Wikipedia:Peer review/Hugo Award for Best Fancast/archive2
Hugo Award for Best Fancast edit
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
Hey all, I listed this list for PR before, but it got closed without any comments. I'm going to take it to FLC in the future when it gets a bit longer, but for now I'm trying to get a peer review so that I can add it to the Featured Topic for the Hugo Awards, the other lists in which are already featured. Any comments or criticisms about the list are welcome!
Thanks, --PresN 17:23, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- Comments by Juhachi
- "The Hugo Award for Best Fancast is awarded to any generally available non-professional audio or video periodical devoted to science fiction, fantasy or related subjects that has released four or more episodes by the end of the previous calendar year, at least one of which appeared in that year, and that does not qualify as a dramatic presentation." -- This is a long run-on sentence, and need rewriting as it is confusing.
- "In order for it to become an official category, it needed to be ratified at Chicon 7 in 2012, which it was." -- This needs rewriting, with less commas, and less ending sentences with 'was'.
- "a one-off Hugo" -- What does this mean? 'One-off' seems pretty colloquial.
- "which closely followed the proposed language for the Best Fancast category which then began on an official basis the following year." -- I might suggest using 'and' for the second 'which'.
- "by supporting or attending members" -- This needs clarification. Wouldn't any supporting member also be attending?
- "the presentation evening" -- This is oddly written. Why is presentation being used as an adjective to modify evening?
- "out of the same field of five fancasts both years." -- I would rewrite this as "with the same nominees for each year."
- "Note that the 2012 award was actually for Best Podcast, not Best Fancast." -- Can this be referenced?
- The winners and nominees section needs
* Winners and joint winnersas in the other articles.