Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by 24 Oras/archive1


 * 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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 16 March 2023 (UTC).

List of accolades received by 24 Oras

 * Nominator(s): Chompy Ace 13:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I am nominating this list because I reworked the accolades table from the 24 Oras page, added more sources and archives, and reached above the 50k size. Chompy Ace 13:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Comments

 * "It enjoyed consistently high viewership" - past tense? Does it not enjoy such viewership any more?
 * Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:51, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Issues fixed. Chompy Ace 09:29, 10 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support - that was easy :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:36, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Comments by RunningTiger123
— RunningTiger123 (talk) 16:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Infobox total for nominations seems to be one off
 * "English: 24 Hours" → "English: 24 Hours"
 * "to be accessed in the online video platform" – This sentence feels clunky to me. If it was the first to be streamed on TikTok, just say that instead of using awkward synonyms.
 * Issues fixed. Chompy Ace 20:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The infobox total is now off by two – I think you went in the wrong direction. But that's small and I'm good to support now assuming that will be fixed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:19, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Dank
Support - as per above. Idiosincrático (talk) 00:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
 * Checking the FLC criteria:
 * 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table.
 * 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
 * 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
 * 3b. The UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but I'll check back after the source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
 * 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
 * 4. It is navigable.
 * 5. It meets style requirements.
 * 6. It is stable.
 * Support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 04:27, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Source review passed; promoting. -- Pres N  00:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.