Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Killers awards


 * 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 User:The Rambling Man 06:47, 15 July 2008.

List of The Killers awards
After having significantly expanded this, I believe it is a worthy featured list candidate. WilliamH (talk) 14:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * "from sixty-two nominations." &rarr; "from 62 nominations." - ✅ WilliamH (talk) 13:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "by The Killers, " – remove the bold or the link per WP:BOLDTITLE - ✅ WilliamH (talk) 13:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Put the article in some categories - ✅ - no longer uncategorized. WilliamH (talk) 13:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Gary King ( talk ) 17:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 09:09, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "This is a comprehensive list of awards and nominations won by The Killers," Don't say "comprehensive". This is implied by FL status. Please also come up with something that engages the reader. Articles don't begin with "This is an article about " and neither should lists.
 * the lead section. WilliamH (talk) 13:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅. WilliamH (talk) 13:55, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Sections with 1-2 awards/nom should probably be merged (both in structure and summary table). As is, it gives the same "weight" to a TEC nomination as to a dozen NME noms and awards. Circeus (talk) 04:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand your sentiment, but I'm not sure. "Weight" strikes me as a little subjectively tacit. All awards are just dispassionately listed in alphabetical order - I can't think of anything less impartial. WilliamH (talk) 10:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments The widths of corresponding columns different sections should be set to the same (for aesthetic reasons). For example, the widths of "Nominated work" columns in all the tables should be set to the same width. Same goes for the other columns (except the Year column which is always the same since the width of the different years are also the same).

Per our accessibility guidelines, colour should not be used unless absolutely unnecessary as it proves disadvantageous to colour-blind users. So I think the reds and greens are unnecessary here. indopug (talk) 08:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC) - ✅ WilliamH (talk) 17:30, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Do you "win" nominations per the opening sentence of the lead? Not really, I think you earn them... - ✅ WilliamH (talk) 21:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "They were signed, and the band..." - "The band were signed and went to...?" perhaps not. it just reads odd at the moment for me. - ✅. I saw what you mean - made it more fluid. WilliamH (talk) 16:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "...was released in 2006 to mixed reviews" - needs reference. ✅ WilliamH (talk) 16:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Since all tables contain the same columns, I'd prefer to see them all forced to the same widths.


 * Support: I like to support don't you. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 20:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.