Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Arnold Schwarzenegger filmography


 * 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 Matthewedwards 21:50, 7 March 2009.

Arnold Schwarzenegger filmography

 * Nominator(s): Nehrams2020 (talk)

I have been working on this list for the last two weeks and believe that it meets the FL criteria. There currently are not that many actor filmographies that are featured and I plan to expand on this in the future, starting here with Schwarzenegger. I have looked to similar lists for formatting and made some modifications to make it a little different. Let me know if you see any issues and I will get to them as soon as possible. Thank you for taking a look and happy reviewing! Nehrams2020 (talk) 22:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

"This is a list of..." FLs don't start like this. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed. I had referred to this revision of Christopher Walken filmography when it had passed as a featured list. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

 Strong Oppose/ Comments from  -- WP:FLC is not a substitute of WP:PR, many problems against WP:WIAFL.
 * I recognize this. I asked two editors to look over the list and had not heard back at all, so I had assumed it was fine. In addition, several of these suggestions were about elements that I had used from other Featured Lists at the time of their passing. Thank you for reviewing the article, I'll work to address your concerns. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Lead


 * This is a complete filmography of Arnold Schwarzenegger. -- (1)This is the same thing as "List of___", reword to something like "Arnold Schwarzenegger is a ______ and so on" (2)Besides, no links should be in boldface in the lead per WP:LINKS.
 * Fixed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Schwarzenegger's beginning career started primarily with small roles in both film and television.  -- Bad wording. Should be something like Schwarzenegger's began his acting career primarily with small roles in both film and television. 
 * Reworded as suggested. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * For his first film role, he was credited as "Arnold Strong", but there-after was credited using his birth name.  -- Should be For his first film role, he was credited as "Arnold Strong", but was credited with his birth name there-after.
 * Reworded as suggested. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Schwarzenegger began acting in films in 1970, and with a few stints at directing and producing, has acted in over thirty films. -- These clauses are in no way connected and throws off the meaning of the sentence.
 * I reworded the sentence, please take another look. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * These are just a few examples of the problems with the prose, and thus not meets criteration A.
 * Before I continue reviewing, please seek a copy-edit, from the first glance I had the lead had all types of problems that could have been resolved at WP:PR. So before I continue reviewing the prose, seek a copy-edit.-- TRU  CO   22:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I respect your opinion on the prose of the following paragraphs so I'll have somebody take a look. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Once one is completed, notify me so I can review the lead fully.-- TRU  CO   23:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Tables


 * Colored tables should be avoided in lists like these.
 * Is there somewhere that states this? Looking at List of No Country for Old Men awards and nominations, it appears to use the colors which I thought was similar. In addition, per the WP:WIAFL, I followed the "It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and color." I figured that was a requirement for including the color. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:COLOR. But you've removed them already.-- TRU  CO   23:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Drewcifer provided the link below so I removed them. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The Additional Information column should be called "Notes"
 * Fixed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The 'Notes' in this column should start with a capitalized word
 * Capitalized all instances. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Blank entries should have center aligned emdashes not blank spaces.
 * Are you suggesting this for the "Notes" parameter in the tables? I'm not seeing this in some other FL/FLCs, and just want to make sure. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes I am because its seems unappealing and dashes confirm that something did not happen/was involved/etc.-- TRU  CO   22:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I added the dashes. I saw a few recently passed FLs such as List of Knight's Cross recipients of the Kriegsmarine that hadn't used it, so I was unsure. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You know, I think I must be smoking or something. I have no idea why I just told you to do that, please remove them, I was thinking of something else. Sorry.-- TRU  CO   23:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. I was just starting to get attached to them too. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * What is verifying the awards? There are not inline citations or general references that verify them.-- TRU  CO   23:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned above, I had referred to this revision of Christopher Walken filmography when it had passed as a featured list. Many of its awards were not sourced, so I figured it was not required by reviewers. As you can see for the rest of the article, I have sourced everything else, and had thought it strange not to source it. I'll look to adding sources today. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well they need to be sourced because it is a major part of the list itself. Please, also, mention his awards in the lead, since its part of the list, the awards need to be mentioned in wording as well.-- TRU  CO   22:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * What about this?-- TRU  CO   23:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Per the suggestion of Drewcifer below, he pointed out that no other featured filmographies include the awards so he suggested that I move them to a separate lists which has been done. He has also raised the question as to whether the awards and box office information should be mentioned in the lead since they are not covered in the list anymore. What do you think? --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well I agree that the awards should go into a separate article, but the box office statistics should have remained in this article. Thus, the statement in the lead about his awards should be removed and the statement about his box office should remain.-- TRU  CO   00:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There never was any information about his box office career beyond the single sentence in the lead. At the Christopher Walken filmography FLC, reviewers were against adding box office takes for each film since the actor may not have played a vital role in the film to indicate they were responsible for the success/failure at the box office. However, since we are talking about his career in appearing in film and television, would it allowable to include this brief paragraph detailing the fact that he had won awards and the total box office take? Those both seem like important details to mention about an actor over the span of their career. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That would be more suitable in his article not in this one since the lead is suppose to summarize the list itself. Unless you can merge some of those statements with others to imply the same meaning and still note the accomplishment, then possibly yes. For example, "Schwarzenegger directed the 1990 (film) film, which he earned a (award) award for.-- TRU  CO   00:49, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I reworded the lead a bit to mention one of the films where he received a Golden Globe and another detailing that the had been nominated for various awards for his work in a list of several films. Hopefully that is a better representation then just listing random awards he had won. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks great from my view. I just did a few minor copyedits.-- TRU  CO   16:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.-- TRU  CO   16:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Neutral I've removed my oppose, since alot of progress has been made. I still have reservations with portions of the lead, which bring up awards and box office gross, which are not mentioned anywhere else in the article. So, per WP:LEAD, I believe they shouldn't be there. But, given the excellent state of the list otherwise, I don't want to hold up its nomination if everyone else is ok with it. So, I'll just refrain from either opposing or support. Drewcifer (talk) 03:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Weak Oppose I guess I'm somewhat to blame for the confusion, given I was the author and nominator of the Christopher Walken filmography. That said, that was the first filmography list promoted to FL, and standards and conventions have improved since then. I've continued to work on that particular list to bring it up to snuff, which I believe it is now, but I feel this list is somewhat lagging behind, still basing itself on an old standard. So, a few suggestions:
 * The colored-header should be avoided, per WP:COLOR.
 * Thanks for the link, removed the colors. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not so hot on the quotes, as some of them don't apply to his filmography as a whole (which the list is about). I'm not 100% against, I guess I'm just not sure how to feel about it.
 * I took out the two that were in the awards section since they wouldn't fit with the size of the filmography table. I still left in the one next to the television roles. If others don't care for it, I won't fight removing it. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Year columns should be centered.
 * Sorry, could you clarify? They look centered to me. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * They don't to me. Maybe it's a browser thing or something.  But I can tell they're not just by looking at the wikicode.
 * I'm using Firefox and don't see it. However, if other browsers are having issues then it should be fixed. How would I fix that, by adding Year ? And do I need to do it just to the heading or each individual year? --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It may also be a resolution/font-size thing. All you do is add " " to the year columns. Drewcifer (talk) 20:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed all of the occurrences. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The list of awards should also be avoided, perhaps moved to a separate awards page (List of awards and nominations received by Arnold Schwarzenegger). I don't think any current FL filmographies still include awards.
 * I created the new list, moving over all of the awards. I still left in the sentence in the lead about the awards, should that remain there as well? --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think so. Per WP:LEAD, the lead of an article/list should summarize the content of it, without mentioning stuff that isn't found elsewhere, which the lists aren't anymore.
 * Thinking about it some more, I think it should stay in since the lead is also mentioning his total box office take (which isn't mentioned in the filmography). In addition, it isn't listing every award, and just provides a brief overview of some of the awards he has won in his career. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's exactly why I think it should be taken out. If it's not in the list-proper, it shouldn't be mentioned in the lead.  The lead is meant to summarize, not to address additional information.  That goes for the awards and the box office data. Drewcifer (talk) 20:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * As the awards and box office total cover the details over the span of his film career, I think that should be relevant. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm also not sure about the notes section, especially its main content of his salary. I feel this is better suited to the films' pages, but not a list like this. Drewcifer (talk) 06:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I figured that covering the details about all of his films should also mention something as important as his salary for each film. I was going to add a box office take as well, but saw the discussion at the CW nomination that shunned on it. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I kind of think the salaries are in the same vein as the box office stuff. But I will defer to other's opinions on this one. Drewcifer (talk) 03:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. I'm open to others' opinions on the topic. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have now removed the salary information and moved it to the various film articles instead. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * BusinessWeek is one word (ref 13).
 * Fixed. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Only publications should be italicized. Websites and publishing companies (Canwest News Service, NBC News, Box Office Mojo, The Numbers, CBS News) should not. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed all occurrences for the ones that remained in the article (since some were being used to source the salaries). --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.