Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/James Nesbitt 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 Giants2008 00:07, 29 October 2011 [1].

---

James Nesbitt filmography

James Nesbitt filmography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/James Nesbitt filmography/archive1

Nominator(s): Bradley0110 (talk) 17:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this list as a companion piece to the main James Nesbitt article and following my successful FL nomination of Robert Bathurst filmography this time last year. As with the latter, this list complies with WP:ACCESS standards in that it features defined sections, sortable tables where appropriate and alt text with the single image. The list meets the comprehensiveness portion of the Featured List Criteria as much as it can; parts of the list where the information simply isn't available are clearly pointed out for readers. Thanks. Bradley0110 (talk) 17:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:48, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Would prefer to not start with a single-sentence para, worth merging that into the second para. I've brought the 80s part of the first paragraph up to this line. Bradley0110 (talk) "which he got while " don't like "got" at all, can you be more eloquent? I can, how's "had"? Bradley0110 (talk) What's a "jobbing actor"? I don't get it, so I suspect others may not either. "Jobbing" is simply casual work but come to think of it, it could be slang, so "casual actor" it is. Bradley0110 (talk) "He 1997, he got his breakout..." Grammar fail, perhaps "In 1997, Nesbitt secured his..."? The erroneous "He" is more of a brain failure! I've changed "got" to "secured". Bradley0110 (talk) Ref 18 appears dead or not quite what you intended it to be... Before I moved citations around Ref 18 was to an issue of Country Life with no link, however I think you might be referring to the Irish News citation. A paywall seems to have gone up around the site so I've added a subscription note. Bradley0110 (talk) " he feature film lead debut" - what? Just more inability to spot basic errors before bringing the list to FLC. I shall shoot myself later on if the embarrassment doesn't kill me first. Bradley0110 (talk) " in more feature films" replace "more" with "additional". I have changed the whole sentence to "He has also furthered his feature film career by taking roles in..." as "additional" breaks the flow. Bradley0110 (talk) "and is filming a role" no, he's not filming it, he's portraying a role, surely? Someone else is filming it. I've just changed this to "has a role" Bradley0110 (talk) "he appeared in no less than five major plays" remove "no less than". That would make it five exactly, which I don't believe it is. Bradley0110 (talk) link the Troubles. OK Bradley0110 (talk) Many lines of the tables unreferenced. Don't forget that IMDB is not considered a WP:RS. IMDb isn't and has never been used as a source here, however I've added citations for roles not already covered in the BFI reference at the top of the tables (just 2010 and 2011 roles). Bradley0110 (talk) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:49, 29 August 2011 (UTC) Thanks for your comments. Bradley0110 (talk) 21:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Comments –

• Film: In this table, the Role column has a couple nicknames with quotation marks. Those roles aren't sorting in alphabetical order like the others. Not sure if this is the intention, but it's worth pointing out.
  • Thanks, I've sorted them now. I didn't sort the characters alphabetically by last name as it would be too confusing and complex to do it in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME. However, it now sorts by the characters' "real" names rather than nicknames. Bradley0110 (talk)
• In the Description column, the em dashes should either be made unspaced or turned into smaller en dashes per the MoS.
  • I've amended this to spaced en dashes. Bradley0110 (talk)
• Was the MySpace video uploaded by the film studio itself? If not, it needs to be questioned whether it is a copyvio on MySpace, in which case it shouldn't be linked here. Not wild about MySpace links in featured content anyway. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
  • The uploader channel name is De Novo Pictures which is the same production company that made the film. I added the link because I think it provides an additional resource for readers and researchers, particularly as this is a short film with an extremely limited screening. Bradley0110 (talk)
• Thanks for your comments, Giants2008. Bradley0110 (talk) 18:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 18:07, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Comments: Firstly, the tables fail WP:ACCESS, see MOS:DTT for information on this Secondly, from the few references I've looked at you don't use any cite templates, you need to fix this. Just so you know Cite news is used for refs from news agencies such as BBC, Guardian etc. Other than these quibbles it looks good. NapHit (talk) 22:52, 17 September 2011 (UTC) Can you elaborate on your first point please? Bradley0110 (talk) 11:09, 18 September 2011 (UTC) I've expanded the table captions for clarity now. As for using citation templates, there is nothing to "fix"; templates are used by some editors as a choice and have never been compulsory in articles. Bradley0110 (talk) 12:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC) Forget the citation bit just read the guidelines and its fine. I was unsure you didn't have to use citation templates so I apologise. I've edited a bit of the first table so you have an example on how to make the table accessible, as adding a caption was part of the problem but there were other bits that needed dong as well. NapHit (talk) 18:14, 18 September 2011 (UTC) Ah - it's the coding. Thanks for the demo, I've implemented it in the tables now. Bradley0110 (talk) 17:40, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

• Support NapHit (talk) 18:07, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
• Support Looks good to me. Jimknut (talk) 22:00, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
• Support This is ready for promotion though I have one comment. Why are there redlink to some unwritten articles and no links to others. Surely it should be consisent? All redlinks or no redlinks. ww2censor (talk) 03:03, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:RED I've left some pages un-red-linked because they don't meet notability guidelines so are unlikely to ever be created; the short films received only limited screenings and went unreviewed in national periodicals, whereas Too Late to Talk to Billy (and the other Billy plays for that matter) were landmark television productions that simply don't have WP articles, but ought to in future. Bradley0110 (talk) 17:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.