Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Javier Bardem 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 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Javier Bardem filmography

Featured list candidates/Javier Bardem filmography/archive1

Nominator(s): ~ HAL 333 18:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it provides a comprehensive review of Bardem's impressive work in film. I've worked on the introduction, which also mentions major awards he has won for his work. The article also includes a sortable list and is well cited. ~ HAL 333 18:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

;Comments

"garnered him a nomination for the Goya Award for Best Actor." - can't see a source for this
"the John Malkovich-directed The Dancer Upstairs and Mondays in the Sun." - ambiguous as to whether Malkovich directed both
"He was the first Spanish actor to ever win an Oscar" - the word "ever" is redundant and can be removed
"In 2017, He played" - unnecessary capital H
"opposite his wife Penélope Cruz" - no need wikilink her again. Also, her name has sprouted a diacritic which it didn't have before.
Any film title that starts with The (or El) should sort on the next word
Think that's it from me, great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:56, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! All of those have been fixed, but I have one question. Should I list the film titles in their original Spanish, or translate it to English, or include both? ~ HAL333 20:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I would say that a film should always be shown with the title under which it was released, unless it is universally known under a title in a different language (can't think of any examples of the latter but I am sure they exist.....) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. ~ HAL 333 16:42, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from MPJ-DK (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

;Review by MPJ-DK

As promised, since you did a review of my featured list candidate I will return the favor.

His IMDB page lists several TV shows among his credits, but they are not listed here? Is there an exclusion criteria that's keeping them off the list?
The titles that are in Spanish only - have they not been released anywhere with an English title? Is that why some have a translation and some don't?

More to come, these were just my quick glance observations of the tables. MPJ-DK (talk) 17:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MPJ-DK Thanks for pointing out the TV shows bit. I've included all that I could find reliable sources for. Strangely Tv Guide doesn't list any of them; I think some of them are very obscure and he wasn't even credited. I'm currently rewriting the lede to reflect his early TV career. On the Spanish titles, if they received a wide release in English-speaking countries, I gave them the translated English title. But many of his films, particularly his early ones, were only released in Spain.~ HAL 333 18:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HAL333 Support, the tables are now as complete as they can get for notable entries, I cannot find a problem with the prose. Great work. MPJ-DK (talk) 19:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Bloom6132 (talk) 04:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

Need a space between "Cruz" and "In 1993".
"The following year he appeared in Días contados (1994) and El detective y la muerte (1994)." and "The following year he starred in the Ridley Scott-directed The Counselor (2013)." Is the year in brackets really necessary for the reader to follow along? If you feel it is needed for consistency (as I observe you only omit the year when it is mentioned earlier, i.e. "That year he also portrayed Pablo Escobar in Loving Pablo"), then feel free to leave it in.
Rest of the prose reads well
Images utilized are licensed and tagged, with appropriate alt text.
When the newspaper already includes the city in its name (e.g. The New York Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, etc.), it seems redundant to use the location parameter (specifically refs 8, 13, 16, 21, 25, 26, 32, 36–40, 44, 45, 54, and 55)
On the other hand, when the location is not mentioned in the paper's title, you could include the city (but it's not strictly necessary). I'm looking at refs 2, 3 and 20.
Ref 2 – capitalize the "T" in "The Guardian"

—Bloom6132 (talk) 23:51, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bloom6132 All done. Thanks for pointing out the city parameter - it's something I was hesitant about myself. On the 2nd point, I think I'm going to keep the brackets in. I think there may be a slight precedent to do so (ex. the Featured List Tom Cruise filmography). Thanks again! ~ HAL 333 02:30, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support – all comments addressed and explanation for formatting precedent is reasonable. Looks to me like it meets all 6 FL criteria. Great work! —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I am participating in the WikiCup, and intend to claim points from the above review. —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:51, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - posting this here as I've haven't received a response from the same question I posed at the Naomi Watts filmography FLC. Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but is there a reason why filmographies have shifted from the film being the first column to the year? Going by the guidelines on MOS:DTT, would it not be more beneficial for visually impaired users to have the film in the row scopes rather than the year? Seeing as that is the more important info, in my eyes anyway, shouldn't they be structured the same way as discographies and accolades list? The guideline I have linked to all has an example table of a filmography that is in the style I mentioned. This seems to have been common practice judging by older nominations, is there a reason why this has changed? NapHit (talk) 19:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NapHit I'll try to answer that. I structured it this way as it is what I saw as the precedent. Note the featured lists Robert Downey Jr. filmography (promoted 2014), Tom Cruise filmography (promoted 2015), List of Amy Adams performances (promoted 2015), Morgan Freeman on screen and stage (promoted 2015), Jennifer Aniston filmography (promoted 2020), Lauren Bacall on screen and stage (promoted 2014), Michael Fassbender filmography (promoted 2016), List of Emma Stone performances (promoted 2017), List of Tom Hanks performances (promoted 2014), etc. Although about half or so featured articles do it the other way, I think it has become an issue of preference. No more than what type of table is used. To me, placing the year before the date just seems intuitive as that is how the list is ultimately organized: chronologically. If titles were the first column, alphabetical organization would seem more appropriate. ~ HAL 333 19:53, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer, HAL333. Of those lists you mentioned, Tom Cruise and Amy Adams had the layout I was referring to when they were promoted. I recall the discussion around this when the shift came at FLC, as I was a coordinator back then. From what I recall and what I understand regarding MOS:DTT and WP:ACCESS the reason the film came first was that it was used as the rowscope and this helped readers who were using screen readers. With the year as the rowscope, the row heading is defined as a year rather than the film and this is relayed to the screen reader. Seeing as this is a list about films, in which the films are the primary information and the year is the secondary, it stands to reason that the film should go first, as is the case with discography lists, which are essentially the same thing but for musicians. I've tried to find the discussion where this shift came about but I'm unable to find it. I'm not going to oppose over this because it's a wider issue but I'll leave my comment in case others wish to add their thoughts. I'm also going to leave a note on the talkpage at MOS:DTT to see what users there have to say, if they say it's fine then I'll happily acquiesce. NapHit (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NapHit, Most of the editors follow WP:FILMOGRAPHY. Which shows the year on the left. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 12:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review –

The reliability of the referencing looks fine, and the link-checker tool shows no issues.
All caps in the titles of refs 4, 5, 8, and 25 should be removed.
In ref 54, the first word of the publisher (the New York Times) should be capitalized for consistency with the other NYT cites. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:15, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Giants2008 Done ~ HAL 333 05:44, 31 May 2020 (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. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:12, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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