Wikipedia:Peer review/List of awards and nominations received by Heath Ledger/archive1

===List of awards and nominations received by Heath Ledger===


 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… I would like to have suggestions be made for the list to try and aim it to Feature list status. Any comments would be appreciated.

Thanks, --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC) :Note: Because of its length, this peer review is not transcluded. It is still open and located at Peer review/List of awards and nominations received by Heath Ledger/archive1.


 * Comments. I think the important qualities sought for such lists are: notable, comprehensive, reliable (sourced). The current colouring is (imo) tasteful and aids comprehension, the layout clear and tidy. My only suggestion for improvement would be inclusion of a short citation, official or critical, regarding the particular aspect of his performances that were considered decisive in wins, or grounds for nomination. I do hope this "pie in the sky" suggestion can be ignored if it is too much work, but it is the sort of thing that would make me "feel" the list was unquestionably featurable as an example of Wiki's highest standards. Even as it stands, I think the list is an example of excellence. Well done and thank you. Alastair Haines (talk) 22:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments from Brianboulton:
 * The lists look thorough and comprehensive, but I wonder why you chose this format, which is basically 30 mini-lists, the vast majority of which contain only one or two items? The information is very bittily presented this way, and it is hard to assess Ledger's career overall, with so many stops and starts. Had you considered a single, chronological listing in which the awarding body appeared as a column in the table? By using the sort facility in wikitables you could then examine the information in different ways; in chronological (date} order, or in blocks by awarding authority if you so wished. I believe that this would result in a much more useful list for the reader, but you may of course have reasons for thinking otherwise.
 * Well, I this is how the list looked before I began fully working on it.
 * The prose in the lead section needs a lot of attention. In the short first paragraph alone I found the following:-
 * Tense inconsistency: it should be "received", not "has received"
 * Done.
 * 16, not sixteen, per MOS
 * Done.
 * "several motion pictures": "several" is weasel - give the number. And "motion picture" sound awfully stilted (would you say "I saw a great motion picture last night"? Why not "films"?
 * Done.
 * Missing word: "...in the Australian crime Two Hands..."
 * Its supposed to be like that, but I added it.
 * What does "respectively" refer to to the end of this sentence?
 * The two categories are way different, but have the same "Best Actor" title in them.
 * "Acknowledged", not "acknowledge"
 * Done, but why is the "A" capitalized?
 * Inconsistency: "...another (singular) AFI and Film Critics Circle nominations (plural)
 * I think I got it.


 * The pattern of dodgy prose continues in the second paragraph, but I haven't time to pick up all the glitches there. However, it is most important that your lead is well presented. This is what people read before they get to the list itself, and if the lead is carelessly written it will affect their opinion of the list. Sorry I haven't time for more, at the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 12:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Review by 
 * Lead
 * Ledger's next feature garnered him an Academy Award, British Academy Film Awards (BAFTA), Golden Globe Award, and Screen Actors Guild Award nominations, for his performance as Ennis Del Mar in the 2005 film Brokeback Mountain. -- feature what?
 * ...film.
 * Ledger, however, received recognition from several North American critics' associations, winning the 2005 Las Vegas Film Critics Society, New York Film Critics Circle, Phoenix Film Critics Society, and San Francisco Film Critics Circle awards, all in the category for Best Actor. -- the however is out of place since this sentence and the last one are about related topics, so it should be something like In addition or Ledger also


 * Done.
 * In 2006 he starred in the Australian romantic drama Candy, in which Ledger received three Best Actor award nominations, including an AFI, Film Critics Circle, and Inside Film. -- (1)Comma after 2006 (2)at the end it should state either award or nomination


 * Done, but for the second one, its already stated that he received award nominations, not wins.
 * Posthumously he shared the 2007 Independent Spirit Robert Altman Award with the rest of the ensemble cast for the 2007 biographical film, I'm Not There. -- (1)Comma after posthumously (2)Remove the comma before the name of the film
 * Done.
 * His wins include an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor, a Best Actor International Award at the 2008 AFI Awards ceremony, for which he became the first actor to win an award posthumously, and the 2009 BAFTA, Golden Globe, and Screen Actors Guild Award for Best Supporting Actor in a Motion Picture -- there is too much inconsistency with the name of the awards, some say "Won Award A at the 55th annual ceremony" others say "won Award B" other say "won Award C" Be consistent, because "and the 2009 BAFTA" is much different than "a BAFTA in 2009" (2)The part of and the 2009 BAFTA should be split with a semi-colon or into a new sentence
 * I think I got it.
 * As of March 2009, Ledger has been nominated for 54 awards, and has won 33 awards. -- this should be at the end of the last paragraph, not by itself
 * See List of awards and nominations received by 30 Rock Never mind.
 * Tables
 * I'm not sure about the formatting, where did you get it from because I've reckon to see an FLC with this format.
 * Um, due to the fact that the ToC was long, the script suggested to make the content shorter, so I saw List of awards and nominations received by Christopher Walken and went with that format. If the format is wrong, I worked on this one; would that work? The only FL that I saw as an example was Judy Garland's, but that really didn't help.

--Best,  ₮ RU  C Ө   02:50, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I hope I got your comments. If there's more, please let me know. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * In 2006, he starred in the Australian romantic drama Candy, in which Ledger received three Best Actor award nominations, including an AFI, Film Critics Circle, and Inside Film. -- I don't think its proper to state these in this context. I don't think its proper like "a grammy" vs. "a Inside Film"
 * Do you have a suggestion?
 * Add award somewhere in the sentence to make it clear that they are awards. Like I said a Grammy is different and sounds proper than a Inside Film--Best,  ₮ RU  C Ө   22:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I hope I got it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I like the one in your sandbox a lot better, as it is the most recent common one that has come to FLC. I would just keep your old format handy just in case.--Best,  ₮ RU  C Ө   01:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I placed the table in the list, hope its alright. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with commentors above that Bluey can do better than Christopher Walken with a sortable table something like the following. Alastair Haines (talk) 02:16, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I also like this format.--Best,  ₮ RU  C Ө   22:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll see if I can work this out in my sandbox. Though, I'm not so sure if the actual awards should be the last category from the table. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I trust your judgment in ordering the columns Blue, mate. I think the only two suggested minor improvements over the Christopher Walken model are: 1. only one single table; and 2. sortable columns, so Awards and Years can be grouped by a reader depending on interest. Cheers. Alastair Haines (talk) 01:09, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I didn't create list Christopher Walken list, someone else did, and I have no intentions on working on it. But, that would be suitable for the user who wants to fully expand the list. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I have a little comment Blue. "in the categories for Best Actor, respectively" I think respectively has no use here? The sentence mentions only one category. --Efe (talk) 11:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Like I said, in another discussion, I was "experimenting" with the lead, that's why "respectively" was added. But, I've removed it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK. --Efe (talk) 05:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you know me Efe, I like to "experiment". ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 03:34, 21 March 2009 (UTC)