Talk:List of accolades received by Shiva Baby
Appearance
![]() | List of accolades received by Shiva Baby is a former featured list candidate. Please view the link under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 20, 2022. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Shiva Baby was one of the most-awarded films not to receive an Oscar nomination in 2022? |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Best-of list removals per the "select" in header
[edit]Taking "select" to mean outlets with 1. international, national, or significant cultural distribution, and 2. a Wikipedia article that passes WP:NMEDIA.
Publication | List | Rank | Ref. | Removal reason |
---|---|---|---|---|
Athlone Advertiser | The best films of 2021 | 8
|
Small, local, distribution; article does not indicate notability. | |
The Commercial Appeal | John Beifuss's Top 20 of 2020 | 8
|
Local distribution; article suggests it is not the leading newspaper in the area. | |
Denton Record-Chronicle | Top 15 movies of 2021 | 15
|
Small, local, distribution; article does not indicate notability. | |
Pittsburgh Magazine | The Top 10 Movies of 2021 | 10
|
Local distribution; article does not indicate notability. | |
RogerEbert.com | The Best Films and Mini-Series of 2021[Note 1] | –
|
I think 160 unranked is too large in scope to be considered a best-of list. Kingsif (talk) 00:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC) | |
St. Louis Jewish Light | The top five Jewishish movies of 2021 | 3
|
Small, local, distribution. As the article suggests it is a significant Jewish newspaper, the media award entry remains. Despite its cultural significance, I think that the distribution is still too small to suggest its best-of list has impact. Kingsif (talk) 00:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC) Also, best-of list is "select", while other awards listed should aim to be complete and comprehensive. Kingsif (talk) 01:07, 16 March 2022 (UTC) | |
That Shelf | The Best Films of 2021: Courtney Small | 8
|
Article has been draftified. |
- Emma Seligman for Shiva Baby was listed as one of the Best Filmmaking Debuts of 2021 by Fort Worth Weekly.[8]
- Local distribution; article suggests it is not the leading newspaper in the area.
- ^ The top 160 selections are listed by release date.
References
- ^ O'Gorman, Ben (December 16, 2021). "The best films of 2021". Athlone Advertiser. Retrieved 2021-12-19.
- ^ Beifuss, John (December 17, 2020). "The Top 20 of 2020: John Beifuss throws out the rules to pick the best movies of the year". The Commercial Appeal. Retrieved 2021-12-19.
- ^ Barta, Preston (December 31, 2021). "Top 15 movies of 2021: Fatherhood, human connection at the center of year's best". Denton Record-Chronicle. Retrieved 2022-01-04.
- ^ Collier, Sean (2021-12-29). "The Top 10 Movies of 2021". Pittsburgh Magazine. Retrieved 2021-12-30.
- ^ RogerEbert.com (2021a). "The Best Films and Mini-Series of 2021". Retrieved 2021-12-19.
- ^ Buffa, Dan (2021-12-28). "The best Jewishish movies and performances of 2021". St. Louis Jewish Light. Retrieved 2021-12-30.
- ^ Small, Courtney (2021-12-21). "The Best Films of 2021: A Year in Review". That Shelf. Retrieved 2021-12-30.
- ^ Lin, Kristian (2021-12-30). "The Best Filmmaking Debuts of 2021". Fort Worth Weekly. Retrieved 2022-01-05.
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 20:49, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
( )
... that Shiva Baby is considered one of the best comedy, horror, queer, Jewish, debut independent films of 2020 and 2021?- ALT1: ... that Shiva Baby was one of the most-awarded films to not receive an Oscar nomination in 2022?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Zamia pygmaea
- Comment: I find alt0 to be witty from the implication of over-specificity; I have been cautious with the phrasing of alt1 as it is based on a source (here, oddly, that makes me somewhat cautious as I have not done the math on every Oscar-eligible film myself to 'check'). Article also nominated at FLC, but nothing in either set of instructions precludes this nom, too.
Created by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 23:45, 3 April 2022 (UTC).
- Page: While the list was created months ago, it wasn't moved from drafspace to mainspace until April 3, which is also when the DYK nomination took place, making it new enough. It is also long enough, having much more than just 1,500 characters. There is one image present in the infobox, which originates from a YouTube video using "Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)". Furthermore, the list is neutral, with everything being properly cited through the use of inline citations. As indicated by the copyvios tool (Here) copyright violation or other form of plagiarism issues are unlikely. Lastly, QPQ has also been done.
- Hook: Both hooks are less than 200 characters, making them short enough. Personally, I find both hooks interesting, although I might be inclined to go with the latter; ALT1. While the first one is also interesting, I'm note sure about the fact that it consists primarily of a string of adjectives used to describe Shiva Baby. The second one is better written, looking, and also more interesting, as it relates to the Oscars. Associating the movie with the Oscars is something that I believe makes the hook more interesting for a general and broad audience.
- Another issue with the first hook is that it apparently fails to meet eligibility criterion 3:B, which states that "each fact in the hook must be supported in the article by at least one inline citation to a reliable source, appearing no later than the end of the sentence(s) offering that fact. Citations at the end of the paragraph are not sufficient. This rule applies even when a citation would not be required for the purposes of the article". Granted, while Hook #0 is present in the article, it is more of a summary of the table and lacks a source at the end. Conversely, as you yourself state, the second hook is directly cited by a source in the article.
- @PanagiotisZois: I am happy to withdraw alt0 based on this. Kingsif (talk) 18:06, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Kingsif: I think that would be best. I'm sorry, I understand you preferred that hook over the second one. It's just that a hook using 6 continuous adjectives to describe the noun "film" is just too much. Especially when the second hook you wrote is so much more interesting. PanagiotisZois (talk) 18:13, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- No, don't worry about it! Kingsif (talk) 20:57, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Kingsif: I think that would be best. I'm sorry, I understand you preferred that hook over the second one. It's just that a hook using 6 continuous adjectives to describe the noun "film" is just too much. Especially when the second hook you wrote is so much more interesting. PanagiotisZois (talk) 18:13, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- @PanagiotisZois: I am happy to withdraw alt0 based on this. Kingsif (talk) 18:06, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Another issue with the first hook is that it apparently fails to meet eligibility criterion 3:B, which states that "each fact in the hook must be supported in the article by at least one inline citation to a reliable source, appearing no later than the end of the sentence(s) offering that fact. Citations at the end of the paragraph are not sufficient. This rule applies even when a citation would not be required for the purposes of the article". Granted, while Hook #0 is present in the article, it is more of a summary of the table and lacks a source at the end. Conversely, as you yourself state, the second hook is directly cited by a source in the article.
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/Symbol_voting_keep.svg/16px-Symbol_voting_keep.svg.png)
Categories:
- Wikipedia featured list candidates (contested)
- Wikipedia Did you know articles
- List-Class awards articles
- Low-importance awards articles
- Awards articles
- List-Class film articles
- List-Class film awards articles
- Film awards task force articles
- WikiProject Film articles
- List-Class List articles
- Low-importance List articles
- WikiProject Lists articles