Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by 24 Oras/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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 16 March 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of accolades received by 24 Oras edit

Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by 24 Oras/archive1

Nominator(s): Chompy Ace 13:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this list because I reworked the accolades table from the 24 Oras page, added more sources and archives, and reached above the 50k size. Chompy Ace 13:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments edit

"It enjoyed consistently high viewership" - past tense? Does it not enjoy such viewership any more?
Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:51, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: Issues fixed. Chompy Ace 09:29, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - that was easy :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:36, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by RunningTiger123 edit

Infobox total for nominations seems to be one off
"English: 24 Hours" → "English: 24 Hours"
"to be accessed in the online video platform" – This sentence feels clunky to me. If it was the first to be streamed on TikTok, just say that instead of using awkward synonyms.

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RunningTiger123 Issues fixed. Chompy Ace 20:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox total is now off by two – I think you went in the wrong direction. But that's small and I'm good to support now assuming that will be fixed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dank edit

Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
Checking the FLC criteria:
1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table.
2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
3b. The UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but I'll check back after the 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.
6. It is stable.
Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 04:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - as per above. Idiosincrático (talk) 00:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passed; promoting. --Pres N 00:22, 16 March 2023 (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.