Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations for Lost

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 00:43, 26 March 2008.

List of awards and nominations for Lost

edit

First, I'm going to address the title. There seems to be no standard for award list titles, there's List of awards won by The Simpsons (titled so because many noms are missing, so I bypassed that one by saying it is mainly a list of awards won), there's List of Home and Away awards, List of awards for Passions (TV series) and List of 30 Rock awards and nominations.

The reason I chose the name "List of awards and nominations for Lost" is because I felt "List of Lost awards and nominations" insinuated the the article had a different meaning, like a list of missing awards or something. If anyone feels differently, I am more than willing to change the title, but I was just clarifying my position.

Anyway, fully sourced, yada yada yada, will address concerns. I tried to use primary sourcing as much as possible, but in some cases the actual award histories page for a certain award would say "for a history please refer to IMDB" in which case I took that to be an endorsement that IMDB was accurate in this case, and used it. -- Scorpion0422 15:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • The other awards (those at the bottom of the list) should be in a ===Other awards=== section, I think.
  • Why are some of the cells in the episode columns missing, when others for the same Award-giving-body are given? For example, in the Emmys, Terry O'Quinn (1st mention), Naveen Andrews, and Michael Emerson have no episode mentioned, but when Terry O'Quinn won, his episode is mentioned.

That's it for now -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 21:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC) Support – Good work -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 03:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Nice stuff! Some comments:
    • 3rd sentence, "It has won and been nominated for a variety of different awards, including..." - did it win or was it just nominated for the awards mentioned thereafter?
      • I actually fixed that shortly before I noticed your comments... Weird.
    • "the Emmys had rarely recognized science fiction/fantasy shows" - just seems more formal and prose-y to say 'science fiction or fantasy shows'.
      •  Done
    • "the series was nominated for nine Emmys but failed to win one" - it's picky but I think for easy reading it should say 'failed to win any'. (And who knows, it might've won two.)
      •  Done
    • And - even pickier - the Primetime Emmys and Golden Globes (to name just two) link categories only the first time they are mentioned, yet the Creative Arts Emmys section repeats the "Outstanding Special Visual Effects For A Series" link. That's just one instance I noticed early on in the list, there could well be a whole lot more.
      • I think I previously got a lot of the double links, but I probably missed a few others.  Done
    • Something I just happened to notice - the Creative Arts Emmys lists a nomination for "Thomas E. deGorter" while the Golden Reel Awards lists a "Thomas DeGorter". I'm assuming this is what their noms were listed as; I'm not sure what should be done for the sake of consistency.
      • I'll go with "Thomas deGorter", a lot more sources use that name.
  • My proverbial hat off to you, and good luck! •97198 talk 04:20, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - In the "References: General" and "External links" parts, there are links to other lists with this information. Although I understand that the links in both categories have a different status, the categories are so small that I would join them. Also, reference #42 currently shows an error message. --EdgeNavidad (talk) 13:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I'm not like the above users, I can't pick out sentences that may seem a bit off. But I can see that the page is informative and well-sourced. One of the best award pages I've seen. Definitely got my support. Corn.u.co.pia Discussion 12:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved stuff from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments
    • What constitutes a "notable" award per your lead opening sentence?
      • My inclusion criteria was that the award was mentioned at IMDB (every award they won that is there is at least mentioned here), and that they have some form of wikipedia page (although that one is flexible, basically any award with a reliable source is here)
    • Image caption is a fragment so no need for full stop.
      •  Done
    • Yeah, I'd agree, the tables should have the columns lined up, it looks untidy right now. You can fiddle with width settings to avoid too much whitespace.
      • Some tables would have to be smaller because of the images and I really think that table should hug the text as much as possible.
    • Be consistent with repeated wikilinking - awards aren't relinked, nominees aren't relinked, episode names are relinked...
      • I fixed as many as I could find.
    • Four of the Creative Arts Emmy Awards entries aren't cited. All others are.
      • Some of the wins are covered by the general Emmy source at the bottom.
    • Four of the Golden Reel Awards entries aren't cited, all the others are.
      •  Done
    • Why does "Best Sound Editing in Sound Effects and Foley for Television Short Form" occupy three lines?
      • It doesn't on mine, I guess it depends on the browser.
    • Saturn awards are partially cited.
      •  Done
    • Consider making the Other awards table sortable since you've made an arbitrary choice on how it's ordered.
      •  Done
  • Some things to consider. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment what's with the [68] in the category for two of the "other" awards? Looks odd so could use an explanation. Also not keen on "See Below"" (which at the very least should be See below) - what's this all about? And finally, ref [24] is showing a template error. Other than that, this should become featured. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • 68 is where I forgot to add the category (whoops). The sections with "see below" are where there are so many nominees that it would screw up the table. Ref 24 has been fixed. -- Scorpion0422 18:01, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • 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://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_awards_and_nominations_for_Lost&oldid=1138485656"