Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/59th National Film Awards/archive2

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 not promoted by The Rambling Man 18:21, 4 January 2013 [1].

59th National Film Awards

Nominator(s): - Vivvt • (Talk) 01:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because since its last FLC nomination, article has gone thru lot of changes, including copy-edit by GoCE member which was a major point in last FLC. I hope to get it done this time. - Vivvt • (Talk) 01:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose without citations. (You k"now my detail views from my comments elsewhere and you also know that my alone's opinion doesn't count. Good luck with FLC. ) §§dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:04, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By citations, you mean "official citations for the awards", right? (to clarify that lack of verifiability is not the reason for your oppose).--Dwaipayan (talk) 07:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh of course, right! My mistake. §§dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is absolutely nothing I can do for the citation with a possible copy-vio suspect . For other articles, those are taken from various sources so we can deal with them. Here, per copyright experts, lot of stuff is taken from a single source so its a pretty difficult situation to deal with. Besides citations, you may want to put comments on other stuff. - Vivvt • (Talk) 12:47, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No other comments. §§dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 16:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose still weak on prose, review the lead alone....

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:28, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*Firstly, the above "oppose" has no basis in fact. We cannot copy-and-paste hagiographical quotes en masse without running the risk of introducing copyright violations. If people want to see the citations, direct them to the ridiculously POV website hosting such nonsense.

"for the three award sections" -> "in the three award sections"
"The Feature Film section was headed by Rohini Hattangadi" what do you mean, the judging was headed by that person or the category was most favourable to that person/film?
"The Best Writing on Cinema section had Vijaya Mulay as its chairperson." -> "The Best Writing on Cinema section was chaired by vijaya Mulay."
"Deool in Marathi language and Byari in Beary language" this isn't common English. You would say "in Marathi" or "in the Marathi language" but not what you have here. twice.
Link items the first time round in the lead, such as the best "Feature Film".
" Hindi-English " sure that should be a hyphen, not an en-dash per WP:DASH?
"The presentation ceremony was held " reiterate here that the ceremony was for the 59th awards, not anything else.

The Rambling Man (talk) 19:49, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done - fixed all. - Vivvt • (Talk) 00:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note, I've reviewed the lead alone thus far and on a re-review can still find a handful of issues. I don't have the energy to review this list in depth, so I'll leave it to our other very able reviewers to iron out some of the major outstanding issues before I re-visit. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:28, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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