Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Michelle Keegan/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 unsuccessful by The Rambling Man via FACBot (talk) 09:54:06 5 April 2019 (UTC) [1].

List of awards and nominations received by Michelle Keegan[edit]

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

Toolbox
Nominator(s): ArturSik (talk) 21:20, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is a well sourced, comprehensive list of Keegan's awards that I worked on over the last two days. The lead could've been a bit longer but it includes all the important information and I couldn't really think of anything else I could write about there but that's probably because she hasn't got that many acting credits and most of her awards are for her role on Corrie. ArturSik (talk) 21:20, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments
    • Combine first two sentences, thus eliminating a sentence of just six words
    • "numerous critically acclaimed" - seems a bit of a bold statement to say "numerous". Numerous suggests a very large number, and I'm reasonably sure Keegan has not actually starred in a very large number of critically acclaimed shows.
    • "The awards were formerly known as TV Quick and TV Choice Awards" - IMO all of the title should be italicised (i.e. including the word "and") otherwise it looks these are two separate former titles. If you don't feel italicising the word "and" is appropriate, please find a way to reword it so it doesn't suggest that the awards have two former titles.
  • Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:42, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Thank you:) ArturSik (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - all looks OK now. As you said, the lead seems a bit short, but maybe there's not much else to say.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:34, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from BeatlesLedTV
  • I agree with ChrisTheDude, the lead does seem a little short. I also find it interesting how she's won/nominated for awards for only three pieces of work. Seems kinda short but I'd love to hear other editors' opinion on the subject. Til then I'll wait before giving my support or oppose. BeatlesLedTV (talk) 19:20, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I absolutely agree but there's nothing I can think of that I could write other than what we already got. Yes, she's been in acting business for 10 years but for the first five she was on Corrie and did nothing else during that time. That's how it usually works when you're in a soap, at least in the UK it does. And that's what she's got most of her accolades for. Since leaving the show she only did few TV shows that weren't very big except for maybe 'Our Girl' but she didn't get many awards for it either. Can't really do anything about it but I can assure you that that doesn't mean the list is incomplete, she simply wasn't nominated for her other projects as much as she was for her role on Corrie. I hope it makes sense. The list isn't big but as long as it's complete I think it meets the FL requirements. ArturSik (talk) 20:45, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – I agree. You can't help it when there's really not much to work with, but as you said the list does seem complete and meets FL standards, so I'll give my support. Sorry it took so long I completely forgot I commented. BeatlesLedTV (talk) 18:03, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Thank you for the support. ArturSik (talk) 23:08, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm afraid that I'm not as comfortable with the length of the lead as everyone else is. By my count it comes to 822 characters, which wouldn't even qualify it for WP:DYK, let alone WP:FL. The leads of similar articles (e.g. List of awards and nominations received by Megan Fox, ... Amy Adams, ... Jennifer Lawrence, ... Emma Stone) are about three times longer – is there really nothing else that can be said? There isn't a huge amount of content in the parent article (i.e. Michelle Keegan) either – frankly, I'm thinking that this entire list could quite conceivably be merged into the biography. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 11:21, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm with A Thousand Doors on this one. The lead is certainly inadequate for this article and does beg the question as to whether the table of awards should just be merged back into the main article as no real additional analysis or text exists here right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:09, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — My apologies but there’s not enough awards to justify a separate list, let alone an FL listing. Would support merging if a discussion about it was opened.—NØ 14:59, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's twice as many wins and 25% more nominations than on List of awards and nominations received by Megan Fox, which is a FL........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:28, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Your other stuff exists argument doesn’t change the fact that Keegan's bio has just 2.8k characters of readable prose and there’s really no reason this list should be separate.—NØ 21:42, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Perhaps standards have changed and the Fox list could be reincorporated into the main article. Perhaps an WP:FLRC is in order to gauge the consensus. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:07, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Aoba47

Most of the opposition votes seem to focus on the length of the lead as opposed to the amount of awards/nominations. I have no issue with the Fox list being put up for a FLRC (I was the nominator of its FLC), but it seems a little weird to me that "standards have changed" so much when the Fox list was only just promoted at the end of last year.

It may help to expand the lead to comment on how she received multiple award nominations in similar categories (i.e. as the best newcomer, her sex appeal). You mention her multiple British Soap Awards for her sex appeal, but she also received similar nominations for Inside Soap Awards and TV Now Awards. Those may be worth mentioning. The lead also does not mention the nomination for Ordinary Lies and it refers to only one of her nominations for Our Girl. I think if these parts are added/expanded to the lead, then it may sway some of the oppose votes (or at least more comments). I personally think there is enough awards for a stand-alone list, but I agree that the lead could use some expansion in general. Hope this helps out. Aoba47 (talk) 05:12, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArturSik are you going to attempt to continue with this nomination or would you prefer to withdraw it? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing note: This candidate has been unsuccessful, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Michelle_Keegan/archive1&oldid=1052827127"