Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Stranger Things/archive1

< 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 by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 17 February 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of awards and nominations received by Stranger Things edit

List of awards and nominations received by Stranger Things (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Brojam (talk) 02:38, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because Stranger Things is a critically acclaimed series that has garnered numerous accolades and it meets the criteria for a featured list. This list is thoroughly sourced and cited and meets all content and style requirements (to my knowledge) for a featured list. Look forward to your comments and suggestions. Brojam (talk) 02:38, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from ChrisTheDude
  • "All episodes of the first season were released on Netflix on July 15, 2016,[3] while the second season was released in its entirety on October 27, 2017" - I would avoid using "while" there, as that suggests two things happening at the same time, which clearly isn't the case here
  • "and a Peabody Award nomination" - I think the last word is redundant here as it is part of a list of nominations, so obviously it is a nomination
  • "one of its Top 10 television programs of the year" - either it should be written as "Top 10 TV Programs of the Year" to match the table or else "Top" shouldn't have a capital T
  • Character column in the first table sorts on forename, it should sort on surname
  • AFI Awards are initially listed second, presumably because it stands for American Film Institute, but it you re-sort on that column it jumps to the top because it sorts under "AF"
  • Same with IFMCA Awards, which jumps about when you re-sort on that column
  • TCA Awards are listed before Teen Choice, but if TCA stands for Television Critics Assoc, then I would have thought it should be alphabetised based on that to be consistent with AFI and IFMCA, which are alphabetised based on what they stand for. Either that or alphabetise the other two based on the actual initials.
  • People's Choice Awards should not be listed before Peabody Awards
  • Think that's it from me. Great work overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:54, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:00, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Spy-cicle

  • Add a short description.
  • The claim it has recieved "Critical acclaim" needs a significant number of references per WP:PEACOCK.
  • Swap out the "E! Online" article with a different one that is more reliable per WP:RSP.
  • Add some more references/inline citations for the lead (2nd and 3rd paragraphs) to meet WP:V particulary the second paragraph: "Stranger Things has been nominated for many awards, including 31 Primetime Emmy Awards (six wins)..."
  • The Efn notes should state "Also awarded to" not "Tied" since it is not a race.
  • IGN should be in italics.

That is all I could find so far but may have a deeper dive at a later date, good work. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 20:53, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Spy-cicle: All your comments have been addressed above. - Brojam (talk) 04:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • All those changes look good. The only other thing I have found is the that runner-ups are considered wins? I understand they are special recognition but conflating them with full on wins is somewhat confusing for readers if they want to find out how many actual wins Stranger Things has won at glance. Perhaps, if you wanted to note how many runner-ups + wins they recieved you could do that in an efn note separate to the wins tally.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 17:57, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Spy-cicle: This is addressed with the note in the infobox: Certain award groups do not simply award one winner. They recognize several different recipients, have runners-up and have third place. Since this is a specific recognition and is different from losing an award, runner-up mentions are considered wins in this award tally. - Brojam (talk) 22:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Brojam: I understand that award ceremonies sometimes give a Winner, runner-up then third place. But I do not see why Runner-Up should be equivialent to an outright win - especially if readers want to find out the exact number of wins at a glance not Wins + Runner-ups. I understand it is recognition but that can be noted on the table itself like shown in the example below.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 16:32, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Example
Test Result
Runner-up
  • Since the list is using {{Infobox awards list}}, we can't just add your proposed infobox table change just for this list. This is pretty standard for awards and nominations lists and such a change and discussion should probably happen elsewhere (like the WikiProjects and template talkpages) since as far I can tell none of the other lists of this type have such a thing. Also, since the actual awards list table is sortable, if someone wants to see the number of just runner-ups or just proper 1st wins like you mentionned, they can sort the result column to see how many the show got. - Brojam (talk) 17:54, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support from Zmbro
  • Support – honestly looks great to me. I can't find any problems. Great job to you! :-) Spy-cicle do you have a support or oppose yet? – zmbro (talk) 04:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Lady Lotus

  • Names in the tables or the references should only be linked once. So the main tables with the awards - Millie Bobby Brown, Trailer Park, Inc., etc. should only be linked once. For the references The Hollywood Reporter, Deadline Hollywood, should only be linked once. It's whoever is mentioned first.
    • Since the table is sortable, it should link linkable items every time. Similarly for the references, since you can randomly look at any one of them individually, they should also be linked every time. The important part for the latter issue is it must be consistent (either you link only the first occurrence or every single time). - Brojam (talk) 01:41, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any particular reason the "Total nominations and awards for the cast" table is set to center? I'd just be careful with so much text aligning when it's not necessary.
    • In order for the nominations and awards columns' values to be centered. I have removed the excess text-aligning in the table. - Brojam (talk) 01:41, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also in this table - each "Actor" row needs a "! scope="row" |" next to it for accessibility
  • In the Awards and nominations table, only "scope=row" the first row, not every row

That's all I can really find, if you have any questions on the above just let me know :) LADY LOTUS • TALK 15:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Teratix edit

Apologies Brojam, it's taken a while for me to get around to this.

Lead

  • American science fiction horror web television series that's an awful lot of adjectives, can this be reduced?
  • and features an ensemble cast -> "which features"
  • The nearby Hawkins National Laboratory Hawkins National Laboratory = no need for "nearby".
  • does experiments imprecise verb. Use "conducts experiments on" instead.
  • including those that involve human test subjects this is awkwardly worded. Maybe ", frequently / often / sometimes / occasionally employing human subjects" (I've never watched the show, use whichever adverb is most appropriate).
  • they have created a portal the use of "they" as a pronoun for organisations feels informal. "the laboratory has" or "the researchers have" maybe?
  • three Writers Guild of America Awards and a Peabody Award Consider using the Oxford comma here; since the list is so long, when reading aloud there would probably be a distinct pause between each accolade.
  • including being honored with nominations for this is awkwardly worded
  • Cast member David Harbour should be obvious Harbour is a cast member without the description.
  • Overall, the last paragraph has a repetitive structure (X received Y Primetime Emmys and Z Screen Actors Guild Awards); could this be varied at all?

Infobox

  • Awards and nominations received by Stranger Things avoid overlinking the show
  • runner-up mentions are considered wins in this award tally why? Seems misleading. Yes, it's a "specific recognition" and "is different from losing an award", but it is not equivalent to a win. Why not have a tally of runner-up mentions?
    • This is part of the infobox template and discussed above. - Brojam (talk) 19:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Awards in certain categories do not have prior nominations and only winners are announced by the jury. For simplification and to avoid errors, each award in this list has been presumed to have had a prior nomination. The highlighted parts contradict each other.
    • This is part of the infobox template, however there are current discussions about its wording and meaning at the template's talkpage, which should lead to at least a cleanup of this text. - Brojam (talk) 19:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tables

  • Total nominations and awards for the cast -> Awards and nominations for the cast (concision and consistency with subsequent header)
    • I've modified it so "awards and nominations" is consistent, but kept "Total" since I think it's important to note this is the total numbers. Since, without that word, it could mean the actual list of awards and noms for the cast. - Brojam (talk) 19:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Footnote for the year column is self-evident and unnecessary.
    • Since some awards ceremonies occur in a different year than the year from which the works are being honored in (which is often confused as being the year of that awards ceremony), I think the note is useful and eliminates any confusion in that regard. - Brojam (talk) 19:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  • Publisher for ref 32, 49 and 88?
  • Drop all caps for "Grammy" in ref 46.
  • Typo in ref 66
  • 103 and 104 are duplicates
    • All done. Nice catches! - Brojam (talk) 19:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the suggestions are quite a bit to look through. Fantastic job for such a large list. – Teratix ₵ 04:37, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Source review – The formatting of the references looks okay throughout after the fixes above, and the link-checker shows no issues. My only concern is with ref 102: Us Weekly has always struck me as a tabloid-style publication, and I don't consider it a particularly reliable source. Surely something stronger must be available for the most recent Teen Choice Awards? Giants2008 (Talk) 21:16, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Giants2008: I've replaced that source. - Brojam (talk) 22:10, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • The new source is definitely better. With that done, I'd say this source review has been passed. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:12, 12 February 2020 (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) 22:16, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Giants2008: would you mind holding off on that until this discussion concludes? I'm concerned that the infobox as it stands, and therefore this list, is giving misleading and inaccurate information. – Teratix ₵ 22:47, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Given that this is a feature in many FLs, not just the one in question, I'm comfortable promoting this now and seeing where consensus takes that discussion. Nobody ever said that FLs can't be improved, and if consensus dictates that the wording be changed in the template, it will be. I see no reason to withhold promotion until that occurs, assuming it even does. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:52, 16 February 2020 (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_received_by_Stranger_Things/archive1&oldid=941168105"