Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Satyajit Ray/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 SchroCat 10:10, 7 August 2015 [1].

List of awards and nominations received by Satyajit Ray[edit]

List of awards and nominations received by Satyajit Ray (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): - Vivvt (Talk) 05:18, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ray is considered as one of the great filmmakers of all time and he has won numerous awards for his films and honors for himself. I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it satisfies FL criteria. Looking forward to constructive criticism.

  • Note: Sorry to say this but bad-faith Indian editors...please stay away. - Vivvt (Talk) 05:18, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from FrankBoy CHITCHAT 17:51, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from FrB.TG
  • Not sure if his date of birth and date are relevant in his awards page, but in his biography it's worth mentioning.
  • I have had used the same pattern for his FL filmography. So would like to keep it same. Also, some of other FLs also use the same pattern, probably for all those people who are passed away.
  • "These include awards at the Berlin International Film Festival (28th), Cannes Film Festival (35th)..." You need not mention the ceremonies in parenthesis. You can have it like "28th Berlin International Film Festival"
  • Done
  • Why is he mentioned by his full name in FN. 2 and 4.
  • Because it has mention of his son as well. Just to distinguish between them, I have used the full name for both.
  • "He won ten awards for his screenplay writing" - I think you should word numbers that are below ten.
  • I am not sure what is the criteria here. Second opinion would be nice.
  • Not sure if Wikipedia (or WP:FL?) holds a criterion regarding this yet you have done this at other places (in the list) which is why I am asking you to do this to maintain consistency. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 10:42, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed and Done
  • You have abbreviated it as "Refs" while the full form is "Reference".
  • Done
  • Why is only section 2.1.3 linked?
  • Fixed I missed it earlier.
  • In the same section "Ray received three nominations and no awards" - The "no awards" is not needed as it's so obvious (from the table) that he didn't receive any award.
  • Done
  • The links for ref. 54 and 56 are broken.
  • Replaced 56 with other source and trying to find another source for 54. web.archive.org did not let me archive it for some security reason and the original site is down now!
  • Since the original site is down and not archived, I'm having no luck finding other source for 54. So I have used the same source as that of 55 because so far, at filmfare, one of the films nominated for the best film is given critics award. I think, its safe to assume that way and would not fall under WP:OR but if this is not OK, I'll remove the nomination mention. - Vivvt (Talk) 03:46, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the National Film Awards section, you have the key indicator in colors while in the table they are colorless.
  • Done. Initially, I thought of not adding the color. But now I think its alright.
  • Why do the tables below "Honorary awards" have so much unnecessary width? -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 17:36, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I had it 80% earlier but its too cluttered and wraps the text. - Vivvt (Talk) 02:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the last section you can change "1958–1959" to "1958–59". -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 10:42, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from —Vensatry (ping)
Oppose on a quick run through
  • Consider changing the caption of the image. Looks pretty obvious to everyone that it's a portrait.
Any suggestions?
  • The table lists 133 wins and 15 nominations – This is a blunder
In what regards?
@Vivvt: Some of those award wins would have had previous nominations which you should include in the total. For example say a film was nominated for five Oscars and won twice then you would include in the table as five nominations and two award wins. Cowlibob (talk) 14:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Cowlibob: But in case of films, its kinda impossible to have previous nominations for the same awards. I didnt want to categorise per award which is very convenient for me but wanted to show how many of his each film won any award. There are total 39 films by him so didnt want to mention all of them in the lead. Do you have any suggestions?
Fixed Cowlibob helped to fix this.
Not done —Vensatry (ping) 12:24, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Point out the mistakes for the further correction, if required. - Vivvt (Talk) 18:22, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Every win is an outcome of a nomination. —Vensatry (ping) 08:05, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thats not true for all the awards. E.g. National Film Awards, Bodil Awards do not declare nominations and only announce winners. As Cowlibob suggested earlier, added a footnote explaining the same. - Vivvt (Talk) 10:47, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Every award has nominations; it's just some ceremonies don't disclose it. In case of NFAs, they have something called "shortlists" in the final round. The winner will be decided from the shortlist, which is made available to the press these days. I agree we cannot consider the all those "contenders" as nominees, but the winner certainly is. Also the BFJA awards have nominations, but you've not considered that. —Vensatry (ping) 11:32, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done - Vivvt (Talk) 12:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see a point in splitting "Awards for the films directed by Ray" and "Awards for the films contributed by Ray". After all, he was the recipient (of a particular category), regardless of who made the film.
  • honors -> honours (Indian English usage)
Not done Will keep US English for this list.
As Ray is Indian, the standard is to use British English not US English. Cowlibob (talk) 14:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done
I can still see the usage of "honor" in the article. —Vensatry (ping) 12:24, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done
  • "Ray received numerous awards and honors, including India's highest award in cinema, the Dadasaheb Phalke Award, in 1984 and India's highest civilian award, Bharat Ratna, in 1992." – The placement of commas confuses the reader. Consider splitting the sentence as it looks lengthy.
Done
  • Same for the succeeding sentence.
Done
  • "Commander of the National Order of the Legion of Honour, the highest decoration in France" – Are you sure about it being the highest decoration? If so, needs a source.
Done
  • "an Academy Honorary Award at the 64th Academy Awards in 1992"
Done
  • "Ray made his directorial debut in 1955 with Pather Panchali." – Needs a source
Done
  • You say 3rd National Film Awards (1955) and 7th Berlin International Film Festival (1957) – Be consistent while mentioning the years.
Done
The year for Dadasaheb Phalke Award also needs to be corrected. —Vensatry (ping) 12:24, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done
Not done —Vensatry (ping) 18:14, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Per source, parent list and this list, 1984 is mentioned everywhere. Point out the mistakes for the further correction, if any. - Vivvt (Talk) 07:12, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The source for the Oscar mentions the year to be 1991, but the article says 1992. I think we sorted out this issue by mentioning the year in which the awards were given out. —Vensatry (ping) 04:12, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how does that source mention 1991 when Ray was awarded in 1992. I have changed the source, which says he was awarded in the year 1992, not 1991. -- Frankie talk 10:18, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do you realize you removed the official citation? For this thing, I wish to have the opinion of the nominator. —Vensatry (ping) 14:33, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I quite do, but I don't understand why does that mention 1991 (maybe it was announced in late 1991 or something and given in March 1992?) when he it was in 1992. And I don't understand what you want in the list to be changed. Anyways, that can be restored, all I tried to do is help, that's all. -- Frankie talk 14:44, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Vensatry: The source says the award was presented in 1992, it incorrectly writes the 64th ceremony as 1991. Here's another ref from the official website which states 64th = 1992 [[2]], from official Oscars Youtube channel, presentation video of Ray's award, [[3]]. The NYT source is fine as a reliable secondary source to make it clearer. Here's another book source that it was 1992. [[4]]. Cowlibob (talk) 18:53, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So 'year' represents the year in which the ceremony had taken place. Like wise, the year should be corrected for Dadasaheb Palke Award. —Vensatry (ping) 05:11, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Vensatry: Not quite. The Dadasaheb Phalke Award is listed as 1984 on the official website as the year it was awarded which we should go with (despite the presentation being in 1985). If you look at the news reports [[5]][[6]][[7]][[8]] for Shashi Kapoor's win it is listed as awarded for 2014 (despite him actually receiving it in 2015). The Honorary Academy Award is listed on official websites as a 1992 award. Hope that's clear.Cowlibob (talk) 11:38, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, see this. —Vensatry (ping) 11:45, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The book would have gone with 1985 as that's when he received it. Surely we should go with what the organiser says is the year? SchroCat, could you help lift this impasse? The disagreement is what year we should state for when an award is won. The Dadasaheb Phalke award (equivalent to a BAFTA fellowship) is announced as the award for a particular year but is actually presented the following year. Should we state the year when it was presented or the year the awards committee specify as the year? Cowlibob (talk) 16:31, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with either of them. But be consistent throughout the article. —Vensatry (ping) 18:04, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't want to take sides on this (it's a content dispute, so my thoughts are as valid as those of you two, or anyone else's) Personally if there is any doubt, I tend to go with what the official sources say, and keep it as consistent as possible throughout. If it's official, then it's difficult to argue with it. I hope this helps. Cheers! – SchroCat (talk) 20:08, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a never-ending discussion about the award year and ceremony year. As far as Dadasaheb Award is concerned, its clearly given for the year. Like for Shashi Kapoor, per this source, its conferred for the year 2014. Academy award does not mention so, for Honorary Awards at least. Per list source, "Year: 1991 (64th) Academy Awards" and "Date & Venue: March 30, 1992". Just to maintain consistency, I would change it from 1992 to 1991. Though, there is no clear indication for the year. - Vivvt (Talk) 17:08, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the lead you say he won 10 awards for Best Screenplay, but the table lists 12.
Corrected
  • OCIC Catholic Award of Cannes Film Festival is linked to a Sri Lankan film award.
Fixed
  • 'Are 'Aparajito and Pather Panchali American films?
Just so you know, the answer is no. But the official site lists the entry under American film awards. However, its Wiki page says " The category was named "Best American Film" until 1961, when it became the "Best Non-European Film". In 2001, the name of the award changed back to "Best American Film", and the European category was changed to "Best Non-American Film"." Added it to the list.
To correct this simply change the category like this: [[Bodil Award for Best American Film|Best Non-European Film]] Cowlibob (talk) 14:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done
  • In BAFTA, you should give the actual names of the category; Best Film -> Best Film from any Source
Not much clear about what needs to be done
The Apu Trilogy films won the "BAFTA for Best Film from any Source" so correct in table as [[BAFTA Award for Best Film|Best Film from any Source]] Cowlibob (talk) 14:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done
  • Filmfare nomination for Shatranj Ke Khilari (Best Film) is not verified by the source. Further, Ray doesn't look like the producer of the film. If so, he shouldn't be credited with the nomination as the film belongs to the producer.
Removed
  • Awarding body for Dadasaheb Phalke Award should be DFF. I'm not sure if the Dadabhai Naoroji Memorial Award is presented by the government. Also, since the UK govt. seems to present an award of the same name, this needs to be clarified.
Done Added the source from PIB release for the awarding body.
Mention the ministry —Vensatry (ping) 12:24, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done
  • Kanchanjangha->Kanchenjungha
Done
Corrected Though the award is given in this particular section, I incorrectly assumed it to be a screenplay section with his name written as a screenplay writer. Another film Bab El-Oued City was awarded that year.
  • In "Established in 1909, the National Board of Review awards are awarded annually by The National Board of Review of Motion Pictures" – Link "National Board of Review of Motion Pictures" rather than the awards. Also, the "Top Foreign Language Films" seems like a list. Not sure if that qualifies as an award.
Done
  • You should know the difference between "The film is directed" and "The film was directed" (in the notes section), especially when the other part of the sentence uses another tense.
Corrected
  • Refs. #47 and #48 use the same title.
Done
  • You have included Bijoya Ray's Manik and I: My Life with Satyajit Ray as a source, but not used it as a ref. anywhere in the article.
Done
The second para of the lead just reads like a series of bullet points. It goes too much into the Apu Trilogy discussing only about those three films. I'm sure the nominator must be aware of other films that fetched him a lot of awards. I can see that a lot of hard work has been put into the list, but sadly there are so many issues with the list. A peer review would have made this process much more easier. —Vensatry (ping) 19:10, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Vivvt: Please add back the Best Film nomination at Filmfare as I found the archive of it here, and I think you also need to ping @Vensatry: to tell them to revisit. Cheers. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 23:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ray was not the producer for the film so it makes sense not to credit him for the award. - Vivvt (Talk) 12:19, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comments
  • The third sentence of the second para is extremely long, so is the succeeding sentence.
  • "During his over five decade career" - His career spanned "over" five decades?
  • Year needed for Rabindranath Tagore's documentary in lead.
  • The 'years' for many films (awards) are still inconsistent.

—Vensatry (ping) 18:14, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry: I assume Cowlibob has resolved your queries. -- Frankie talk 22:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice work thus far, but this one is still pending (I don't see a point in splitting "Awards for the films directed by Ray" and "Awards for the films contributed by Ray". After all, he was the recipient (of a particular category), regardless of who made the film.) —Vensatry (ping) 10:00, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No specific reason as such. Just went by his filmography format and wanted to make distinction between his own films and others. - Vivvt (Talk) 10:13, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on comprehensiveness. Looks much better now —Vensatry (ping) 11:43, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your review comments and support. - Vivvt (Talk) 19:32, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments[edit]

  • A dead link and a few missing access dates Please rectify them.
  • ...received critical acclaim and was awarded the Best Film prize at various award ceremonies and film festivals — i think prize can be replaced with award.
Ssven2 made the change on my behalf. :)
  • ...and two awards for writing lyrics — and two awards for lyric-writing.
Done
  • Looks like the list has been written with focus. I see a few redlinks though. Any reason behind this?
I think red links are ok with FLs and would encourage editors to create new articles.

I hereby request the nominator to ping me once all these issues are addressed. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pavanjandhyala: Thanks for the review. I have made changes per your request. - Vivvt (Talk) 07:30, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Seven references do not have accessdates. Any explanation regarding this? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:35, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are you referring to ref no. 9, 20, 23, 109? These refer to a book so accessdates are not needed. Please let me know if you are referring to any/something else. - Vivvt (Talk) 08:52, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's all from me then. Support Pavanjandhyala (talk) 10:52, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your review comments and support. - Vivvt (Talk) 12:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Ssven2[edit]

Supprort - Nice work on the article, Vivvt. One minor comment,

  • "The film was critical acclaimed" — Typo. Can also change to "The film received critical acclaim".
  • Done Thanks for the support. - Vivvt (Talk) 13:31, 6 August 2015 (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/List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Satyajit_Ray/archive1&oldid=1138485916"