Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/95th Academy Awards/archive1

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

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]

95th Academy Awards

Featured list candidates/95th Academy Awards/archive1

Nominator(s): Birdienest81talk and RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We are nominating the 2023 Oscars for featured list because we believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. We followed how the 1929, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1984, 1986, 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, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 ceremonies were written. Birdienest81talk 21:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pseud 14

Halle Berry who won for performance in 2001's Monster's Ball. -- who won for her performance in...
Link to Halle Berry's wiki article, since it is the first instance in the prose.
after Haing S. Ngor who won the same category for his role -- who won in the same category for his role
last year's decision to presented eight below-the-line -- to present
in the vent a similar altercation -- in the event of a similar alteraction
or unexpected fiasco arose -- should an unexpected fiasco arose or if an unexpected fiasco arose
winners names -- should be possessive as in winners' names
or images form the nominated films -- from the nominated films
According the red carpet consultant Lisa Love -- According to
That's it from me. Enjoyed watching this ceremony and one of the best (IMO) in last couple of years. Pseud 14 (talk) 13:44, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pseud 14: Done - I have made all the corrections based on your comments. Thank you for your feedback.

--Birdienest81talk 19:07, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changes look good to me Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 19:39, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pamzeis

I've never seen an Oscars ceremony because... they're really long, and I can just look up the results and watch random bits and bobs on YouTube. I will try not to screw this up

Check for MOS:LQ issues
I could be mistaken, but lead doesn't mention anything from #Critical reviews?
- Not every section has to be covered, at least by my reading of MOS:LEADREL; here, it focuses on the key items (namely, the major dates, crew, and winners) in line with previous years. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"the third pair of directors to" — is "of directors" necessary? What other pairs could the have been winning in the "Best Director" category?
"directors to win the aforementioned category for the" — "aforementioned" feels a bit clunky... can we just say "win in that category"?
- I thought "pair" instead of "pair of directors" felt a bit awkward, so I tried a slightly different wording to address the two points above. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"since the 7th ceremony were held in" — "were held" is unnecessary unless there's something I'm missing?
"who won the same category for his role" — "the same category" is already implied
"The 42-year span between Judd Hirsch's first nomination for his supporting role in 1980's Ordinary People and his latest one in the same category for The Fabelmans set the record for the longest gap between career Oscar nominations." — I'm confused. This sentence doesn't mention what category he's nominated in (even though it's sorta implied) so "the same category" is meaningless. Also, is it even relevant what category he was nominated in? And I'm also not sure what "career Oscar nominations" means...? (OK, now I'm confused by what I wrote in this comment, so.......)
"oldest person nominated competitively" could be linked to List of oldest and youngest Academy Award winners and nominees#Superlatives (though that page is outdated)
""We are thrilled to have Glenn and Ricky at the helm. We look forward to working closely with them, our Board of Governors and the Board's Awards Committee to deliver an exciting and energized show," remarked AMPAS president Janet Yang and CEO Bill Kramer." — this is a pretty long quote that doesn't have much meaning. I assume at every Oscars ceremony the Academy want to deliver an "exciting and energized show" regardless of its producers. Is it possible for this to be trimmed?
"Either way, I am grateful to the Academy for asking me so quickly after everyone good said no." — seems like a random quip Kimmel made? I don't really understand why it warrants inclusion...
- I'd say it reflects/comments on the general difficulty in finding hosts that the Oscars has faced for a few years. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any information on what the "crisis team" does? (Like, are they security guards or something?)
- Nope, the cited article just calls it that. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"would perform the song during the ceremony" — remove "during the ceremony" as redundant
"the film's Instagram account was criticized" — by whom?
"Critical reviewes" — typo?
Any curly apostrophes (’) → straight apostrophes (') per MOS:CONFORM
You've probably seen this brought up a million times but the Critical reviews section is mostly made up of the "X said Y" structure, which, to be honest, can get pretty boring. WP:RECEPTION can be a pretty helpful guide for this (you've probably seen that essay brought up a million times too)

Overall, this is a pretty good article, and I can definitely see it getting to FL status. However, at the current moment, I'm leaning ~~oppose~~ as I feel it doesn't meet the "professional standards of writing" required. I'm 100% expecting (and hoping for) that to change... but right now... that's my position. Best of luck with this article. Pamzeis (talk) 08:52, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis: I've either addressed your feedback above or edited the article accordingly; let me know if anything should be tweaked. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your changes. I'm happy to support on prose now. Pamzeis (talk) 04:21, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Kimmel image caption needs a full stop
"negative feedback regarding last year's decision" => "negative feedback regarding the previous year's decision"
"Many consider Merle Oberon who was nominated for her role in 1935's The Dark Angel to be" => "Many consider Merle Oberon, who was nominated for her role in 1935's The Dark Angel, to be"
That's it I think. Great work once again! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:58, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ChrisTheDude: All done. RunningTiger123 (talk) 17:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there's a giant gap in the Films with multiple nominations and awards subsection. I figured a while back that you need to remove the float command from the tables to get rid of the gap.—indopug (talk) 02:04, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's the tables, it's something with {{col-float}}. When that template is added, the first text (or table) in that section appears no higher than the top of the last image included before that template. The same issue exists at other articles (for instance, 74th Primetime Emmy Awards, which doesn't include a float parameter in the tables). I can ask about it at the template talk page. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:19, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passed; promoting. --Pres N 15:53, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.