Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/BAFTA Award for Best Film/archive1

BAFTA Award for Best Film
Article that I restructured, and practically re-built, covers every winner and nominee. ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 06:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment- Needs a compact TOC. smurrayinch e  ster( User ), ( Talk ) 07:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: I agree with Smurryinchester. Also, why do some of the movies have a country next to them, while others don't? Are those unlabled British films? If so, please say so in the lead. Pepsidrinka 00:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Fixed and answered within article. ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 06:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Done ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 05:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Confused.
 * 1) What does "Until 1960, and then sporadically later on, the awards for Best Film were not handed out to any one person." mean?
 * 2) "Films in the Best Film from any Source category without a country next to them are British (pre 1960)." wouldn't be more consistent to just label them? Are there any years that a film won the any source but not the British film category. That would be worth mentioning.
 * 3) Why is there only one award listed each year after 1968 and why doesn't the lead explain this? Rmhermen 16:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, I forgot. Support, as self-nom ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 01:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Nothing great about this list. It seems as plain text. Could you change the design of the page, maybe a tabular form? CG 13:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I converted the first section of the page to a table. Is this really better? Rmhermen 00:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see how it's any better. It's a list for christ sakes, what are you expecting? Hanging Gardens of Babylon? ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 07:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong object - it looks really ugly (the started table format looks better, but I don't think it solves all the problems). It has inconsistent formatting (i.e. some list people (directors? producers? actors?), some don't) and a bunch of red links. References are not sufficient (i.e. both of your references list only winners and not other candidates). Renata 01:33, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, the people thing is actually explained. And I never listed the actors! What are you talking about? And how does the table look now?....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 05:25, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course table looks way better than a plain list. And imentioned actors just because it was unclear who they are and why they are listed... Renata 11:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Some of the candidates for 1949 and 1950 are the same films is this correct? Rmhermen 17:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry, I was halfway through converting 1950 to tabular form. Don't worry, I'll fix it. ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 23:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)