Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by A Star Is Born (2018 film)/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) 00:26, 24 April 2021 (UTC).

List of accolades received by A Star Is Born (2018 film)

 * Nominator(s): Gaga Nutella talk 01:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I was not active here during ASIB era, but recently I have done some edits to improve and finally promote this list. It is very comprehensive, listing down all notable awards with reliable sources. I talked to Debyf, one of the top editors and he agreed to this nomination. A special thanks to him, IndianBio and Arlandria Ff for their effort to keep it updated during that time. Gaga Nutella talk 01:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * With no evidence to suggest otherwise, I'll assume good faith that File:CMiks - A Star is Born table - CCA 2019 01 13 (cropped).jpg is the uploader's own work as claimed.
 * The lead should mention by name which BAFTA and Grammys it won
 * iHeartRadio is one word instead of two
 * Don't italicize "E! Online" (which should just read as E!), Wiwibloggs, or ASCAP
 * Not sure whether "Awards Circuit" or "Next Best Picture" should have italics
 * Göteborgs-Posten should be italicized

This is pretty close to being FL-material. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:44, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * thank you so much for your review. All fixed! Gaga Nutella talk 19:27, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

My pleasure. I now support, and the media review passes as well. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:18, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * "which was unprecedented in the award's history" => "which was unprecedented in the awards' history" (it refers to the history of the British Academy Film Awards, not of a singular award)
 * There are some issues with the sorting on the recipients column - everything starting with a quote mark sorts at the top, whereas the quote mark should be disregarded and it should sort based on the first actual word. Once you get beyond all the listings for the film's title, I can't figure out what's going on at all.  Steven A Morrow sorts first, when that should be under M.  Then after Erin Benach there's one entry for Bradley Cooper, which comes before Jay Cassidy and is separated from the rest of his entries.  After Matthew Libatique there's one listing for Mary Vernieu, which should be under V.  Karen Murphy and Ve Neill sort before Alan Robert Murray.  Right at the end, after P. Scott Sakamoto, there's randomly one more entry for Steven A. Morrow and one for Tom Ozanich.  Can you check all the sorting?
 * Sorting on the result column gives Won > Runner-up > Nominated > 10th > 5th > 4th > 3rd > 2nd. I would suggest that the numbered places should come before "nominated", and they should definitely sort in the correct numerical order.
 * That's what I got on a first pass...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * thanks for your review. I have changed the apostrophe and the result column is right. On the second point, I believe it is a Wikipedia's problem, because if you take a look at other lists, like this or this one, they are FL but with this same problem. So I don't know how I can fix it, sorry. Gaga Nutella talk 03:03, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The fact that other lists might have slipped through FLC with issues isn't really relevant. You need to use sorting templates to make things sort in the right order.  So anything that starts with a quote mark should be changed eg "Shallow" needs to be "Shallow" .  As far as names go, Steven A. Morrow is wrong, because the A is not part of his surname, so it should be Steven A. Morrow .  The listing for Tom Ozanich which jumps to the bottom is because no sortname template has been applied to his name at all and I suspect some of the others are the same.  Hope this helps....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it's done, please check again. By the way, I have one curiosity. Why is it sort by their surname and not their name? Gaga Nutella talk 18:05, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It's the standard way in which people's names are sorted. In the index of a book or in the telephone directory, for example, people's names are ordered based on their surname, not their forename -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:11, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * good to know. Thanks for your review, I hope you can support now. Gaga Nutella talk 18:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorting on the result column still needs looking at...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:01, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I've just checked and it's working pretty fine. First the numbers (2, 3, 4, 5 10), then nominated and then won. Gaga Nutella talk 19:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It should go Nominated > 10th > 5th > 4th > 3rd > 2nd > Runner-up > Won. If "Won" is at the bottom then the numbers should go in descending order, not ascending (i.e. counting down towards finishing in 1st place).  Also, "nominated" is the lowest value, because that's not as good as finishing 2nd/3rd/etc, so it should come first -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:31, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I took a look at other FL lists and they're the same as this one. It's sorted in alphabetical order, not for what it's worth, just like the rest of the columns. So starting with the numbers, going to the letter N then W is correct. Gaga Nutella talk 21:03, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Well, personally I don't think it is correct, but I'm not going to make a big deal out of it. Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Just one minor comment: I don't think everyone would know what RTHK stands for so list the publisher as "Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK)".--NØ</b> 06:17, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Support from MaranoFan
 * well noticed! Thanks for your support. Gaga Nutella talk 14:52, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:27, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * From a quick Ctrl+F search, it looks like there are only 93 wins, but the infobox lists 106. Double-check the infobox to make sure it matches the table. This was my mistake – I forgot about runner-up, 2nd/3rd/... place, and so on – so the comment is irrelevant.
 * Remove the Gold Derby Awards; they do not meet the notability guidelines (see Articles for deletion/Gold Derby Awards (2nd nomination)).
 * Source 8 is misrepresented (at least when I read it); Alfonso Cuarón received six nominations for Roma, so implying that Cooper's five nominations were a record is misleading. It was simply the combination of awards that was unique. Reword this so that the wrong implication isn't there.
 * The Category column has sorting issues for "Behind the Scenes" Promo, The Best Selling Soundtrack Album (should sort by "Best"), and The Don LaFontane Award for Best Voice Over (should sort by "Don").
 * For the Clio Awards and Promax Awards, it would make more sense to use templates like Won in the Result column instead of writing "Gold Winner" in the Category column.
 * Guild of Music Supervisors Awards and PGA Awards don't need to specify "for A Star is Born".

Support – Great work! RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments, very necessary. I have addressed all of them. Gaga Nutella talk 15:11, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Table accessibility review (MOS:DTAB): The table is missing a caption.
 * Please add `|+ table caption` to the top of the table, or if it would duplicate a nearby section header you can visually hide the caption as `|+ `
 * -- Pres N  14:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Hey, I've added the caption. Thank you! Gaga Nutella talk 17:49, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Source review passed; promoted. -- Pres N  22:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)


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