Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Caldecott Medal/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) 00:26, 30 August 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Caldecott Medal edit

Featured list candidates/Caldecott Medal/archive1

Nominator(s): Barkeep49 (talk) 19:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Along with the Newbery Medal (already a FL), the Caldecott Medal is one of the two most prestigious awards in American children's literature. Winning the award can mean hundreds of thousands of copies of the book are sold. I look forward to the feedback offered by reviewers. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:56, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

;Comments on the lead

The lead is a bit short and could do with another paragraph. This could talk about the first winner, most recent winner, the person who has won most times, etc etc.
"beginning with 1937 publications." => "first awarded in 1938 for 1937 publications."
"The number of Honors or runners-up had always been one to five, and it had been two to four since 1994" => "The number of Honors or runners-up had always been between one and five, and it had been between two and four from 1994"
That's it on the lead, I will look at the rest later...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:47, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have rewritten the lead to expand it and I think the rest of your comments don't apply to this revised version. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:27, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

"awarding a medal to the best illustrator, "who had created the most distinguished picture book of the year."" => "awarding a medal to the illustrator "who had created the most distinguished picture book of the year.""
"the award helped draw-in American artists to the field of children's books" => "the award helped draw American artists into the field of children's books"
"When the award was founded books" => "When the award was founded, books"
"The committee had noted other books of merit" => "The committee noted other books of merit"
"which despite being awarded by the Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC)," => "which, despite being awarded by the Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC),"
"lists the original the Children's Librarian's Section" - eh?
"A picture book, according the award criteria" => "A picture book, according to the award criteria"
"are judged on their in their artistic technique" - some extraneous words there
"must have been published in English the United States first" - think there's at least one word missing here
"Picture books for any audience up to age May 14 be considered" - think something has gone wrong here
"committee members formally nominate 7 books" - write seven as a word
"and hold vote on the winner" - word missing here again, I think
"The winner must receive at least 8 first place votes and be at least 8 points ahead of the second place finisher" - write the numbers as words
"Honor books may be chosen from runner-ups to the winner or selected in a separate ballot" => "Honor books may be chosen from runner-ups to the winner or be selected in a separate ballot"
"Anita Silvey, children's book author, editor, and critic, suggests they might even be the most important book awards, "No other award has the economic significance of the Newbery and Caldecott”" => "Anita Silvey, children's book author, editor, and critic, suggests they might even be the most important book awards, saying that "no other award has the economic significance of the Newbery and Caldecott”"
"According to Marcus" - I would re-state this forename as it's been quite a while since he was mentioned and for a moment I thought "who's Marcus?"
"most winners were written at the elementary age level" - what is an "elementary age level"? Is there an appropriate Wikilink that would clarify?
"It also found that unlike recipients" => "It also found that, unlike recipients"
"The Horn Book Magazine editor Martha Parravano" - italicise the title
I will look at the table later...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:39, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on image beside the big table

Two of the image captions for some reason refer to the person only by their surname and do not Wikilink them - fix these
"Ingri and Edgar Parin d'Aulaire who won the third Caldecott Medal in 1940 worked together as a writing and illustrative team." => "Ingri and Edgar Parin d'Aulaire, who won the third Caldecott Medal in 1940, worked together as a writing and illustrative team."
"David Macaulay, had been disappointed not to " - no reason for that comma
"This One Summer was the first, and as of 2020, and only" - the second "and" should not be there
In the Patrick McDonnell caption, Mutts and Me...Jane should be in italics
In the Christian Robinson caption, the book title should be in italics and there should be a comma after de la Pena's name
"Mary GrandPré illustrated the covers and chapter illustrations for the Harry Potter books" - for all editions? Or just the American versions?
Back for more later :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:30, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the big table

Puss in Boots (1991) seems to be the only book not either blue or redlinked
1 is One should probably sort under O (for One)
Think that's it on the big table -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the second table

MOS:NUMERO says not to use the hash sign to represent "number"
Total does not need a capital
In the David Wiesner caption, write 3 as a word
Joe Klassen caption does not have him wikilinked, and "to also have Caldecott honor book in the same year" is also missing at least one word
Nelson caption does not wikilink him or list his first name

Comments on Notes section

This section is empty so there is no reason for it to be here

Comments on references

Ref 30 shows no work/publisher
Refs 31 to 35 are all exactly the same so can be combined
Think that's it from me....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done thanks ChrisTheDude. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:29, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:56, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to ping people who commented at the FL review for Newbery Medal in hopes that they might be willing to review here too. @PresN, Reywas92, BeatlesLedTV, Aoba47, and The Rambling Man:. Thanks for considering this. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:32, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the ping. I have already committed myself to three FAC reviews so I unfortunately do not have time at the present to help with this review. If this FLC is still up when I am done with those three reviews, I will try my best to come back here. Apologies for that. Aoba47 (talk) 18:39, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TRM edit

I'll submit this as part of my WikiCup contributions.

I'd be tempted to move those odd three refs out of the lead and into the main body. They look odd sitting there on their own. Even the one on the quote as that's covered again in the main body.
- I'm happy to do it. What's quoted there is identical to what I was encouraged to cite in the LEAD for Newbery Medal so I did the same here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sure, I think if we check MOS, it's fine to not cite quotes in the lead if the same quotes are used and cited in the main part of the article. If you'd prefer to leave it, that's not a major issue. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 17:18, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - I had already made the change. I prefer "clean" LEADs personally. Let's see what others say :). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:08, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"worthy runners-up," maybe "runners-up they deem worthy"
"runner-ups "Honor" " why isn't this "runners-up" as before?
- The point here is that they explicitly changed the name from runners-up to Honor. I edited to try to make this more clear. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I meant runners-up vs runner-ups. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 17:18, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done Barkeep49 (talk) 15:08, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"English and in the United States first and be " maybe "English, in the United States first and be " to avoid "and ... and ..."
"Publishers Weekly " should be in italics.
"changed and tweaked" these mean essentially the same things?
"simultaneously to " in?
"any honor books. Honor books may" repetitive.
The table calls them "Honor Books" be consistent with capitalisation.
"The annual number of runners-up has ranged from one to six, same as for the Newbery Medal during the same timespan, from 1938. Indeed, for twenty years from 1993 to 2012 there were two to four Honors every year." not sure this is needed at all, it's self-evident from the table I think.
"Nothing At All" -> "Nothing at All"
"who won two honors and the Caldecott Medal in 1950," this is confusing, he didn't win two "Honors books" did he?
"Both of Chris Van Allsburg's Caldecott winners have been adapted into films." unreferenced.
Check all captions are referenced if they're making claims not substantiated in the list/prose.
For me, the row scope element should be the primary element, and that's the name of the illustrator, not the year of the award.
- You're suggesting organizing the table by illustrator rather than chronologically? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - No, I'm say the scope=row goes with the illustrator, not the year. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 17:18, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Listen I know how much I don't know about tables. I have no objection to this change, but there is scoping for each column right now not just year and it follows the practice at both Newbery Medal and the various Hugo Awards FLs (e.g. Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation which have been my templates here. Unless I'm still not understanding. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:08, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - It's no big deal. I know the cols have scope, that's fine, it was just the element you had selected for the row scopes, in my mind it's the most important element of information for each row, and that's the illustrator names, not the year, but I guess I should just be grateful there are scopes there at all! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:04, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Multiple award winners" typically these tables are initially sorted by the number of awards, not alphabetical order.
Minor point, the source for the table has 2013 as retrieval year, but presumably it was accessed post-2013 for the post-2013 receipients!
New York Times Book Review. -> The New York Times Book Review.

That's it for me. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:25, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: thanks for the review. I believe I have implemented all your suggested changes with one exception (and a couple assorted comments) above. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: seeing you around reminded me of this - are you still looking for changes before you can support its promotion? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry I missed this. I've added it to my backlog and will do my best to get back it tomorrow. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:40, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:04, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

"To be eligible for a Caldecott book the book…" --> "To be eligible for a Caldecott the book…"
"… the book must be published in English, in the United States first and be drawn by an American illustrator" is clunky (due to sentence structure, "published" is implied to precede each subsequent statement, which fails for the final "be drawn…" statement). My suggestion would be: "… the book must be published in English in the United States first and be drawn by an American illustrator."
"It can also increases…" --> "It can also increase…"
Generally, this article has a lot of missing commas. For example, this sentence feels like a run-on sentence due to lack of commas: "Until 1958 a previous winner could win again only by unanimous vote of the committee and in 1963 joint winners were first permitted." Or consider this sentence, which should use a semicolon and a comma after "however": "In recent years there has been an increase in the number of minority characters and illustrators recognized, however this is something which has fluctuated over the history of the award." These are far from the only examples, and further proofreading is needed here.

Additionally, you should also bracket appositives with commas on both sides. I also use commas after introductory adverb phrases; for instance, in the second example, I would follow "In recent years" with a comma, though this is based more on personal preference. For more, see MOS:COMMA.

Use {{'}} for the apostrophe in "Where the Wild Things Are's"
Remove double bolding for Marcia Brown in section Multiple award winners
Archive all online sources

—RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:30, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RunningTiger123: thanks for your time. I have done all the wording suggestions you made and done my best go at addressing the commas. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:28, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support — Cool, I know I wasn't super clear on the commas, which are fairly subjective anyway, and the rest of the grammar looks good. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - Pass edit

Doing now Aza24 (talk) 02:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there two commas for ref 1? Well actually for this one "Association for Library Service to Children" should be the author, "American Library Association" the publisher, 2018 for the year. The edition parameter is usually for "1st, 2nd, special, Anniversary" edition stuff so I wouldn't worry about that
Refs 2 and 4 are the same?
What is ref 6? A PDF or something? If so add "|format=PDF"
Do full date for ref 7 and needs retrieve date
What is 39–40 mean in ref 10?
- It refers to the page numbers using |pages in the journal template. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Huh, that's weird that the template doesn't generate a "pp." or something. You could consider adding it yourself but it's probably fine without it. Aza24 (talk) 03:18, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since ref 14 is in the NYT archive you should add the page and section numbers
Refs 19 and 20 missing dates
Ref 22 date needed
wrong date for ref 27?
What does "p. 55+" mean in ref 28? And is there a missing URL?
Both people in ref 29 should be listed as editors, |editor-last1= |editor-first1= |editorlast2=...
Ref 34 should probably be spelled out as The Wall Street Journal
Retrieval date for ref 33?
I would rather see the American Library Association and Association for Library Service to Children spelled out every time rather than abbreviated
You need links for The Reading Teacher, The New York Times, School Library Journal, Association for Library Service to Children, Publishers Weekly, The Horn Book Magazine, Curbed, Cambridge University Press, American Library Association, Tor.com, Hogan's Alley (magazine), The Wall Street Journal and Smithsonian Magazine otherwise the linking would be inconsistent

Thanks Aza24 for doing this source review. I believe I have implemented your suggested improvements with the exception to the answer of a question above. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, I linked two publishers in the further reading section. Pass for source review. Aza24 (talk) 03:29, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting. --Pres N 20:53, 29 August 2020 (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.