Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/59th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy 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 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 22 August 2022 (UTC) [1].[reply]

59th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards

Featured list candidates/59th Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards/archive1

Nominator(s): RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:27, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on more recent Emmy ceremonies, but I saw the sad state this list was in and decided to completely redo it. Fun fact: This ceremony saw the first "broadband" nominee. To quote one article, "Twenty years from now, when Emmy [sic] only recognizes programming found on the Internet, historians will point to the mostly forgotten Drive as the show that started it all." Seems pretty accurate to me. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:27, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee received five wins from 11 nominations, leading all programs in both categories" - what are "both" categories? The last mention of categories said there were 66? Do you mean across the two ceremonies?
If the presenters are in alpha order, Miley Cyrus should be after her dad
That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:21, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @ChrisTheDude: Done. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:13, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:25, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Birdienest81

Per MOS:CONFORMTITLE, titles of TV series and movies should be italicized even in citations.
Per MOS:QWQ, quotations within quotations (namely quotations inside the article title) should be formated with half quotation)

Bob said: "My favorite episode of Cheers is 'Thanksgiving Orphans' which aired in 1986."

Otherwise this is good.

--Birdienest81talk 09:32, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Birdienest81: Done. RunningTiger123 (talk) 15:08, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Good work.

-- Birdienest81talk 00:02, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dank

Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
Checking the FLC criteria:
1. No problem with the prose. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the tables.
2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
3b. The list is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
4. It is navigable.
5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
6. It is stable.
Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 20:15, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Z1720

No concerns with prose in the lede

Image check

Licencing is good.
Instead of px, use upright per MOS:IMAGESIZE

Source check

Version reviewed, spotcheck not done

No concerns with quality or formatting.

Please ping when the image concern is addressed. Thanks, Z1720 (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Issues have been fixed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 00:49, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. My concerns have been addressed. Z1720 (talk) 01:43, 20 August 2022 (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) 22:33, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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