Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Last Week Tonight with John Oliver/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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC).

List of awards and nominations received by Last Week Tonight with John Oliver

 * Nominator(s): MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Known for being the sources of such iconic things such as Mickey Mouse, "Donald Trump", "SLAPP Suits", Our Lady of Perpetual Exemption, and the John Oliver Memorial Sewer Plant, Last Week Tonight is one of the most iconic late-night shows of our time. Excited for everyones comments! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

EN-Jungwon
That's all. --  EN  - Jungwon  10:57, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * In the infobox the total number of wins listed is 56 but adding every individual win listed in the infobox gives 58 wins. But in the awards and nomination table, there are 57 wins mentioned.
 * Same as nominations. Infobox says the total is 127. Adding everything mentioned in the infobox gives 132.
 * In the lead, the second paragraph it says 61 Primetime Emmy Awards (21 wins). In the infobox, Primetime Emmy Awards has 26 wins but in the main table, I counted 25 wins.


 * I think I forgot to include "pendings" in the noms- my bad, it's been recounted. Thanks for your review! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Forgot a ping for @EN-Jungwon. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Support --  EN  - Jungwon  01:55, 27 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * "HBO announced the comedian" => "HBO announced that the comedian"
 * There's a 2023 Primetime Emmy row with a blank "nominee" field
 * That's it, I think! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:39, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @ChrisTheDude Fixed, and the empty cell is because the nominees have not yet been announced- added a statement to clarify that. Thank you for the review! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. In that case I would suggest changing the wording to "individually named nominees not yet announced", as I spent a few moments thinking "how do they know that the show has been nominated if nominations have not been announced.........?"  But then I am a bit dumb........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:54, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @ChrisTheDude That makes more sense- fixed. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:05, 1 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Pamzeis
Screwing something up is an option, so tell me if that happens Think that's it from me. Ping me in any replies! Pamzeis (talk) 09:56, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * "The half-hour-long show was created by Oliver, who also serves as an executive producer," — sounds a bit awkward. Can it be reworded?
 * I just cut it, since the exec producers are already mentioned below. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph is a bit confusing for me. It seems to jump from point to point... so, basically, this is what I'm reading (ignoring the opening sentence because I want to): . Can it be reorganised with a more..... um, what's the word....... I'm thinking "cohesive", but that's not right. Um... I think you'd get my point? Lemme know if you're confused because I definitely am.
 * I see what you mean- shuffled some things around, let me know what you think now. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) <small style="font-size:40%;">(still no) 11:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * "received critical acclaim" — this is sourced to Metacritic from what I'm seeing, which gives it a score of 76. However, 76 is "generally favourable reviews", not "universal acclaim", so I think a source that explicitly states it received critical acclaim will be needed.
 * I can't find any other sources that state "critical acclaim"- the number of reviews is surprisingly limited, particularly since rotten tomatoes has no critics score up. Changed the sentence appropriately. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:40%;">(still no) 11:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Think I've gotten everything. Thank you very much for the review! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:40%;">(still no) 11:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. BTW, I'd appreciate any comments at this FLC. Pamzeis (talk) 12:08, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Source review — pass

 * Sources are all highly reputed and compliant with WP:RSPSS, Deadline Hollywood and The Hollywood Reporter are the main ones used and they are both okay.
 * Spotchecks passed.
 * The source review is an easy pass. Congrats on the nomination going really well! I need a prose review on my Julia Michaels discography FLC if you're ever up to it. Cheers!--<b style="color:purple">N</b><b style="color:teal">Ø</b> 16:24, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Question for coords: May I open another candidacy, since there's three supports and a passed source check on this? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) <small style="font-size:66%;">(also not me) <small style="font-size:40%;">(still no) 00:32, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * This director says yes you may. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Image review – The lone image used in the article is the title card, which is public domain because it consists of simple text. It also has alt text provided, which is nice. No problems here that I can see. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Giants2008 ( Talk ) 21:17, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.