Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of A24 films/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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of A24 films

Featured list candidates/List of A24 films/archive1

Nominator(s): Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:38, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In 2013, A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III became the first film distributed by A24. The first film they produced, Moonlight, won the Academy Award for Best Picture. I rewrote the Wikipedia List of A24 films to add every film they distributed and/or produced. One reference says when they acquired the rights to the film, another says when it was released. I went with a style similar to the one found in List of Dharma Productions films, which also features a brief summary of every film once it is released. I have expanded the list to FL standards and I hope it can become an FL. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:38, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

The note "also produced by" looks weird on its own, like there are words missing at the end i.e. also produced by whom? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:41, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

"The company also made a multi-year agreement that November with Amazon Prime where" - I would say "whereby" personally
The synopsis column looks a bit odd to me being centre-aligned. I think left alignment would work better, personally
Wikilink Kalgoorlie? Not a very well-known place IMO
"a young woman and her 5-year-old son Jack" - seems a bit odd to name the son but not the woman.......
Think that's it from me - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:42, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude:

Done I didn't shift the plot column due to the table's formatting. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 02:13, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:21, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little concerned by this list, namely that it's a list of films by a distributor, rather than a production company- I'm not as familiar with the film world as other forms of media, but is that really such a notable quality that it needs a list rather than a category? Do we have other examples of "films by distributor" lists, as opposed to "films by producer"? This leads to the second concern, that pre-pandemic A24 was pushing 20 films a year. With 2-3 lines per film, within a few years this list is going to be very, very long, even if A24 doesn't start distributing more films per year. Maybe that's okay, but it's a concern. --Pres N 21:45, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN: A24 is a production company. They also release films (see Category:Lists of films by studio). However, if you want the list to look shorter, we can remove the "Synopsis" column which is by itself already uncommon. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:25, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I get that it's also a production company, but it's only produced 17 dated films and 9 undated, out of about 110 and 17, so less than a quarter of the list is about its produced films. If being a distributor is considered a major-enough part of film production that they should get lists on par with "regular" production companies then that's fine; I was just surprised to see it as for books or video games a "distributor" is just a non-notable middleman that doesn't even get a category. --Pres N 16:41, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pamzeis

Not gonna screw this up hopefully

Per MOS:CONFORMTITLE, titles of works should be italicised in citations
TBA should sort after 2022 in #Undated films

Pamzeis (talk) 05:00, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis: done. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 15:48, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Pamzeis (talk) 01:06, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Gerald Waldo Luis

Congrats for the FA of Bad Times at the El Royale! This looks like a good FL, just a few lead comments. After that I'll support. Gerald WL 12:53, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Gerald WL 12:51, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

* "as a film distribution company in New York City"-- add "based" between "company" and "in"

Done. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 15:40, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Ex Machina" --> "Ex Machina (2014)"
"Room" --> "Room (2015)"

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Final two notes. In 2016, films distributed by A24 received seven Academy Award nominations; Amy won for Best Documentary Feature, Ex Machina won for Best Visual Effects, and Brie Larson was awarded Best Actress for her performance in Room. While Ex Machina is a 2014 film, it was not released by A24 until 2015.[2] Instead, would this work? In 2016, films distributed by A24 the previous year received..." Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 15:41, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that should work. Additionally, I think it could start with "In 2016, three films". Also the semicolon must be replaced with a colon. Gerald WL 16:26, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the long wait, didn't check the article to see this change has been done. Anyways that makes a support. Gerald WL 12:51, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image reviews –

All of the references are well-formatted.
~~What makes The Tracking Board (ref 191) a reliable source? I haven't heard of this site and it hasn't appeared in any candidates that I've looked at, so I feel like it's worth asking.~~ Other that that site, the sources appear reliable throughout.
~~Ref 12 (from The Numbers) is showing up on the link-checker tool as a possible dead link. Please double-check that the site is working.~~
The lone image was extracted from a Flickr photo that had an appropriate license, and is appropriately licensed itself, so no issues there. On an optional note, you might consider adding alternate text to the image for improved accessibility. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Giants2008: Ref 12 works for me and is not a dead link. The Tracking Board article is reliable because it is an "exclusive" report, and was the first to mention the development of 2019's Share [3]. The Tracking Board is also used in this featured article. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 16:27, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Those answers are satisfactory to me. I'd say the source review has been passed, along with the image review. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:24, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted. --Pres N 19:48, 30 December 2021 (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.