Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Toy Story 3/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by FACBot (talk | contribs) at 00:25, 14 July 2023 (List of accolades received by Toy Story 3 promoted to Featured List). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]
List of accolades received by Toy Story 3 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Chompy Ace 03:40, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After nominating List of accolades received by Toy Story 4 (created by me) to a featured list, I am nominating this (also created by me) too! Chompy Ace 03:40, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- "....finishing its theatrical run as the highest-grossing film of 2010 and the highest-grossing animated film of all time from August 2010 to March 2014" - last part reads oddly, as it sounds like you are saying that it finished its theatrical run as the highest-grossing animated film released between those dates. I think what you mean is "....finishing its theatrical run as the highest-grossing film of 2010; it ranked as the highest-grossing animated film of all time from August 2010 until March 2014"
- "Toy Story 3 garnered awards and nominations in a variety of categories with particular praise for Michael Arndt's writing. It garnered five nominations" - pick a different word so you aren't saying "garnered" twice in such quick succession
- Think that's it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FOARP
[edit]Going down the criteria I get:
- 1) Prose - good.
- 2) Lead - good
- 3) A and B both good, C I'm going to AGF except that maybe a time-limit should be given for the gross earnings if one is available (i.e., "as of 2023 it had grossed XXXX").
- 4) Good.
- 5) A and B both good.
- 6) Stable. FOARP (talk) 08:22, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- FOARP, C is good since it may be condensed wording, and it is used on such articles like List of accolades received by Dune (2021 film). This may be subject to the film's re-releases so time limit is not needed, especially List of accolades received by Inside Out (2015 film). Chompy Ace 09:18, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- My issue here is accuracy: as you say the film may be re-released so the number can go up in future (it's the re-releases that make this needed), so for total accuracy we should say as of what date the figure is accurate. FOARP (talk) 09:23, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- FOARP, done. Chompy Ace 09:33, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support FOARP (talk) 21:26, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- FOARP, done. Chompy Ace 09:33, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- My issue here is accuracy: as you say the film may be re-released so the number can go up in future (it's the re-releases that make this needed), so for total accuracy we should say as of what date the figure is accurate. FOARP (talk) 09:23, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pseud 14
[edit]- in a variety of categories -- in various categories
- with particular praise for Michael Arndt's writing -- I think praise pertains to reviews, so this should follow after the approval rating statement in the second para. Unless you tweak it to say that Arndt was a recipient of multiple awards or was recognized for his writing or something along those lines.
- Abbr of Ref should be Ref(s) to be consistent with how the full word is written Reference(s) in the table.
- That's it for me. Great work. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:15, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Pseud 14, done; I think for you second comment was addressed since I changed to "recognition". Chompy Ace 02:17, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Would also appreciate your input/comments with a current FLC. Pseud 14 (talk) 12:39, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from SNUGGUMS
[edit]From a quick glance at the citations, you shouldn't use italics for the following:
- Digital Spy
- Box Office Mojo
- IndieWire
- BBC News
- ABC News
- CBS News
- TV Tonight
- Awards Daily
- Anime News Network
I'll have a look at the prose later. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 23:49, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- SNUGGUMS, your comment I addressed is MOS:ITALICWEBCITE and its footnote. Chompy Ace 20:21, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking at how that bit says case-by-case basis, I don't see how that inherently means using italics for any of those is warranted as you seem to think. From what I've seen, they more often tend to be used for print works, their accompanying websites, or fully digital magazines/newspapers. Anyway, getting to the prose:
- How much did it earn within 2010 to become the year's highest grossing movie?
- The image caption's use of "awards" from "Michael Arndt received several awards and nominations" to be misleading when the table only shows noms that he lost. It's also an understatement to say "several" (suggesting 5-10 but it's still a vague term that's best avoided) when at least 11 could be counted.
- When discussing BAFTAs, it's worth saying how this won Best Animated Feature
- This neglects to mention Randy Newman winning a Grammy, making it feel incomplete
- While I won't mark you down for leaving out Saturn awards from the lead, it wouldn't hurt to add the wins from that.
Thankfully not a lot of issues. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:47, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- SNUGGUMS, partially done. I keep italics on websites within citation since MCU articles do that method. Your first comment is basically its initial release, including re-releases. The fifth comment I addressed is similar to List of accolades received by Encanto. Chompy Ace 02:47, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
EN-Jungwon
[edit]- Boston Society of Film Critics Awards for Best Film; the source doesn't mention this, instead it says that the movie was nominated for Best Picture
- Critics' Choice Movie Awards for Best Original Song; Should it be "Best Original Song" or "Best Song"? The source says the latter and a quick search shows that all featured awards and nominations lists say "Best Song".
- Golden Trailer Awards for Best Animation/Family TV Spot; According to the source Toy Story was nominated for this award at the 2010 award show too.
- People's Choice Awards for Favourite Movie: According to the source provided Toy Story did not win that award source (Ref 79)
That's all. -- EN-Jungwon 14:06, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- EN-Jungwon, done except for your first and third comments. The first one is the source I read carefully, stated that the film was a runner-up for Best Picture (title per that link), among others. The third one which mentions film 1 and 2 double feature (not 3); this is WP:UNDUE issue. Chompy Ace 00:41, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for clearing that up. Support. -- EN-Jungwon 03:13, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- EN-Jungwon, done except for your first and third comments. The first one is the source I read carefully, stated that the film was a runner-up for Best Picture (title per that link), among others. The third one which mentions film 1 and 2 double feature (not 3); this is WP:UNDUE issue. Chompy Ace 00:41, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Source review – All of the sources used appear reliable enough and well-formatted, and the link-checker shows no concerns. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:42, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Promoting. --PresN 18:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.