Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Kate Winslet performances/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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 15 September 2018 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of Kate Winslet performances

[edit]

List of Kate Winslet performances (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:53, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kate Winslet's biography is now a featured article. Here's hoping her list of performances makes the cut too. Cheers! --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:53, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from TompaDompa (talk) 09:21, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
*I'm not a big fan of the title. "Kate Winslet on screen, stage, and record" is more in line with most of the other WP:Featured lists like this.
I don't mind changing it to that but certain FLs do have similar names, e.g. List of Emma Stone performances. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I know some do, but most don't (for the better, in my opinion). TompaDompa (talk) 19:32, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
TompaDompa I normally wouldn't mind, but I am a bit sceptical to change it to "screen, stage, and record" as she has starred in only one professional stage production. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:35, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
All right. It's not a deal-breaker. TompaDompa (talk) 09:21, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image is not a particularly good photograph of Winslet. It should definitely be possible to find a better one.
Yeah, it's not ideal. Do you think this image is better? --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That would be an improvement, yes. A high-resolution headshot would be ideal. TompaDompa (talk) 19:32, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to that. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:35, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Also that year," – "The same year," is better.
  • "earned her an Academy Award nomination" – I'd note that it was her second nomination.
  • Try to find a reference for The Dressmaker that doesn't require a subscription.
Which reference are you talking about? None of them seem to be asking me for a subscription. --Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This one (currently reference 19). TompaDompa (talk) 19:32, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Changed. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:35, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Refers to the film's earliest release" seems unnecessary to me – what else would it refer to?
Well, there's sometimes a conflict regarding a theatrical release and a film festival release. This footnote prevents warring. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are two identical references (58 and 59, as of my writing this).

TompaDompa (talk) 17:46, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

TompaDompa thanks for taking time out to review this. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support now that the above issues have been resolved. TompaDompa (talk) 09:21, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Cheetah (talk)
  • Comments I have a couple of nitpicks
    • I am not sure now, but back in the day it was a requirement to have inline citations in ascending order: [13][10] should be [10][13]
    • Why is there a note saying "Refers to the film's earliest release"? Did someone require it? To me, it's obvious and no need to note that.
    • When you have two directors for a film, like for the "Manou the Swift", how do you decide who should be the first when sorting?
    • When there are multiple years, the column should be titled "Year(s)", and for multiple references - "Ref(s)"
    • What was the reason when one of the editors removed the film "Critters" here? Was it because she was uncredited?

--Cheetah (talk) 18:29, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Crzycheetah Thank you for the review. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:38, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are a couple of tables that still need "Ref(s)". One more nitpick, I just noticed this ref titled "For real pride, tune in the aboriginal awards" was retrieved in 2004 even though the article is published in 2018, I am not even stating the fact that this wiki page was created in 2013.--Cheetah (talk) 07:25, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Crzycheetah Sorry, the date and accessdate parameters were mixed up. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:29, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all. Thanks for the fixes. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:51, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aoba47

[edit]
  • I have a question about this part (and the single "What If", which she sang for the 2001 animated film Christmas Carol: The Movie, proved to be a commercial hit). I could not find support for the “commercial hit” claim in the reference provided. Could you point out where it says this in the source as I am most likely just reading over it? Also do you think that this statement requires further context/specification as it was primarily a commercial success in parts of Europe as opposed to everywhere.
  • Do you think that you should be consistent with using either Academy Award or Oscar? I was just curious if an unfamiliar reader may not be aware that they reference the same award. I know that it is fairly common knowledge, but I was just curious about this part.

Wonderful work with this list! These are the only comments that I have noticed. I will support this for promotion once my comments are addressed. I would greatly appreciate if you could provide comments on my current FAC. Either way, have a great start to your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 17:43, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47, tweaked accordingly. Thanks for the review. Much appreciated, as always. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:42, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's very kind. Thank you! :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 15:21, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Looks like a good list.

  • "The 2004 science fiction romance ..." This whole sentence reads kind of clumsily to me. I'd suggest breaking it into two sentences, and having something more like "The 2004 science fiction romance Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind marked one of Winslet's first roles set in contemporary times.[ref] She followed it by playing etc. etc.". You may then need to rewrite the next sentence, which talks about the "first and last" of these roles.
I somehow believe that if I split the sentences, it will be clunkier as I will have to repeat her Oscar nominations in two consecutive sentences. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:33, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't repeat the word "titular" quite so close together.
  • "6 episodes" -> "Six episodes"
  • Episode: Family Matters -> Episode: "Family Matters"
  • Spaced hypens ( - ) need to be spaced en dashes ( – ).
  • What's the logic behind which publishers are wikilinked in the references? Some of them are, some of them aren't.
Wikilinked the first instance. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:33, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, my current open FLC is YouTube Awards. If you've got the time, I welcome any comments on it. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 23:17, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Thousand Doors Thanks for the comments. I'll review your nomination soon. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:33, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 21:26, 14 September 2018 (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.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Kate_Winslet_performances/archive1&oldid=1138482801"