Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Mary Kom (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  Pres N  20:48, 23 September 2015 (UTC).

List of accolades received by Mary Kom (film)

 * Nominator(s): — Prashant 17:27, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because because I feel the list meets FL criteria. This article provides a listing of the awards and nominations received by the 2014 Indian biographical sports drama film Mary Kom starring Priyanka Chopra as the eponymous boxer. I hope to receive constructive comments for the same.— Prashant 17:27, 26 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Support .DoDung2001 (talk) 13:22, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Just a note for the delegates, that DoDung2001 has been indef blocked. Cowlibob (talk) 23:07, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeed, a sockmaster. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 19:04, 27 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Support: I can't find anything wrong with the list.
 * --Birdienest81 (talk) 03:17, 7 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Strong Support : Nice piece of work. Brilliant job and keep up your good work you are an asset to Wikipedia. Daan0001 (talk) 16:03, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Support: Good work on the list, Prashant. —  Ssven2  Speak 2 me '' 12:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Support:, congratulations on a job well done on this list. The image of Chopra is licensed CC BY 3.0 and is therefore acceptable for use here. The list conforms to the criteria laid out in Featured list criteria and its lede conforms to the criteria set forth in Manual of Style/Lead section. -- West Virginian   (talk)  04:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Wow, so many supports. I must have done something right. Thank you everyone.— Prashant 13:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments
 * The second sentence of the opening para needs to be rephrased for clarity.
 * Not sure if "while" and "whereas" can be used in the same sentence.
 * "the film was released on 5 September 2014." - where?
 * Is the TIFF held out of the world? &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 19:24, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Dont see the issue here? TIFF helds in Toronto? Also release refers to worldwide? What's going on here?Daan0001 (talk) 21:34, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Any suggestions ?— Prashant 07:40, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It was premiered at the TIFF on 4 Sep 2014 before having a theatrical release (worldwide if I'm right) the next day. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 11:38, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Tweaked it a bit.— Prashant 17:55, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * "The film received generally positive reviews from critics and was a commercial success" - This needs multiple reliable sources
 * "Best Film and Best Actress for Chopra" Comma needed after Best Film
 * "Dialogue of the Year" - ditto
 * This source, cited in the article, states the film received seven nominations at the 21st Screen Awards whereas the article says eight. Furthermore, 'Best Actress – Popular Choice' isn't verified by any of the sources.
 * See reference number 22. — Prashant 13:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm still not able to find. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 12:37, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Source number 23 clearly verifies it. After adding another source this became 23 as previously it was 22.— Prashant 17:44, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but the source doesn't say she won the award. Looks like it lists only the nominees. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 13:02, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The article does not claim her win for Best Actress Popular, she was only nominated and the source verifies it.— Prashant 13:38, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * My bad. But then, two of the sources which you've used says the film got only seven nominations, excluding the popular choice award. Looks like the category doesn't having nominations. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 15:59, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Popular Awards nominations are declared along with those Jury nominations. It's just that (you know) Indian media does not cover these things. I hope its clear now.— Prashant 11:54, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The problem is two of the sources doesn't include that cat. in the nominees list. They say the film received seven nominations. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 17:41, 20 August 2015 (UTC)


 * What makes 'Arab Indo Bollywood Awards' and 'Jagran Film Festival' notable ceremonies?
 * These awards are supported by secondary sources and the latter is even present [[List of accolades received by Queen (film)|in this

featured list as well]].— Prashant 13:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced. Would like to have the opinion of others. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 12:34, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Would you like to say something about this?— Prashant 17:44, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You need to look at Cowlibob's comments here. I hope its helpful.— Prashant 11:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I was pinged here. I shall simply state what I said in the other nomination. If the award ceremony is able to be redlinked. Per WP:REDLINK, it needs be verifiable and notable (i.e. meet WP:GNG). If it was covered in depth by reliable sources i.e. not just a rundown of winners and nominees so much that you could build an article on it (which is the reason for redlinking) then it should be included in the table of accolades. I haven't looked at these particular ones but I think if sources could be provided supporting notability then they can be included. Cowlibob (talk) 17:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The film never won a Bronze Horse, rather was awarded at the Stockholm International Film Festival Junior. This year's ceremony of the Stockholm International Film Festival is yet to take place.
 * Link the first occurrence of all publishers in refs.

&mdash; Vensatry (ping) 09:46, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Done and thanks for your inputs. It really means a lot.— Prashant 13:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Additional comment
 * What makes 'businessofcinema.com' a RS?

&mdash; Vensatry (ping) 15:15, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Replaced it with a TOI source.— Prashant 17:44, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Note to the delegates – Highly displeased with the nominator's behaviour, so not willing to continue my review. He first came up with this a week ago after I left my comments here, and now has labelled my review as silly. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 13:32, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note to the delegates - I didn't labelled his review silly but his one point. The film received 8 nominations at the 2015 Screen Awards, however, this user has an issue—why? 8 nomination are mentioned, and not 7 (according to him). The eighth nomination is cited by another source, and despite knowing that, he was going on and on. The list is perfectly cited by good sources. He even questioned things, which are already present in other FLs, something that is very frustrating. Plus, this user took more than 10 days to review this and was still not clear what he was doing. He could have stretched it to 21st of next month. I tried to resolve his comments politely, but this was the final straw.— Prashant 14:44, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You cannot pester somebody to review/re-visit nominations. If you go through the history, it would be quite evident that I wasn't abandoning your nomination. So you cannot offend me for not turning up. Your behaviour towards reviewers in FACs/FLCs is a well-known thing, I'm not surprised. &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 15:35, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Support meets the criteria. Harrias talk 07:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments The Rambling Man (talk) 08:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Image caption is a complete sentence so needs a full stop.
 * Spaced hyphens should be replaced with en-dash, per WP:DASH, e.g. ref 2.
 * What makes all the redlinked awards notable enough to be included here?
 * Yes they are notable as these awards are widely covered by the secondary sources and see the above discussion for more informatiion. Thanks.— Prashant 10:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * " in Ningbo City" our article just calls it Ningbo, and it's worth pointing out that this is in China.
 * "BIG Star Most Entertaining Actor (Film) Debut – Male" is "BIG Star" part of the name of the award? It doesn't appear in the other BIG Star award titles.
 * "Star of the Year Award – Female" appears to be called "Stardust Award for Star of the Year – Female".
 * Done.— Prashant 10:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Not done. Please check each one off.  The Rambling Man (talk) 13:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Done now. Thanks .— Prashant 15:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Please make sure all retrieval dates use the same format. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:44, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ref 7 title is incomplete. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:45, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Done and let me tell you all retrieval dates use same format. Thanks .— Prashant 12:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Delegate note - Prashant! (now Krish!) left a note on my talk page about this nom that I was replying to, but I thought I should put it here so that everyone can see it. He was asking why this nom is still open after 35 days, when there were 5 supports in the first week:


 * TRM hasn't returned to support or not. 35 days is not that long- while we'd like everything to be done in a month or less, the truth is that many nominations don't get closed until closer to 2 months. Finally, delegates do not just count votes- you had 5 supports in the first week, yes (one struck for being made by a sockmaster), but given that they had no actual review attached to them but were followed by extensive reviews by Vensatry and Harrias (and TRM), the only conclusion that I can reach is that they didn't actually review the list- they skimmed it at best and slapped on a support. I'd count that as more like 2 supports, given that I recognize a couple of them as people who've done actual reviews before. So the nom is really at 3 supports, one reviewer who left, and an unfinished review. And that's if we were just counting supports- which we're not; if all we needed was 4 supports and no opposes with no ongoing reviews, I could code up a bot to do the work for me. We're looking for actual reviews which end in support votes, not just counting bolded words. Bare supports followed by real reviews are not usually useful. Please pass this message along; the two areas we've been seeing this a lot in the past few months are music lists and Indian film lists- bare supports are not helpful when issues are present, even if the reviewer is acting in good faith; please spend 5-10 minutes going through the list in more detail, or else the !vote will likely be discounted. -- Pres N  22:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * What's the matter now?— Prashant 06:38, 8 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Comments by Dr. Blofeld
 * Delink China. MOS advises against linking countries like that I believe.
 * Are Priyadarshini Academy Global Awards and Stockholm International Film Festival Junior likely to ever become blue links? If so create them or delink them.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:13, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. — Prashant 18:42, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * If Priyadarshini Academy Global Awards are not going to be notable enough for Wikipedia, remove them. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:10, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't say we will never have a page here. I just can't go and create a page because I'm very busy right now. These awards are widely supported by secondary sources and have enough notability.— Prashant  05:00, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Support But I think you should make the extra effort to start the missing links. I'd feel happier it was notable if we had an article rather than shutting off the links.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:21, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll create those articles as soon as I have time.— Prashant 18:32, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Kailash

 * Remove consecutive links per WP:SEAOFBLUE.
 * Actually that occurs because the category has a large name. National Film Award for Best Popular Film Providing Wholesome Entertainment see.— Prashant 19:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Never mind. The problem was in the lead, with Indian biographical sports drama, where I unlinked "Indian". Kailash29792 (talk) 04:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)


 * "The film was premiered"? Remove the "was". It only works in cases like "was released".
 * Seems you have rectified it. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Why are there so many red linked awards? That should indicate their lack of notability.
 * No. someone told me to red link them so that someone could create a page. No problems with the notabilty. It was widely discussed above.— Prashant 19:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Good work unlinking them. Someone will create pages for those awards anyway. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)


 * "Ref(s)" should be (in syntax mode), Ref.References.
 * Refrences are in this syntax mode ( Ref(s) ), much like other FLs.— Prashant
 * It's good now. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Does any other awards page FL have something like "List of Bollywood films of 2014"? Kailash29792 (talk) 19:20, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. Yes, all Bollywood FLs has that link.— Prashant 19:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

With all my comments addressed, this article has my support. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Closing this nomination as passed -- Pres N  20:46, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.