Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Priyanka Chopra/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 not promoted by NapHit 05:49, 30 December 2012.

List of awards and nominations received by Priyanka Chopra

 * Nominator(s): Pks1142 (talk) 04:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating the list for featured list candidate because Priyanka Chopra has won Several awards for her universally applauded performances. Chopra is one of the Best actresses of Indian cinema and a superstar too. There are very rare stars who can really act and she is undoubtedly one of them. Chopra's Awards and nominations list meets Featured list candidates criteria and after the peer review, It only got Better. I had worked hard on the list and It deserves to be a FLC.Pks1142 (talk) 04:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Quick comment: Names of awards ceremonies with the name of the magazines in them should have the magazine title italicized. For example, "Cosmopolitan Fun Fearless Awards" should be "Cosmopolitan Fun Fearless Awards" and "GQ Men of The Year Awards" should be "GQ Men of The Year Awards". — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  10:59, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Pks1142 (talk) 12:44, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * And in the section headers. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  13:13, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Done.Pks1142 (talk) 13:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Oppose on lead alone.
 * Don't link common terms like "India" or "United States".
 * Done. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "film debut with The Hero " -> "in The Hero"
 * Done. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Andaaz" what's this? Mentioned in the lead but not linked or explained.
 * Linked. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "several awards for" repeated, boring prose I'm afraid.
 * Done. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "a Filmfare Award in "Best Villain" category. She also became second and last woman to win Filmfare Best Villain Award. " you link the award the second time, which is odd.
 * Done. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * And you say "last" so you mean the category is now defunct? Or do you mean "most recent"?
 * "Chopra starred in commercially successful films like" -> Chopras has featured in commercially successful films such as...
 * Done. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Try to avoid things like "several" and "a few" as this is an encyclopaedia.
 * Done. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "she won every "Best Actress" award in India" some claim, are you sure you can reference this?
 * refrenced. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "From 2010-2012" see WP:YEAR and WP:DASH.
 * Fixed. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "for her blazing trails in " not encyclopedic writing.
 * Done. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * " 56 awards from 65 nominations." does not match the infobox.
 * Done. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "recognize" vs "organisation" please select a consistent WP:ENGVAR and stick with it throughout.
 * Adopted. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * IMDB is not considered a reliable source.
 * Removed. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * If you mention publications like The Telegraph, you should have location and/or publisher information so we don't confuse it with The Daily Telegraph for example.
 * Given. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Check all references have publisher information.
 * Checked. Pks1142 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Oppose
 * Miss World and Stardust Awards linked twice in the lead.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 08:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * July 18, 1982->18 July 1982 to maintain consistency.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 08:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Infobox image requires "alt text".
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 08:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Awards won" in the infobox and listed ones doesn't match.
 * Corrected— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 08:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "which made her second and last woman to win in this category (the category has been retired since 2008)" needs a source.
 * Refrenced.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 08:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "commercially successful films such as Mujhse Shaadi Karogi (2004), Krrish (2006) and Don (2006)" ditto.
 * Refrenced.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 08:43, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * India[3]: refs should come after a punctuation.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 08:43, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "BIG Star Entertainment Awards" should come before "Bollywood Hungama Surfers' Choice Awards".
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 08:43, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The infobox listing also needs to be sorted alphabetically.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 18:45, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Nominated work" -> Priyanka Chopra wrong.
 * Corrected.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * No source for Fashion Bollywood Hungama Surfers' Choice Awards.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 12:02, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * What makes sources like "Indiaglitz", "desihits.com", "indya.com", "pinkvilla.com", etc., reliable?
 * Explanation: DesiHits is a very reliable source, indya.com is an archive of Screen award nomination, Indiaglitz source is presented by a very well known author Subhash K. Jha and Pinkvilla is just showing the exact nominations list.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Five refs missing publisher information in Screen Awards.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 10:28, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Explanations for "World Music Awards" is unsourced.
 * Explanation is taken from its wikipedia article.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Why is "The Times of India" linked in ref #13 and not in others or ref #3. EIther link all or the first occurrence alone.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Why are "bollywood hungama", "bbc.uk." "rediff.com" italicised in refs.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)v


 * Overlinking in the prose part of certain awards.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:31, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Superstar of Tomorrow – Female" for Mujhse Shaadi Karogi is not verified by the BBC source. It shows only a picture of chopra receiving the award.
 * replaced.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * First two refs in "Cosmopolitan Fun Fearless Awards" are improperly formatted.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The Honours section is completely unsourced.
 * refrenced.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Why no tables for "Recognitions"? This being a list everything should be presented in tabular form.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 10:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Any reason for emboldening text inside "Recognitions"?
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 10:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Other Awards" count in the infobox and table doesn't tally.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 10:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * First Indian Actress to cast her foot impression in Salvatore Ferragamo Museum. This neither looks like an award nor a recognition to me.
 * removed.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 09:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * My biggest concern with this article is the quality of sources being used; a few sources doesn't seem like verifying the facts. Besides this there are a lot of formatting errors in refs and MOS issues. I did not go fully through the prose, table and check all the references. Given the number of concerns, I may have to oppose the list at the moment. &mdash; Vensatry  (Ping me)  07:05, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I somewhat Disagree with you regarding Its reliability, as I have used the most reliable sources found on the web. Yes, some sources are not that reliable But they are reliable enough to prove everything correctly.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 10:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm not a reviewer but have been asked to comment upon this list. It's looking a lot better since I first saw it, but could benefit from further improvement. These are my suggestions for changes to improve/expand the prose, which do not represent an endorsement for or against its listing as a featured list:
 * '''Comments from Baffle gab1978 (talk):


 * Header prose
 * General
 * Numbers smaller than ten should be written out in words, so use 'four' instead of '4' per WP:MOSNUM (but see 'exceptions'). I'm sorry I didn't notice this earlier!
 * done by me Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * 1st para


 * "Born in Jamshedpur India," - needs a comma between city and country; doesn't need a comma after 'India'.
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "After spending years in United States" - how many years? --> "After spending x years in the United States..."
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Chopra returned to India, she participated in" --> "Chopra returned to India where she participated in...".
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Chopra received a number of nominations for her part in Andaaz," - how many nominations? What was her role in it?
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "In 2004, Chopra won many awards for her performance in Aitraaz" - needs a comma after Aitraaz. How many nominations? What was her role in it?
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "(the category has been retired since 2008)" --> "..., which was retired in 2008" or "which has not been awarded since 2008" - avoid using bracketted statements where possible.
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Chopra has featured in commercially successful films such as Mujhse Shaadi Karogi (2004), Krrish (2006) and Don (2006) which won her a number of awards and nominations." - needs a comma between the film and "which". Why isn't "Don (2006)" listed in the tables?
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * 2nd para


 * "From 2010-12, Chopra received many nominations and won a few including a consecutive Apsara Award for Best Actress for Kaminey (2009) and another Filmfare Award in Best Actress (Critics' Choice) category for 7 Khoon Maaf (2012)." --> "From 2010-2012, Chopra received x nominations and won several, including two consecutive Apsara Awards for Best Actress for Fashion (2008) and Kaminey (2009), and another Filmfare Award for Best Actress (Critics' Choice) category for 7 Khoon Maaf (2012)."
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "In 2012, Chopra's first single In My City..." - needs quotemarks around "In My City" per MOS:QUOTEMARKS
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * 3rd para


 * "...for the inauguration function of Atlantis, The Palm." --> "for the inauguration function of Atlantis, The Palm, a luxury holiday resort in Dubai." or "for the inauguration function of a luxury holiday resort in Dubai called Atlantis, The Palm."
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "Eastern Eye ranked her at the top of their list of "World's Sexiest Asian Women" twice." --> "Eastern Eye twice ranked her at the top of their list of "World's Sexiest Asian Women."
 * Done. — PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * List


 * Bhaskar Bollywood Awards


 * "The Bhaskar Bollywood Awards are presented by Dainik Bhaskarfor excellence in Hindi Film Industry." --> "The Bhaskar Bollywood Awards are presented by Dainik Bhaskar for excellence in the Hindi film industry."
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Bollywood Hungama Surfers' Choice Awards


 * "Chopra has won two awards, both in Best Actress Category in two consecutive years.year." --> "Chopra has won the award in the Best Actress Category in two consecutive years."
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Filmfare Awards


 * "They are presented annually by The Times Group to honour both artistic and technical excellence of professionals in the Hindi language film industry of India." --> "They are presented annually by The Times Group to honour both artistic and technical excellence of professionals in the Indian Hindi language film industry."
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Indian Telly Awards


 * "The Indian Telly Awards are presented annually to honour excellence of professionals in Television Industry." --> "The Indian Telly Awards are presented annually to honour excellence of professionals in the television Industry."
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Lions Gold Awards


 * "The Lions Gold Awards is an annual accolade presented to Indian Film Industry." --> "The Lions Gold Awards is an annual accolade presented to the Indian film industry."
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * National Film Awards


 * "The awards are presented by President of India." --> "The awards are presented by the President of India."
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * People's Choice Awards India


 * "recognising Indian Film, Television, Music and Sports." --> "recognising Indian film, television, music and sports."
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Global Indian Film and TV Honours


 * "Hindi film & Television industry." --> "Hindi film and television industries."
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Recognitions


 * "In addition to achieving merit honours, Chopra has been recognised for her contributions and is the recipient of several achievement honours by various organisations." --> "In addition to the industry awards, Chopra has been recognised for her contributions to Indian cinema and is the recipient of several achievement honours by various organisations."
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * General comments - I think this list has improved a lot since I first reviewed it, and I'm glad to see that the suggested changes from reviewing editors have been implemented. Cheers, and good luck with the nomination, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 14:22, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank You for your suggestions.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 15:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Pks, you missed a few points in my checklist, which I've now fixed; please don't mark points as done when you haven't done them. I've also taken care of the WP:MOSNUM error in the header ('4' and '8' instead of 'four' and 'eight') which I added late, so please accept my apology for not noticing it earlier. Anyway my checklist is resolved. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Just a general comment about the article as I'm not generally a FLC reviewer...I don't see any issues currently as far as with MOS or prose. List has adequate lead and details in tabular format. I'll watchlist this page and see if any other outstanding issues are mentioned by more seasoned reviewers, but I currently Support this for Featured List. --MONGO 16:29, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the support.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 18:36, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Noted that I have retracted the support until further improvements are made.--MONGO 05:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

General comment: this level of comment on a list usually indicates that the list is not ready for nomination, so we should consider a withdrawal until the list is ready for review. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:22, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think so, your queries has been resolved. So, pls don't point fingers towards its nomination. I know it was a bit unready but know, its completely ready for passing FL.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 18:36, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe what The Rambling Man is indicating is that there were numerous issues (meaning more than usual) that they and others had with the list...but I concur that those issues seemed to have been addressed. If The Rambling Man has further issues it is probably because he is a well seasoned reviewer (which he is). So, is the suggestion to withdraw based on other things that need correction, or just that there were so many to begin with?--MONGO 19:33, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't expect nor want candidates here which attract ten times as many comments as I see at a peer review. That's what WP:PR is all about.  Before lists are nominated here, they are supposed to be of a minimum quality such that we're not picking up silly things like poor English, poor punctuation, poor MOS compliance.  If I can spend the time, I'll give the list one more look, but if I find too many more issues, I'll archive this nomination and recommend you take it for some peer review, and quality control elsewhere, before returning to FLC.  The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The numerous issues haven't all been addressed, as is evidenced below. The award counts in the lead and infobox aren't even correct, and aren't that close to being correct. How two supporters can miss that, I will never know. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 23:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid to say that we will have discount a number of supports from reviewers who clearly are not even capable of seeing the basic failings. This extends beyond just this nomination.  For some time I've been worried about "friendly supports" going on here at FLC.  I think we need to go back to the drawing board.  Clearly a number of our reviewers are not able to review lists against the criteria adequately.  The Rambling Man (talk) 23:33, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I stated above that I was watching this, but based my support on the then current issues that had apparently been addressed. But I've retracted that support since it is now more apparent to me that more issues need to be addressed. I am actually a well seasoned FAC reviewer and have been the primary author of 8 FAs, but far less well versed in examining FLCs. In the past month I have been involved in 3 FAC's reviews, one other FLC review and am assisting another get an article through GAN and one more ready for PR. It would be nice if I could contribute to FLC's in the future but if I'm going to be insulted by more seasoned FLC reviewers, then there isn't any reason to bother with it. I had no qualms about changing my support to an oppose if there was further explanations.--MONGO 05:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Support This list meets the criteria for FL. It is Well-crafted and I don't see any issues with its prose or lead . Good work.Green Parakeet (talk) 18:57, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Oppose – Sorry, but I do see issues with the prose in the lead. To respond to one of TRM's points above, the list did have a peer review that was closed awfully early, before I had an opportunity to respond to a talk page request. Had I been able to review earlier, some of the basic glitches that prevent this article from meeting FL standards could have been weeded out before this FLC.
 * The following part is awkwardly written: "with the nominations categories mainly ranging from Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress for her critically acclaimed performances." I've never been a fan of the "with + -ing" type of sentence structure, and the "ranging from Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress" doesn't make much sense. This could use a re-write.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "Chopra won four awards from eight nominations for her performance in Aitraaz including the Filmfare Best Villain Award which made her second and last woman to win in this category". Needs more punctuation (at least one more comma) and a "the" before "second".
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "which won her a number of awards and nominations." A more precise number would be welcome here.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "by the trade journal, The Hollywood Reporter". Remove the comma and italicize the journal name.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "at Shanghai International Film Festival for her contribution to cinema." Needs "the" before the festival's name.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * En dash needed in "From 2009-2012".
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "including two consecutive Apsara Award for Best Actress...". The award needs to be made plural here.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "and another Filmfare Award for Best Actress (Critics' Choice) category for 7 Khoon Maaf (2012)." The word "category" doesn't need to be here and should be taken out.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "As of December 2012, Chopra has received 56 awards from 61 nominations." I count 50 awards and 73 nominations from the individual listings in the infobox. We can't be promoting lists that are giving an incorrect award count, in the lead and infobox.
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Second word of the Other Awards heading should be decapitalized in the article body and infobox. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 23:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Done.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 04:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I somewhat disagree to your allegations over no. of nominations and awards. 73?? Are you, counting the CRITIC'S or JURY award as nominations. They are not nominations. They were directly given. I had not included the pending nominations. Pls, don't confuse with those at all. I do confess that this has many comments which is unusual for this kind of page. Sorry for that but I don't see further problems with prose and lead.— PKS: 1142  · (TALK) 03:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose - I tend to agree with Giants2008. The PR was closed too early and I too didn't got any chance to review the list. Numerous issues have been pointed out and most of them are addressed. But I feel that other issues do exist and a second PR is what I advise to start. For now, I don't see this FLC passing so I'd suggest withdrawal. Go for another PR and ask for more input and then go for the second nom. Since many editors above have not changed their stand in oppose and the feel that I get about issues with the prose and list, I'd oppose this. It is also tagged for being an "incomplete list" which is enough to strongly oppose but I believe that it isn't that far away from FL status like most of incomplete lists.  TheSpecialUser TSU 04:26, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Withdrawal Thank you and sorry. I withdraw the list from FLC. A PR would be conducted as soon as I can. Please, Help me on the PR and thanks to all you amazing people.— PKS: 1142   · (TALK) 04:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)


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