Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/70th 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 Giants2008 02:08, 24 March 2014 [1].

70th Academy Awards[edit]

Featured list candidates/70th Academy Awards/archive1

Nominator(s): Birdienest81 (talk) 18:02, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating the 1998 Oscars for featured list because I believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I read the requirements and criteria. I also followed how the 1929, 1989, 1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2009, 2010, and 2012 Oscars were written. --Birdienest81 (talk) 18:02, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: (having stumbled here from my FLC discussion page). A few comments and suggestions: (1) Image review: All images check out okay, except for File:70th Academy Awards poster.jpg, please format this one with {{Information}}. (2) A few other portals could be added to See also sect, for example Film and Theatre. (3) In Memoriam - not sure this is encyclopedic title for sect or proper to have it italicized, maybe something like Tributes instead, seems like by using same title for our sect as the show it tilts towards bias or promotion a bit. (4) Maybe a bit more in Critical reviews about performance by Billy Crystal, I'm sure there's more secondary source coverage out there about how he was received. Feel free to keep me posted on addressing above, — Cirt (talk) 03:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done: I have addressed your concerns (except one, see notes below)

Added fair use rationale for ceremony poster (akin to movie posters in Featured Articles)
Added a few more portals such as theatre, film, and Los Angeles (where the ceremony is held)
Changed In Memoriam to Tribute, but I still feel awkward with just that word.
Not very sure about reviews. I did mention Billy Crystal reviews. Do you want more positive reviews of Crystal's stint, or what else? I would like more clearer feedback (including maybe an example) because I am not sure what you are asking for.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks better. Maybe a few reviews about the singing by Billy Crystal? — Cirt (talk) 23:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Ceremony information: "AMPAS president 'Gil has become...'". First two words should be removed here. Giants2008 (Talk) 03:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done: I have fixed that sentence.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 08:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Although one is part of the title, "the" doesn't need to be duplicated for Saranden's presentation. There's also an inconsistency between that line and "Oscar's Family Album" later. If it's just an attributed name and not a published title of the segment it shouldn't be in quotation marks; the same goes for the other segments.
Just an opinion, you don't have to change if if you don't want to, but "festivities" is a bit of exaggeration for a (singular) awards show.
Comma between "host commenting"
Whoopi Goldberg is an actress.

Good work Reywas92^Talk 03:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done: I have fixed everything listed above.

--Birdienest81 (talk) 07:33, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support Reywas92^Talk 21:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Quite high quality page. — Cirt (talk) 04:45, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Excellent work. --Jagarin 19:31, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Comment: I have some difficulty with the lead. The first sentence, while grammatically correct, seems overlong and quite wordy. You might consider breaking it into 2 sentences. Also, towards the end, you use "ceremony" quite frequently, making it seem a bit redundant. Might try using words like "event", "show", etc. The first sentence under Winners & Nominees, I'd drop "the" before actress Geena Davis. I really like the rest of that section though, a lot of info in a short amount of space. You might want to delete one of pictures running down the right side; in the multiple awards section there is a lot of white space, but that's simply stylistic. The tables are great. In the Ceremony section, it's press release, not pres. You also might want to run a check on overlinking, the section has a few (Rehme, Hunt, 69th awards). Other than that, the section is well written and organized. The critical review section, of note, is extremely well done and balanced. I didn't do an in-depth check on citations, but the one I did check (footnote 46), did not support the data in the sentence. If I have more time later, I will go back and check other citations. Would support if these items are addressed.Onel5969 (talk) 19:33, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done: I have fixed everything mentioned above with a few notes

Moved phrase "films of 1997" to sentence starting with "During the ceremony..."
Made variations of ceremony such as event, gala, etc. in the lead paragraphs.
Removed "the" before "actress Geena Davis"/
Removed one picture
Delinked some names
All references have no dead links according to Tool Server
Replaced ref 46 with a different site containing table displaying all Oscar ceremony ratings and viewership figures (earliest data of total viewership is from 1974 ceremony).

--Birdienest81 (talk) 16:38, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Nice job!Onel5969 (talk) 17:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I have no issues with the article. Aureez (Talk) 12:05, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Excellent job once again, Birdienest. -- KRIMUK90 ✉ 10:02, 18 March 2014 (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. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:44, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.