios and The Walt Disney Company." => licensing agreements (plural)  Done "The list below shows the principal hill stations which were categorized by Aiken as the major hill stations" - again, who is Aiken?  Done Added more details on who is the person. "one hill station, Genting Highlands, which were built" => "one hill station, Genting Highlands, which was built"  Not done The sentence is removed due to rewriting the paragraph in List of hill stations section. "The importance of Bukit Tinggi and Mount Jerai as a hill resort were also mentioned" => "The importance of Bukit Tinggi and Mount Jerai as a hill resort was also mentioned" (the subject of the sentence is "importance" (singular))  Not done The sentence is removed due to rewriting the paragraph in List of hill stations section. First sentence in that block of text is very long and could be split Note: I had rewritten the whole paragraph in the "List of hill station" section I don't understand the designation of "principal" stations in the first table. The intro text suggests that all the stations in this section are "principal" except for Genting, but only four are coloured green?  Done I had rewrite the whole paragraph and description of the designation for better understanding and less confusion, also the table has been merged and removed the mentions of "important". Also, per the MOS, you can't use just colour to indicate something, you need to use a symbol too  Done

• Refs would look better centred

Question: What does it mean with the references is look better when centered?

It would look better if the refs were aligned in the centre of the column, rather than to the left -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:48, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done @ChrisTheDude: Just got more clear that centering the references is on column section instead. WPSamson (talk) 02:36, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

• That's it for a first pass...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @ChrisTheDude:, I had addressed the first issue based on the first comment. Can have a look at the improved article and check if there are necessary changes needed for the latest changes. WPSamson (talk) 09:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

• A "format=PDF" for ref 1 would be nice

 Done

• Given that the location is only in ref 2, I would either add locations to the other refs or delete it here

 Removed

• Refs 3 and 14 shouldn't be in all caps per MOS

 Done

• Ref 6 missing author

 Done

• Link Geographical Review in ref 11

 Done

• I'm unsure if ref 14 is reliable, it's self published but written by an Academic. Can the @FLC director and delegates: weigh in here?
• "format=PDF" for ref 19

 Done

• The further reading section to be changed to "Sources" or "Bibliography" – further reading means that the sources in the section are not used in the article, this is not the case here. Aza24 (talk) 08:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done

• I think ref 14 is fine, Harun's field of study is "Science, Technology and Asian Society", so not unrelated, and the founding details of a Malaysian colonial town are not particularly controversial. That said: --PresN 15:11, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

• Fix WP:ALLCAPS in refs 3, 14

 Done

• • If he's an expert in the field, I think the reference will be okay. However, it does need the all caps removed as Pres said, and if the content comes from a particular chapter of the book, it would be helpful to include that for verifiability (I'm not seeing any page numbers in the version I looked at). Under the publisher= parameter of the cite template, I'd put Self-published in the field, as I noticed the missing publisher in the reference. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:12, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done -  Comment. I had placed the chapter name on the references and replace URL with chapter-url parameter for easy finding on where the content pages comes from. WPSamson (talk) 04:29, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@Aza24: The source part are done per recommendation. Thanks. WPSamson (talk) 04:29, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Good work, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 22:22, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:27, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @ChrisTheDude: & @Aza24: WPSamson (talk) 03:52, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Some thoughts

• I gave it a copyedit, but the prose probably needs some more tuning

 Done modify the prose a bit for better understanding

• The dates need a consistent format and order

 Done

• What citation style is Aiken, S. Robert, October 1987. p. 426 in?

 Fixed using Harvard citation style

• You probably don't need to cite Aiken's bio

 Done

• GGR Asia is a blog

 Resolved replaced with more reliable newspaper site for citation purpose

--Guerillero | Parlez Moi 04:21, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

@Guerillero: I had resolved the list page based on your thoughts. Can have a review on the updated page. Thanks. WPSamson (talk) 11:05, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support I might tinker with a better map at some point --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 14:39, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Guerillero: I do not have experience in making interactive maps in Wikipedia, so I created static map instead. Anyway thanks for review and support. WPSamson (talk) 09:33, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments Support from Hog Farm

Might claim WikiCup points for this. Hog Farm _Bacon 19:37, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

• "There are ten hill stations that in Malaysia's mountainous area" - There's a word missing in here somewhere

 Fixed add "built" word into the sentence.

• Is there a way to bold essentially the title in the first sentence, per WP:BOLDLEAD?

 Done rewrite the whole sentence and bold the title in that sentence.

• "The British were not used to the environment in Malaysia, especially the hot tropical weather, the illness," - I feel like the illness part should be reworded slightly. Maybe "the endemic illnesses" instead?

 Done

• " prevented any people in tropical countries from returning to their homeland on a regular basis" - I think this ought to be rephrased. "Any people" is a bit awkward here. Maybe "British nationals" or something like that; a lot of the people in tropical countries were native to those areas, while the context is clearly referring to the Brits.

 Fixed rewrite as "...prevented any British people settled in tropical countries from returning..."

• " several colonial governments built these hill stations in Malaysia" - What governments these were never seems to be specified anywhere. I'm only seeing references to the British.

 Fixed rewrite as "...the British government built these hill stations in Malaysia."

• " including the renovation and uplifting of the colonial-era hill station" - It's very unclear what you're referring to by "the colonial-era hill station"

 Fixed rewrite as "hill station built by British government"

• Do geography and professor really need linked, per MOS:OVERLINK? Particularly the latter seems to fall under the common occupations bullet point of that link

 Removed

• "Following the independence of Malaysia, another three hill stations were built" - Go ahead and give the year the independence of Malaysia occurred in, so readers don't have to follow the link.

 Done

• Why is Mount Angsi not mentioned in the lead, when all of the others are?

 Comment. Initially was not added due to built or established year not available. Now added to the lead, not sure if it's fit or not.

That's it for a first pass. Hog Farm _Bacon 19:52, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hog Farm: I had fixed all the issues based on your comments. Feel free to review the updated list page. Thanks. WPSamson (talk) 08:30, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Supporting. Sorry for the delayed response. Hog Farm _Bacon 03:19, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Hog Farm. WPSamson (talk) 05:26, 1 October 2020 (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) 21:12, 11 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC) [16].

---

Lecrae discography

Nominator(s): 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe that it satisfies the criteria for featured lists. For a long time it had issues with citations and referencing, I believe that these issues have long been addressed. The article has already undergone peer review and the recommendations implemented.3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:13, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

;Drive-by comment In the studio albums table, the titles are left-aligned, but in all the other tables they are centre-aligned. I believe the standard for discographies is to left-align that column Back for more later :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:05, 21 April 2020 (UTC) I think I just had difficult figuring out how to do that for the other listings.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:35, 21 April 2020 (UTC) Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC) Comments on the lead First sentence says 9 studio albums but the infobox says 8 "Lecrae began garnering mainstream attention when he performed at the 2011 BET Hip Hop Awards Cypher" - is the word Cypher meant to be on the end there? What does it mean? Two consecutive sentences start with "Gracity", maybe change the second to "the album"? That's it for the lead. I will take a look at the tables later -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:30, 21 April 2020 (UTC) Infobox says 8 because the 9th is listed as a collaborative album - I forget why that was done (or even if it was me or someone else). Cypher is part of the title, I'm happy to elaborate. The awards are called "BET Hip Hop Awards Cypher"? Sounds a bit odd but a bit of Googling suggests it's correct, so fair enough.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC) "Gravity" sentences fixed.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:02, 21 April 2020 (UTC) Initial comments on the tables Studio albums - US Internet column is unsourced EPs - "Church Clothes" appears both here and in the mixtapes table - are both the same release? If so, why does it only have chart placings in the EP table? More later :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2020 (UTC) Source added for Internet Albums. Church Clothes was released as both a mixtape and as an EP. The mixtape was longer and released for free, the EP was much shorter and released commercially. So they technically are different releases, they just share the same Wikipedia article because the EP doesn't have enough separate coverage for its own article.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC) OK, that makes sense. An old fool like me can't keep up with all the new-fangled formats for music in the digital age :-D -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:23, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

• In the singles as a lead artist table, the first two rows have the album title cell shaded and differently aligned. I think something is up with the scope on those rows.
• Some of the refs for singles/songs are against the release date or the album title rather than the title - better to be consistent in their placement
• A few of the music videos have no source
• Think that's it on the tables...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

  All of this should be fixed now--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Lead

• You may want to consider using semi-colons in the first sentence (e.g., "eighty singles, including forty-one as a featured performer, forty-five music videos..." → "eighty singles, including forty-one as a featured performer; forty-five music videos..."
• No. 1 → number-one
• No. 3 → number-three (or "in the top five")

• This was done, and then reverted by Walter Görlitz because once it is the consensus to leave the numeral formatting established as it is once it has been set. Also, per MOS:NUMERO, the existing form is acceptable.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• "It received RIAA Gold certification" → "It was certified Gold by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)"

Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Body

• "—" denotes a recording that did not chart or was not released in that territory. Beginning in 2015, Billboard rendered most hip hop/rap albums ineligible for the Gospel charts → this note is usually indicated at the bottom of the table (see here for an example).

  This was separated from the tables by Izno and myself due to concerns about accessibility.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• Chart column titles' font size is reduced to 90%; those with more than one word take up two lines with <br> as well.

I'm not sure what you're requesting here.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• Don't list notes at the bottom of the table, use {{efn}} and create a "Notes" section at the bottom of the article followed by {{notelist}}.

This was done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• You may want to consider adding more archive links to the sources as many are older web links, and perhaps to Billboard links as well because they have changed their chart URLs many times in recent years.

I did a bit of this today, I'll go through and check to make sure that they all are live.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• Non-album single → {{n/a|non-album single}}; rowspan="x" {{n/a|non-album singles}}
• "Get Back Right" (with/featuring x) → "Get Back Right"<br>(with/featuring x) (applies to all)

  Use of small text in for this is a violation of the Manual of Style guidelines for accessibility, much more clearly than the notes at the bottom of tables is.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  From what I've read at MOS:SMALLTEXT, small font is prohibited in "infoboxes, navboxes, and reference sections." I'm pretty sure this isn't a violation (tables don't automatically reduce font size), otherwise small text would be banned from every article, and that certainly isn't the case. You should be okay here. Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  Why do these need small text, though? I might pose a query on the talk page for MOS:ACCESS.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  Indeed, there is and should be a high bar for the use of abnormally-sized text. The line in question you are reading is there because adding small text to elements in the listed kinds of templates/sections takes us below the absolute threshold for small size text, not because it shouldn't say more strongly that small text elsewhere does not also need to have strong justification. --Izno (talk) 17:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  Thank you, Izno, for your feedback here and elsewhere.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:18, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• I would strongly suggest removing the day and month from the date column in the singles tables... it is difficult to source and not the standard format. (You can still show release order by listing them chronologically)

  I looked at the guidelines, and there's nothing that says you shouldn't do this, just that it's not necessary. In this case, all the exact dates are supported by the citations, or else just the year is given.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  I'm not 100% on the citations for the dates at this point. For example, ref 73 links to an article that was posted on May 5, 2008, but the release day in the table is listed as March 4, 2008. Also, the article just gave news about a music video being filmed, which proves nothing about the release of the single. You can choose to keep the days and months, but I'm not too sure if another reviewer would approve. Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  Okay, I might just stick to year, then.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• use "rowspan=x" for the album names; you don't have to repeat them each row.

  Not using rowspan was another thing implemented in the changes by User:Izno and myself to comply with MOS:ACCESS, because some screen-readers have difficulty with the rowspan.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  That's tough. Do you know of a discussion about this somewhere? (Perhaps this may affect many articles). The "good example" tables in MOS:DTT happen to use rowspan. Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  Okay, so it looks like using rowspan for year is okay. It might just be an issue with the right-most column. This edit and the talk page discussion set the precedent, the issue was brought up at the discography Wikiproject but no discussion resulted--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC).

  There are multiple factors here. One: The header/first cell for each row should be the main topic of the row (which is the song I think for most of these tables). This is because screen readers read left to right (normal humans do as well). Two: In data tables, any row/colspan that isn't in the headers typically causes difficulty for screen readers as well, so those as well are/should be removed.

  Yes, these issues affect many other articles. Editors who know about accessibility will sometimes clean them up, but more often we try to act as force multipliers by educating about these topics because there's just so much wiki to cover. --Izno (talk) 17:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• There is no "sales" column in the tables; you can remove "sales" from the table captions.

This was done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• Charts are listed in artist's original country followed by alphabetical order of chart name (e.g. "US Gospel" follows "US Christian" (Sorry, but you will have to rearrange most of the columns in the tables).

Done. It's actually an easy fix using Visual Editor (one of the few cases where Visual Editor is better than wiki-text for table editing).--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• However, list the Bubbling Under column first.
• The standard maximum amount of columns for a discography table is ten—you'll have to remove some in the tables that list more than ten.

  Yep, I thought this was getting unwieldy. There's a complication that I'll mention below.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• Use the real chart name: R&B → R&B/HH

Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• Subcharts are not be listed when a song has charted on the main chart:
  • For example, if even just one of Lecrae's songs has charted on Hot Christian Songs (which has occurred), do not add a column for Christian Digital Charts. For songs that did not chart on the main Hot Christian Songs Chart, add a — in the Hot Christian Songs slot with an {{efn}} next to it listing the Christian Digital peak, or given that Christian Airplay is also a subchart, pick between either (usually the highest peak).

    Okay, so for this and the need to reduce to 10 columns max: Yeah, I see why this is. Where I'm not sure what to do is that there are songs that have only charted on a subchart. What do I do in those cases? Especially in the case of "other charted songs"? I'm thinking maybe change the entire layout and use Template:Single chart?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

    The Template:Single chart is used in the "Charts" section of a song or album article; I haven't seen it used in a discography. You can still use the same format for the other songs charted table. If the songs have only charted in a subchart, then you still label the column with the main chart but add footnotes with its peak on the subchart. Would you like me to code a small example on here of how this could look? Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

    I understand what you mean, there's already an example of this in the studio album section with Let the Trap Say Amen. The problem I'm seeing is that there are songs like "Dum Dum" that only charted on a sub-chart, without charting on a main chart. Do I just list them as a row of blanks for the maincharts but with the footnotes for subchart peaks?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

    That's what I've seen in other articles. Heartfox (talk) 20:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  • This also applies to the Gospel Digital column (replace peaks with —{{efn}} in Gospel Songs slots), and others.
    • Good work so far, but there is a fair bit to do... I'd advise you look over WP:BILLBOARDCHARTS for what columns are permitted when for the singles, and take a look at WP:DISCOGSTYLE (while it's a dormant proposal most of these guidelines are followed by most articles). This is my first time reviewing anything so I don't know exactly what I'm doing lol but I do have some experience with discography articles and I didn't want to let this sit in the review pile. Good luck! Heartfox (talk) 21:43, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

      Thank you, what I haven't commented on are what I'll work on implementing tomorrow.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

      I haven't gone through this, but you may want to check the Christian radio release archives here, and others in case you find Lecrae and then can use it as a better source. Heartfox (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

      Ooh, thank you for that link, that will be helpful in general.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Question, Heartfox: Top Rap Albums is now a subset of R&B/Hip-Hop, but the creation of the Top R&B chart as a subchart came about after Lecrae was charting on the Top Rap Albums. I can note the split, but is there justification for keeping the Rap Albums charts since he was on those for years before the change was introduced?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:06, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

You may want to ask the Discography Wikiproject. Heartfox (talk) 20:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I raised the question on Wikipedia talk:Record charts.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• Heartfox, how does it look now? I think I addressed everything that you brought up.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:03, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

  Heartfox, what do you think now? I've updated the urls, provided archived-urls where necessary, and updated the chart entries. I believe all the issues that you brought up have been resolved.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 23:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• 3family6, the charts used look appropriate.
• You don't have to provide a footnote for the position on the subchart if it's already charted on the main chart (they're pretty much redundant).

• I included a citation at the first example of each chart in the footnotes, but deleted the rest.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• If you choose to link each instance of Billboard or other publications, make sure all of them have wikilinks (e.g., ref 32 and 80 don't, but others do).

• I think I got all these.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• In the albums table, the other US charts should follow US, not BEL and CAN (same for mixtapes table).

• Okay, I'd actually thought this. Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• As you've chosen not to use abbreviations for the chart titles in other tables, BEL and CAN should be spelled out.

• I tried to abbreviate as best I could, now.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Specify which Belgian chart region you're using (Flanders or Wallonia).

• Wallonia specified.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Use <br /> in the chart titles for the tables so it's not all on one line with a big column (right now some do and some don't).

• They should all be like this now.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• You don't need references for the songs in the other charted songs table as they're already listed in the Billboard references.

I've removed all citations from songs for which there are chart positions cited.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• You may want to limit the length of the song title column in the featured songs table, the final entry is pretty long. I think you could <br /> it. Heartfox (talk) 22:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

• Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Comment It's when I see things like deliberately ignoring guidelines such as MOS:NUMERO as was done above that I recognize that be promoted to Good Article status does not mean that the article is compliant to any specific guideline. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing that to my attention, I apologize. I took the initiative to actually respond to this editor and tried to focus on more relevant things like WP:BILLBOARDCHARTS and WP:DISCOGSTYLE and hadn't done a thorough review of the entire MOS. Heartfox (talk) 20:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Per this discussion, I've merged the R&B/Hip-Hop chart listings and Rap chart listings together, and put Rap charts in the footnotes. Heartfox, anything else that I need to do?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Oppose Support from TRM

(WikiCup entry)

• Don't use EP without explaining it first.

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• "reached No. 1 on " why do we have that in the prose, why isn't it "number one"? Or vary it with "topped the chart" or similar.

  I'm not sure what the issue is here, "No. 1" is consistent with MOS:NUMERO.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• "Christian hip hop site" do you mean website?

  Yes. Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• " 53rd Grammy Awards" vs " 2013 Grammy Awards" and both redirect! Be consistent with how you refer to the ceremonies.

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• "As of September 2014, he has sold over" nearly six years ago, and he's had gold/platinum albums since, no chance of an update?

  Updated. It's over 3 million now.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• " certified Gold by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)" i would split the links, so link "certified" to the certification article, and RIAA to the RIAA article.

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• "Gospel charts[15]" missing a full stop.

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• Some of the charts need to be explained if they're not linked, e.g. I thought NET meant Netherlands, but it turns out to mean Internet.

  There doesn't seem to be any articulated standard here for the abbreviations, so I'll see what I can do to be more clear. If anything is still unclear, please let me know specifically which ones.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• Where is "Don't Waste Your Life" referenced?

• I'm actually not sure now whether or not this was ever described as a single. The only internet references I can find to it call it a "song". I've moved it into the "other charted songs" section.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• Where is note D referenced?
• Where is note F referenced?
• Where are "High" and note G referenced?
• Same for notes H and I.
• In fact, all notes which make claims of chart positions must be referenced.

  This conflicts with the feedback from Heartfox above, who thought that the footnotes and chart listings were overcited. The first instance of each chart-listing mention has a citation. So they all are referenced, not all have an immediate citation. "High" now has a cited reference.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• There are 104 spaced hyphens, these should be en-dashes, per MOS.

I'll get to work on this.

Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:53, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

I'll leave this here for now, I'll come back once we've dealt with these issues. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for the long delay, The Rambling Man, my wife was visiting and I've been having trouble with my laptop. Please see my above comments and the accompanying edits.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Support now all my issues have been addressed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Further comments from ChrisTheDude

Completely forgot about this one, humblest apologies. A handful of further/final comments from me.....

• I agree with TRM above that the chart column headings need clarifying. I can't see anything, for example, to explain what "CLASS DIG" means.

  I've tried to clarify things, please let me know if there's anything still to fix--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• I also agree that notes such as "Charted at No. 2 on the Gospel Digital Songs chart" need sourcing

  Please see above. These are referenced, with a citation for the first occurrence. I removed the repeated citations due to Heartfox's above concerns about the citations being redundant.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• A couple of the videos have no director listed, is this information not known? If so, put something to that effect.

  Some of the videos do not provide the director(s), and I've been unable to find the information online. Whether this truly is unanswerable, I don't know.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:07, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

  Thank you for your feedback, ChrisTheDude, apologies for the delay in my response.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, my computer was being repaired and so I missed that this review had been revived. I'll get to these tonight.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:18, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• Apologies for taking so long to check back. Could you add footnote(s) to make clear what the charts are that aren't wikilinked in the column headings (GOS, Internet, etc)? And if the director of a video is unknown, put "unknown" so that people don't think you've just accidentally left it blank...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

  Will do!--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:31, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

  This should be all set, ChrisTheDude.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:08, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Sooooooooo many sources... I will get to this tomorrow. Aza24 (talk) 08:41, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• I appreciate all the archive links :)
• link HipHopDX in ref 5

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• Billboard missing link in ref 41

  I think you mis-numbered this. Which reference?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

  Oh, I realized that the number change was due to an edit of mine, I'll find the reference.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:55, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

  I think that I already fixed this.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:57, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

• Shouldn't "SoundCloud, archived..." in ref 45 be "SoundCloud. Archived..." ?

  This was autogenerated by the template.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• Who are "Philip Rood and Chad Horton" and why are they in some Rapzilla refs but not others?

  They are the publishers of Rapzilla. This is an inconsistency. Fixed.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• Your 3 "DaSouth" refs are all formatting differently, please standardize them

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• ref 63 is missing website/publisher

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• Reach Records link in ref 64

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• The MOS says that titles shouldn't be in all caps, even if thats the original publication, fix these for ref 73

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• HipHopDX link for ref 89

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• AllMusic link for ref 105

  Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• Got through half (ref 113) will do other half later. The fact that most of these are just missing links is a good sign. Aza24 (talk) 07:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
• Sorry for taking so long to get back to this, comments on other half below:
• There's still much inconsistencies with the Rapzilla refs
• Ref 137 missing author
• ref 143 missing author
• the second ref in 147 is missing the author's full name
• Link "Vimeo" in ref 192 (and youtube in 193 and 194)
• ref 218 missing retrieval date and the "via youtube" thing
• Just these small fixes and you're good Aza24 (talk) 20:40, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

These all should be fixed, please let me know if I missed anything. Thanks.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:12, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

You missed a little but I went ahead and fixed it. Great work here, pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 19:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support Looks like everything has already been addressed. ~ HAL333 01:33, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: you opposed earlier. Are you satisfied with the responses, or did you have more issues to point out? Giants2008 (Talk) 21:09, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

• All is almost there, I added a [citation needed] though for an unreferenced video. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:33, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Not the nominator but I've added a ref to support the music video. Cowlibob (talk) 11:26, 2 October 2020 (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) 21:06, 11 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 5 October 2020 (UTC) [17].

---

List of Hot C&W Sides number ones of 1961

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Here is the latest in the seemingly never-ending run of country number one song lists - 1944, 1959, and all the years from 1962 to 2011 inclusive are at FL. Fun fact: one of this year's biggest hits was by Faron Young, who was on the bill at the very first live concert I ever went to (not in 1961, though, I'm not that old!!!)..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Reliability and formatting looks good, especially per previous FLCs source reviews which use the same formatting and similar sources. Btw Chris, are you planning to do all of the Billboard country lists? (if so, that's awesome!) Aza24 (talk) 21:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

• @Aza24: - I have already got every country singles and albums number ones list (about 130 articles) up to what I think is pretty much FL standard, it's just a case of nominating them :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• I only found one mistake: the must successful → the most successful; I support this nomination once it been fixed. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 11:31, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I fixed that typo - well spotted! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:56, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• FLC criteria:
• 1. The prose is fine. I did some minor copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. The coding in the table seems fine.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. You make excellent use of images (but that's about all I'm qualified to say).
• 6. It is stable.
• Support - Dank (push to talk) 15:37, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support I can't find a fault --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 03:42, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support Spick and span, as usual. ~ HAL333 01:28, 19 September 2020 (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) 21:15, 4 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 5 October 2020 (UTC) [18].

---

List of descriptive plant epithets (A–H)

Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 19:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Johnboddie (talk) 19:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Co-nomination with John, who did most of the work for A to D. Sorry for putting up two complicated lists; the payoff is that these lists will make our other plant lists easier to write (and review, I hope). You may find answers to your burning questions at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of descriptive plant epithets (I–Z)/archive1. All comments are welcome, as always. Reviewers, please do me a favor and check to see if all the images load for you ... sometimes they don't for some readers on long lists, and I need to know if that's happening with this list (it was for Chris with the other list). - Dank (push to talk) 19:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Given that the sources are virtually the same as the other half of the list my comments apply to both lists. Aza24 (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Done, I think. - Dank (push to talk) 13:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Pass per the same changes made on the other list. Aza24 (talk) 19:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks much. - Dank (push to talk) 01:26, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Heh, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 19:03, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 17:57, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks much. - Dank (push to talk) 19:02, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
• Support Fine work. ~ HAL333 20:54, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks much. Maybe we'll take the record for fewest bytes in an FLC? Works for me! - Dank (push to talk) 20:59, 12 September 2020 (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) 21:10, 4 October 2020 (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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 5 October 2020 (UTC) [19].

---

List of awards and nominations received by Alicia Vikander

Nominator(s): Cowlibob (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Alicia Vikander is a Swedish actress who has won numerous accolades including the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her role in The Danish Girl. As always I welcome constructive comments on how to improve it. Cowlibob (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support - I got nothing, sorry ;-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:16, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments by HAL333

• I think it would make more sense if 2012 adaptation linked to Anna Karenina (2012 film) and Anna Karenina linked to the actual novel. Everything else looks great. ~ HAL333 20:58, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@HAL333: Thanks for the review. I've made the above amendment. Cowlibob (talk) 21:28, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

• Support ~ HAL333 21:32, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments by RunningTiger123

Overall, it looks really good; there are just two quick fixes to consider.

• From what I can tell, while most of the sources are archived, four aren't. Is there a reason for that, or can they be archived as well?
• I think that Template:Runner-up would be better than changing the text for Template:Nom for categories in which she was a runner-up or received a specific place. It helps to distinguish between more specific recognition and a regular nomination.

– RunningTiger123 (talk) 14:57, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

@RunningTiger123: Thanks for your comments. I have run the IABot again and I think it has picked up the missing sources that needed archiving. Also added the runner-up template (wasn't aware of its existence till now). Cowlibob (talk) 11:50, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Support – Looks good! One final edit to consider (this isn't enough to change my support, but it's something to consider): now that you know about Template:Runner-up, you could use that on the awards for which she received 2nd or 4th place. RunningTiger123 (talk) 14:14, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• Source review – The reliability of the references looks fine throughout the list, and the link-checker tool shows no issues. Overall, the source review is a pass. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:16, 30 September 2020 (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) 21:05, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

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