Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/90th Academy Awards/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

90th Academy Awards[edit]

90th Academy Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk) 09:05, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I am nominating the 2018 Oscars for featured list because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I followed how the 1929, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017 ceremonies were written. Birdienest81 (talk) 09:05, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Shape of Water won a four awards- remove "a". ~ HAL333 21:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, well done. ~ HAL333 02:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
;Comments
  • "televised in the United States by American Broadcasting Company" => "televised in the United States by the American Broadcasting Company", surely?
  • Fixed: Changed "televised in the United States by American Broadcasting Company" to "which was televised in the United States by ABC" in line with previous Oscar ceremony lists that are FL status.
  • "Other winners included Dunkirk won three awards" - doesn't make sense. Maybe "Other winners included Dunkirk, which won three awards"
  • Fixed: Changed "won" to "with" in line with previous Oscar ceremonies that are FL status
  • Same comment for the two-award winners
  • Fixed: Also changed "won" to "with"
  • "since Mickey Rooney for his role in 1939's Babes in Arms." - film title should be in italics
  • Fixed: Added italics to the movie's title
  • If the citations for the honorary awards are direct quotations, I would put them in quote marks
  • Fixed: Added quotation marks.
  • "highlighting depictions of the U.S. Military in film" - no reason for capital M
  • Fixed: Changed "military" from capital "M" to lowercase "m".
  • "Despite the mixed reception received from" => "Despite the mixed reception received by"
  • Fixed: Changed "received from" to "received by"
  • "before several categories highlighting the importance of several below-the-line categories" - suggest using a different word to avoid repetition of "categories"
  • Fixed: highlighting the importance of below-the-line crafts during film production.
  • "with a 14.9% households" => "with 14.9% of households "
  • Fixed: Removed the unnecessary "a" in that sentence.
  • "Singer Eddie Vedder performing" => "Singer Eddie Vedder performed"
  • Fixed: Changed "performing" to performed.
  • Made a few minor amendments and now happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from User:SNUGGUMS
  • The lack of a source URL for File:2018 Oscars Official Poster.png is suspicious. It's also lazy for users to just say it "could be obtained from the distributor", which could potentially be a disguise for unofficial artwork that got pulled from a fansite or (even worse) was fabricated altogether.
  • Fixed: Added source from Deadline Hollywood showing poster. The user probably downloaded the image and then compressed it. It also may have come from the AMPAS website under press kits section. Here is the same page archived from 2018 when the 90th Oscars occured and thus shows the same key art that is depicted in this article.
  • Fixed: Changed URL to one that actually links the picture.
  • Fixed: Removed image since there is no valuable replacement.
  • Fixed: Removed image since there is no valuable replacement.
  • I would replace the Kimmel image, but I'm not sure which one is properly licensed.
  • I'll look for a better one and let you know later what a more appropriate use would be. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:39, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed: Replaced photo of Kimmel with the one you provided.
  • "However, Best Actor winner Casey Affleck reportedly decided not to attend the ceremony due to his sexual harassment accusations; Jodie Foster and Jennifer Lawrence presented the award together in his place; the Best Actor award was presented by actresses Jane Fonda and Helen Mirren." is quite a mouthful! I'd split that overly long sentence into three parts by replacing the semi-colons with periods.
  • Fixed: Replaced semicolons with periods.
  • Super short paragraphs make the text look choppy, so I'd merge the two paragraphs from "Ratings and reception" when its second one is quite small on its own.
  • Fixed:Merged paragraphs into one.
  • Fixed: Removed other see also links except Foreign Language one.
  • Variety should be italicized in ref#19 ("Oscars: 'Lady Bird's' Greta Gerwig Becomes Fifth Woman Nominated for Best Director")
  • Fixed: Changed field of Variety from publisher to work to make title italicized.

That's all from me. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That Jimmy Kimmel license is actually kind of funny. I don't know how it has been on Commons for two years. ~ HAL333 05:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Following my media review and sufficient improvements for that among other things, I support as the article is now up to FL quality as far as I'm concerned. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:16, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support and comments from Aza24
  • Here are some ref fixes:
    • Ref #16 should be "cite news" not "cite web" and needs author
    • Ref #29 should "cite news"
    • Ref #39 should "cite news"
    • Ref #44 should "cite news"
    • Ref #47 needs author, publishing date
    • Ref #49 should "cite news"
    • Ref #56 needs author and should "cite news"
  • I support this solid list, with the hopes that these (very) minor issues will be addressed. Aza24 (talk) 05:27, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Aza24: I've fixed refs 16, 47, and partially 49, but I'm not sure what you mean by "cite news"? The other refs you listed are using the cite news template. Do you mean the refs do not provide evidence for the statements claimed in their respective sentences?
--Birdienest81 (talk) 07:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize, that was definitely unclear! There's a couple sources that are news sites but use "cite web" template instead of "cite news" one. If you open up the editor and do command f cite web, you can through them and should be able to be able to change the ones that are news sites pretty quickly. I honestly doubt if this makes a difference, syntax wise, but consistency is always important. Aza24 (talk) 07:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Aza24:Done: Changed a few "cite web" templates to a "cite news" ones for citations using agencies such as NBC News, CNN, or CBS News. I've kept "cite web" templates for ones that are not primarily news agencies, magazines, or newspapers such as Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences or Television Bureau of Advertising.
--Birdienest81 (talk) 00:10, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alt text should describe what is in the photo such as Photo of a man in a dark suit smoking a cigarette --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 00:11, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Guerillero:According to WP:ALT#Importance of context, alt text shouldn't describe what kind of clothes the person is wearing or what action the person is doing unless this is a fashion article. I've used to do that for former articles, but someone pointed my errors in this previous FLC (see comments under FrankBoy fifth bullet point).
--Birdienest81 (talk) 23:58, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source review – The reliability of the sources looks fine throughout. In addition to updating the templates as suggested above, I suggest that you have a look at the formatting of ref 35. Somehow, the listed title looks like an access date, and the true title of the article doesn't appear. That's definitely worth fixing. Unfortunately, I can't get the link-checker tool to work at the moment, but I'd say we're a few tweaks away from a successful source review. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:17, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay, it looks like the templates have been fixed now. I'm comfortable calling this sourcing review a pass at this point, as that was my last outstanding item. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:07, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/90th_Academy_Awards/archive1&oldid=965030107"