Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Inside Out (2015 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) 00:30, 5 August 2016 (UTC).

List of accolades received by Inside Out (2015 film)

 * Nominator(s): FrB.TG (talk) 20:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Another awards list of another fantastic film of 2015, which in my humble opinion, meets the FL criteria. FrB.TG (talk) 20:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Support Comments have been addressed, I looked at other similar articles and have found it to be acceptable. The list is well-written, detailed and complete, the writing is superb, and well deserving of FL status. Best – jona  ✉ 14:22, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. FrB.TG (talk) 14:35, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

I have been meaning to add comments for a while now, but it's just taken me some time to get here. After a quick read I believe the lead would really do well with some critical commentary, maybe just the RT consensus, as it reads a little bland and too factual. A single round up of the major aspects from any other reputed source could work too. Will add the rest of the comments in a short while. Numerounovedant  Talk  08:42, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * The lead is fine for an awards list, which can get repetitive as it only talks about awards it received. FrB.TG (talk) 11:50, 30 June 2016 (UTC) do you have any concern? FrB.TG (talk) 12:12, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay... I've been busy lately, however, the list looks good. I will go through it one more time before giving a final say. Numerounovedant   Talk  15:19, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The list looks in order to me, but, since I have not added much to the review so I think it's not a place where I should be giving a verdict. Good look with nomination though, good job. Numerounovedant   Talk  10:54, 12 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Support All my comments have been resolved satisfactorily. - Vivvt ( Talk ) 03:50, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated. FrB.TG (talk) 12:12, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Support can't see any issue. Yashthepunisher (talk) 09:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Yash! FrB.TG (talk) 11:27, 16 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Strongly Support: Since i am the creator of List of accolades received by Inside Out (2015 film) and all the relevant information (which has been rewritten) that i had provided, i don't see any problem it being a FLC candidate. Nauriya (Rendezvous) 15:29, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

*Need refs for the cast and plot of the film *Many of the entries in the awarding bodies in the award column are redirects to the actual article. Please fix.
 * Comments by Cowlibob
 * Budget should be production budget
 * We don't need to be that precise with box office figure to go to decimal points.
 * Strange to start a paragraph with as of. How about moving the Rotten Tomatoes sentence to bookend the previous paragraph. I would also rephrase it as " Rotten Tomatoes, a review aggregator, surveyed x reviews and judged y percent to be positive."
 * In the next sentence, "the voice of Poehler" sounds really odd. How about... "Poehler's voice performance received the most recognition from award groups."
 * Annie Awards are mentioned twice in the lead.
 * America Cinema Editors Awards should be ACE Eddie Awards
 * on rechecking I think I got them all. FrB.TG (talk) 09:29, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

*Ref 56 needs language=Danish as well as the publisher being Danish Film Academy Cowlibob (talk) 23:10, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Ref 27 has a typo
 * This is a better ref for Bodil Award nomination [].
 * Thanks - I have acted upon your suggestions. FrB.TG (talk) 08:08, 31 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Source review


 * Formatting: No issues
 * Spotchecks: checked refs 8, 26, 47, 71; all clear
 * Completeness: Refs all seem appropriate

Source review passed; this nom is good to go once confirms that they're satisfied their concerns have been addressed. -- Pres N  19:00, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * To confirm that the last comment has been resolved. Cowlibob (talk) 20:10, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Alright, passed. -- Pres N  20:17, 4 August 2016 (UTC)


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