The topic includes Leonardo DiCaprio's biography, filmography and accolades list. He owns a production company, which has not been started yet (in Wikipedia). The production company can be included when/if created. --Frankietalk 10:36, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Director Comment - This user has been indef blocked due to editing warring. Struck out his vote. Sorry Frankie. GamerPro64 14:27, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! Quite sad to see the user being blocked. Quite nice editor they were. -- Frankietalk 15:52, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from SNUGGUMS
From DiCaprio's main article, I'm not too sure about the following references:
"Heavy.com"
"Highbeam.com"
"Collider.com"
Additionally, Forbes should be italicized while Box Office Mojo and "RogerEbert.com" should not. "Daily News (New York)" should read New York Daily News, "Deadline New York" should read Deadline.com, "HollywoodReporter.com" should read The Hollywood Reporter. I'm going to oppose for now. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:38, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All resolved SNUGGUMS. As for Highbeam Research, it's a high quality source used to access newspapers. -- Frankietalk 08:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can now support. Thank you and Ssven2 for also explaining Highbeam. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:14, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! :) -- Frankietalk 16:06, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Ssven2
I have helped solve some of SNUGGUMS' comments (the Box Office Mojo, RogerEbert.com, Daily News, Deadline and Hollywood Reporter ones). I would have to disagree on Highbeam as the article redirects to HighBeam Research, a very reliable source which is like an archive of newspapers, websites and magazines. Frank, as for Heavy and Collider, you can try to find more reliable sources than them. — Ssven2Speak 2 me 05:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Ssven2. You can provide your comments if you want. -- Frankietalk 08:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Main article
"The film eventually premiered at the 2001 Berlin International Film Festival, where it was well received by critics, with Time Out New York writer Mike D'Angelo calling it "the best film [I saw] in Berlin". DiCaprio's last film of the year 1995 was The Basketball Diaries, a biopic about Jim Carroll." — needs ref.
"he was awarded a Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Screen Couple for both incarnations the following year." — needs ref.
Since Raspberry is not considered an award, I have removed that.
"The following year, DiCaprio received his third Golden Globe nomination for his work on the film." — needs ref.
"DiCaprio received rave reviews for his performance and won a Golden Globe Award for Best Actor, also receiving another Academy Award nomination." — needs ref.
"For his portrayal DiCaprio garnered his seventh Golden Globes nomination." — needs ref.
"DiCaprio's performance in The Departed was applauded by critics and earned him a Satellite Award for Best Supporting Actor. The same year, both the Golden Globes and the Screen Actors Guild nominated DiCaprio twice in the Best Actor category for both of his 2006 features, and in addition, DiCaprio earned his third Academy Award nomination for Blood Diamond." — needs ref.
All done. Thank you. :) -- Frankietalk 09:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@FrB.TG: Thanks for resolving them. The topic has my support. — Ssven2Speak 2 me 11:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Although Razzies may not be considered awards, their non-existence cannot salvage critically mauled films. The Razzie statement(s) may be re-added with reliable refs; when Oscar winners Halle Berry and Sandra Bullock have accepted their Razzies in person, it is high time we consider them real awards. But the articles look otherwise good. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:38, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Kailash29792: Thanks for your comments. I have added the Raspberry Award back with a reliable source. -- Frankietalk 17:53, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome. Although the main article seems to have some bad prosing, I'll take care of that. But this Featured Topic Candidate still has my support. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking time to review it. :) -- Frankietalk 18:35, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support pending fixing the issues mentioned by other reviewers. Nergaal (talk) 17:50, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Delegates: it has now four supports. It's been more than a month. Isn't it the time for closure? -- Frankietalk 09:48, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with a consensus to promote to Featured Topic. - GamerPro64 02:16, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this topic meets the criteria, as over 50% of the articles or lists are featured and there are no obvious gaps. The topic is in keeping with previous topics of this nature such as York City and Ipswich Town. Thanks in advance for your comments. --NapHit (talk) 11:20, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Think I've rectified this now @Shudde:. Thanks. NapHit (talk) 12:02, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Meets the criteria, follows the well-established standard for football club FTs, and the articles are all up to scratch. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:40, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I wonder if the Shankly Gates make for a more striking image?—indopug (talk) 08:16, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're right @Indopug:, I've changed the image now. NapHit (talk) 10:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - an excellent topic -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:29, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This topic is a joint effort between user:Sturmvogel_66 and me over the past few years, and it is of course a component of WP:OMT. It's actually been complete for quite some time, but I haven't gotten around to putting it up here until now. The topic details all of the pre-dreadnought and dreadnought battleships built or planned by Italy from the 1890s to the 1940s. Thanks for reviewing the topic. Parsecboy (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - another amazing OMT topic. --PresN 17:48, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Director Comment - This nomination has been going on for nearly a month with only one vote for support. There needs to be more discussion here so we can get a consensus or this will have to be closed as failed. GamerPro64 15:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - per PresN. Hamish59 (talk) 13:09, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Question - FT or GT? An amazing amount of work has gone into this. Do I read the criteria correctly that it says 50% have to be Featured level? Maybe I missed something in the criteria? — Maile (talk) 16:14, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A GT - there is no separate WP:Good topic candidates, so all nominations fall under the "Featured topic candidates/[title]" format. Parsecboy (talk) 16:41, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I see that now. Well, I reiterate that this is an amazing amount of work since 2013. I've reviewed each article, and I support. — Maile (talk) 16:45, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - good representatives of what consistency in a topic should look like among the different articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llammakey (talk • contribs) 13:42, 10 September 2015
Support. Topic appears complete, and meets the criteria. All editors involved have done an incredible job here, and should be proud of this accomplishment. Great work. – Rhain1999(talk to me) 02:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 16:09, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is a high-quality, and so far the first of its kind, collection of articles encompassing a single state's components of the national Interstate Highway System along with the related business routes. If the contents of the I-96 subtopic are included with the above, there would be another 5 FAs added here giving this 50% featured content. As my editing continues in the future, the featured percentage will only increase as I have plans to take I-94, I-275 and I-675 to FAC at a minimum. --Imzadi 1979→ 06:15, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is also the first of three subtopics about the Michigan State Trunkline Highway System. The other two subtopics on Michigan's U.S. Highways and "plain" state highways will be coming to FTC/GTC later this year as FLCs and a few more GANs are completed. Once these subtopics are promoted, I plan a FTC using the system article and the four lists of roads in the overall system. (Pure Michigan Byway won't have its own topic.) Imzadi 1979→ 06:27, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Meets the criteria for a GT. Hopefully more articles in the topic can be brought to FA in the future so this can become a FT. Dough4872 13:43, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is no good reason to keep interstate 96 as a separate subtopic. It can be easily included in its entirety within this topic, as it does not appear that it could be a subtopic somewhere else. Nergaal (talk) 20:04, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Not sure about keeping I-96 as a separate topic or not. In the future, theoretically each interstate could get its own subtopic (provided they had two additional articles). In that case, I think it would serve well to have both interstates by each state as well as each route. This just happens to be the first time this has come up (to my knowledge). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:21, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
_starboard_bow_view.jpg){kind=small}
