Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Michelle Williams (actress) on screen and stage/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 archived by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:32, 18 August 2016 (UTC).

Michelle Williams (actress) on screen and stage

 * Nominator(s): Krimuk | 90  ( talk ) 06:34, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Michelle Williams is an actress who, despite several acclaimed roles, likes to keep a low profile. This listing of her stage and screen appearances has been well-cited, and I appreciate all constructive comments on its improvement. Cheers! Krimuk | 90 ( talk ) 06:34, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Please see the discussion at the article talk page. This editor has a long history of violating policy just to put a FA/FL under his belt. —Musdan77 (talk) 18:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: Delegates please note that if I was violating policy, I wouldn't have FA/FLs under my belt. is trying to insinuate that the FLC delegates who have passed my previous 21 FLs don't know what they're doing. This is just another bad-faith tactic by Musdan77, who has a history of attacking editors who write featured content. Look at the persistent disruptions that Musdan77 made at Emma Stone's awards list that eventually became an FL.  Krimuk | 90  ( talk ) 02:35, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I checked the whole discussion and can concurr that Musdan77 needs to WP:DROPIT. Being tag happy for the sake of it when you don't even understand the basic structure of lists is borderline disruptive. Further disruptions if reported by other editors should be taken to WP:ANI. — I B  [ Poke  ] 12:20, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Some of their edits were good suggestions. For example, there are redundancies: section titled Film has a second title called "Film roles of Williams" which can go. Same with other two sections. Why do you need 2 titles for each list? However I do disagree with the lead, it is of an appropriate length. Mattximus (talk) 01:22, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, one is a section title and the other is the table title. But yeah, that isn't really important and I have removed the latter. Cheers! Krimuk | 90  ( talk ) 01:54, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this nomination hasn't received enough comment after 2 months, and I'm going to have to remove it to keep the FLC queue moving. -- Pres N  16:46, 17 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.