Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Satyajit Ray filmography/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 10:01, 12 April 2013 (UTC).

Satyajit Ray filmography

 * Nominator(s): -  Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 19:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Satyajit Ray is considered among greatest filmmakers of all time and I am planning to get this list to FL status on the centenary celebration of Indian cinema on 3rd May 2013. I am nominating this for featured list because I believe article satisfies FL criteria. It has gone thru a peer review with the comments from User:Tomcat7, User:Another Believer and User:Crisco 1492. -  Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 19:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Support per my comments at the PR. Image looks fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:19, 23 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Support--Tomcat (7) 11:01, 23 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Support Appears to meet criteria.--Dwaipayan (talk) 00:13, 26 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The references look a little odd, "general" and specific". I'd rather you use those general ones as citations and all in with the references and then the bibliography underneath.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  13:14, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I have changed the references layout per your suggestion. -  Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 18:20, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Excellent job.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  09:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments
 * In the beginning, Satyajit Ray should be unbolded as this isn't the parent article
 * Done


 * The lead is not complete IMO. Apart from Pather Panchali, Apu Trilogy and Ashani Sanket I don't see other films being mentioned. The fact that three of his films submitted by India for Academy Awards (Best Foreign Language Film), the most by any director is not mentioned anywhere.
 * Three films were just submitted and not even nominated. Again, academy award submission does not add any value to his portfolio. so I don't think it needs any mention here or anywhere else for him. -  Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 13:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah but still they are important from an Indian perspective. This has more significance than a film being named by a magazine such as TIME. When that fact is included this could well be accommodated. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  02:56, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * "His Apu Trilogy (1955–1959) appeared in Time's All-Time 100 Greatest Movies" -> His Apu Trilogy (1955–1959) appeared in Time's All-Time 100 Greatest Movies in 2005. A similar list was released just a few months ago. Also this fact should be come before the last para since the last one talks about awards won by himself.
 * Done. Changed the flow. Also, can you guide to me to the link for recent listing? Content can be then changed accordingly. -  Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 13:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Recent listing I don't get what you actually mean &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  02:56, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You said "A similar list was released just a few months ago." I was considering that as a recent listing. Anyway, 2005 is added to the article for better clarity. -  Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 03:05, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Here is a link &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  07:31, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. -  Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 14:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * "Dadasaheb Phalke Award in 1984[23]"; Refs should come after punctuation
 * I don't see it.
 * References should come only after punctuation &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  02:56, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you mean the ref [23] should come at the end of the sentence like 1992.[23][24]? -  Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 03:32, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Exactly &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  07:31, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. Mind you, last three FAs use that format. -  Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 14:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The Atlantic Monthly -> The Atlantic or The Atlantic (Monthly)
 * Done
 * This being a magazine shouldn't it be in italics &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  02:56, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Missed that. My bad! Done now. - <span style="font:italic bold 11px Georgia, serif"> Vivvt  &bull;&#32; ( Talk ) 03:32, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Ref #9 has no publisher
 * Done


 * publisher=The Hindu is totally wrong. It should be either work=The Hindu or newspaper=The Hindu
 * Done


 * Ref #19 has no author
 * Done


 * Time is a magazine; using for quoting a material from it seems inappropriate to me

&mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  19:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Done

My concerns were addressed in the peer review process. Again, I am not terribly familiar with filmography standards, nor am I familiar with the subject, but I see no major problems with this list in terms of style, formatting, spelling, etc. I am not sure the languages need to be linked each time, both because of repetition and because commons languages do not need to be linked. I would support the promotion of this list as long as concerns raised by all other reviews are addressed. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Support all my concerns have been addressed.—indopug (talk) 05:55, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment:

Support With all the concerns raised by other users have been resolved, I find no other imperfections in the list. The article meets all the criteria of a FL. Amartyabag   TALK2ME  09:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Support Great work! ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛  Talk Email 10:23, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.