View text source at Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Arshad Warsi, roles and awards/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 archived by Crisco 1492 13:11, 21 July 2015 [1].

Arshad Warsi, roles and awards

[edit]

Arshad Warsi, roles and awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Skr15081997 (talk) 10:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arshad Warsi has been in the Hindi film industry since 1987 but it was only in 2003 that he won fame for his role in Munna Bhai M.B.B.S.. Since then he has won several awards for his acting skills. This list presents all his film credits, awards and nominations.Skr15081997 (talk) 10:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from FrB.TG
  • I don't see a need to add three images of him, all taken during the same time.
Removed 2 from the filmography section.
  • Why is it that you've not included a "Director" column in the table?
If an actor-director collaboration is really noteworthy, then it is mentioned in the lead. Adding separate column for director would increase total width. I have followed User:Cowlibob on this. An actor's direct contribution to a film is his/her respective role. Almost all the filmography websites list film's name, year and role. On WP, we provide 2 more columns–notes and ref(s). Had he been a director/producer then a different format would have been followed as in Satyajit Ray filmography.
Yeah, I know. Not a requirement, just a suggestion.
  • "and reprised his role as Circuit in Munna Bhai M.B.B.S. in its sequel Lage Raho Munna Bhai" - grammatical error.
Corrected
  • "Warsi also hosted the first season of the reality television show Big Boss, for which"
Added
  • Don't restrict the awards to only Filmfare in the prose as it's not just a filmography, but also awards list.
All awards and nominations have been mentioned in the lead.
  • "he played a lawyer in the National Film Award-winning comedy" - "National Film Award-winning" is WP:UNDUE.
Removed

Please have a look at this. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work. I now support. --FrankBoy CHITCHAT 12:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@FrB.TG: Thanks for reviewing. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 12:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 20:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
*I think the prose of this list could do with a thorough peer review. In its current state, it merely chronologically lists all of Warsi's films in a rather dry fashion, which doesn't make for a particularly engaging read (e.g. "The following year, he [did something]. Two years later he [did something else]. In the same year, Warsi [did another thing]. In 2013, he [did something else]"). With the exception of the ones for which he won awards, it's difficult to see which of his roles are the notable and why. Is there any significance in his hosting of Razzmatazz, for example, or is it just something else that he's done?
Copy-edited
  • Certain years are repeated quite frequently in the lead. "2003", for example, is repeated three times in the sixth sentence.
Fixed
  • There are three citations in the first half of the first paragraph, but then none from there on. This is an issue for me.
I have added 6 citation to the 2nd para.
  • What's the deal with Jeetenge Hum? The Year column suggests that it was released in 2001, but the reference in the table is from 2005 and implies that, at that point, the film had yet to be released. Is there any other information available about the film?
It released in 2011. A source for the same has been added.
  • Unless the title of the programme actually was "Bigg Boss (season 1)", this should probably just be "Bigg Boss".
Done
  • I believe that, for page ranges, we use en dashes rather than hypens (e.g. "47–51" rather than "47-51").
Done
  • The awards and nominations table requires rowscopes in order to meet MOS:DTT.
Done
  • The Year columns might be better centre-aligned.
Done
  • {{IMDb name|0451174}} -> {{IMDb name|0451174|name=Arshad Warsi}}
Done
  • "Arshad Warsi's Official Website" -> "Arshad Warsi's official website"
Done

In its current state, I don't feel that this article yet meets the FLC, so I wish all the participating editors the best of luck in improving it. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 09:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  • The very first item listed in the WP:Featured list criteria is WP:Naming conventions, which says, in part, to "not use titles suggesting that one article forms part of another". A title such as "Arshad Warsi, roles and awards" suggests to me that this article is a subsidiary to the main Arshad Warsi article, and many other editors have expressed similar concerns about this particular title format (see, for example, User:sroc's comprehensive reasoning here). Therefore, I believe that this title violates WP:Naming conventions and that thus the article does not currently meet the FLC.
A Thousand Doors, the new title is List of roles and awards of Arshad Warsi.--Skr15081997 (talk) 16:12, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that, while I have no objections to titles of the format "List of roles and awards of [name]", there are editors who do. If this article were promoted to FL under its current title, I'm not convinced that it would stay there for very long. I feel that the community need to reach a consensus on what are appropriate titles for list of this type before we promote anymore to featured status. I'm afraid to say that my oppose stands. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 20:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of community consensus isn't a good reason to oppose.--Skr15081997 (talk) 04:57, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing in sroc's reasoning that is applicable here (or anywhere else, for that matter) and your agreement with one user's opinion means nothing in this context. Indeed, quite the reverse, as the consensus was against him there and in similar discussions. The title format "Name, roles and awards" is entirely acceptable, here and elsewhere, and an oppose based on such an opinion holds no water. (To clarify, although I am an FL delegate, I will not take part in closing this candidacy to avoid the question of COI on this point.) It is a great shame that the title has been changed because of ther bullying stance, and a greater pity with it is such a poor choice: the double "of" is utterly jarring. Whay was a perfectly good title changed for a poorer substitute? - SchroCat (talk) 11:35, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have compared this article to the FLC; I do not believe that it meets them. That is why I am opposing. Sroc was certainly not "one" user. I count over a dozen editors who have, at some point or another, raised objections to this particular title format:
  1. "The title seems very ungrammatical to me"
  2. "The title bothers me as well" (NB. This user went on to support John Gielgud, roles and awards becoming an FL)
  3. "Comma here may imply that we are speaking about John Gielgud, some roles and some awards"
  4. "This is a terrible title, and I'm incredulous that this made FL with such a title"
  5. "the present title sounds like a discussion about John Gielgud, roles and awards"
  6. "the current title at best scans poorly and at worst is confusing, if not sub-optimal use of English"
  7. "'John Gielgud, roles and awards' doesn't work"
  8. "the current title is at best awkward and at worst a comma splice"
  9. "the comma version is atrocious"
  10. "The current title is awful"
  11. "The current title is pretty mediocre"
  12. "maybe to something like Roles and awards of John Gielgud or List of roles and awards of John Gieldgud. To me, that just reads and looks nicer"
  13. "Personally, I can't parse the current version with the comma"
  14. "The title is a little non-standard"
  15. "'Name, roles and awards' has unsatisfactory syntax because it has the appearance of a list" (NB. This user was the closing admin in the Category talk:Filmographies discussion)
This all suggest to me that titles in the format "[Name], roles and awards" are not, in fact, "entirely acceptable". I'm certainly not seeing anything at WP:AT that forbids use of the double "of". We have many featured lists with such titles (for example, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). Accusations of bullying are unwarranted. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 10:17, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing that "forbids" double of? There's nothing that specifically bars many things, but it's piss poor English, which is why it jars. WP:OSEmi a nutshell. As to the previous name format, the ignorance of a small number of the holier-than-thou, self-appointed Guardians of the MoS regarding the British use of the comma does not in any way diminish the fact that this is an entirely acceptable format. The reason articles still exist in the format is because there was no consensus to change it, and because it is grammatically correct. I stand by everything I said in my first comment. – SchroCat (talk) 10:33, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now – Fails 3(b) criterion. With the prose size of the parent article being less than 5k chars (~800 words), I don't find any reason to fork out a separate list just for roles and awards. —Vensatry (ping) 10:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Vensatry: I have added a few lines to the main article, hope that suffices 3(b) requirement.--Skr15081997 (talk) 14:51, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Would you even call than an improvement? —Vensatry (ping) 17:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Vensatry: I appreciate the time you are giving to this nomination, but can you be a bit specific? It will help both of us.--Skr15081997 (talk) 02:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure about the minimum prose size. Since you want me to be a bit specific, my rule of thumb would be 15k chars, say the size of Bipasha Basu's. —Vensatry (ping) 06:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
15k sounds too much at present. However I will try to make the article 8-10k characters in prose size. Meanwhile can you review the list?--Skr15081997 (talk) 07:29, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know but make sure it reaches at least 10k. —Vensatry (ping) 10:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, give me some time.--Skr15081997 (talk) 12:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Vensatry: now the parent article has 10,167 characters of prose. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Krimuk90
  • The very first sentence has two instances of the word "film".
reduced to 1
Done
  • Warsi didn't "star" in either Maine Pyaar Kyun Kiya or Salaam Namaste. Salman & Sushmita did in the first, and Saif & Preity did in the other. Please tweak.
Tweaked
  • "His performance in the latter won him the Filmfare and Zee Cine Awards in the category Best Actor in a Comic Role" ==> "in the Best Actor in a Comic Role category"
Done
  • "honoured him" is not something we use to talk about film awards. Please use the more conventional received, won, garnered etc.
Done
  • In can see many, many instances of "in the same year". Please construct your sentences differently. In general, the prose definitely needs an additional bit of work.
Copy-edited
  • There is no mention of which of his films earned the most money. It's an important bit of info in an actor's filmography. It's also important to say that his first film was a box office flop. Without those bits of pertinent information, the lead reads like a monotonous collection of "he played xxx in yyy".
Added info on box office performances
  • The source you provided for Jeetenge Hum makes no mention of when it released, but only states that it has been in production for a long time. What made you put 2001 as it's release date?
The film was shelved for about 10 years. IMDb lists its release date as 2001 while the BH source used now says 2011.
  • I don't think the name of the tv show is Bigg Boss 1. The 1 refers to it's first season. The show is simply called Bigg Boss. You need to mention which season he hosted in the notes column.
Done
  • Warsi's official website as an external link is unnecessary in his filmography page.
Removed

--Krimuk|90 (talk) 02:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: I hope my recent edits have resolved all of your concerns. Thanks for your thorough review. Regards, --Skr15081997 (talk) 10:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More comments:

Done
  • "Warsi also co-produced and starred in the supernatural comedy-drama Hum Tum Aur Ghost. It performed poorly at the box office." The two sentences can be combined.
Combined
  • "Golmaal 3, the year's second-highest grossing Hindi film also featured him in an important role". Not sure what "important role" refers to. You can say he played one of the primary roles in it.
Done
  • "...and turned out to be a commercial disaster". Sounds like a tabloid report. Please tweak to something more formal.
Tweaked
  • What is a "solo commercial success"? Do you mean it was his first commercial success in which he played the lead role? It's not very clear from the prose that before Jolly LLB most of his successes were in ensemble films.
I have removed this claim.
  • You have a number of "shelved" or "unreleased" films in the table, and have yet provided a release year for them. Why?
Those are the years they were scheduled to release in.
The very purpose of the year column is to state which year the film released in, or for films that haven't released yet, the scheduled year. For shelved or unreleased films, this is a violation. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maintain consistency in the notes column. In the television section, one note says "He hosted the show's first season." and another note simply states "second season". Follow the latter format.
Done
  • Also, the season must link with the respective article, where available.
Linked
  • I see you have used "arshadwarsi.net" as a source for several claims. Personal websites are not considered reliable sources, and cannot be used to cite claims.
Replaced with better sources.
  • Why do we have the location information only for a few refs? Either include it for all them or don't include them at all.
Location is an important information for references.--Skr15081997 (talk) 10:01, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite what I meant. You need to maintain consistency here. If you provide location information, then you must provide for each of the refs. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

--Krimuk|90 (talk) 08:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Krimuk90: I have responded to all of your comments. Cheers, --Skr15081997 (talk) 10:34, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually he was nominated for Best Comedian.
Yes, but you put the wrong category in the table.
IMDb says he was nominated for Best "Actress" category.
Added and thanks for the source.
This will be everyone's worry. See here. The worst thing is that http://filmfareawards.indiatimes.com couldn't be archived.
Hopefully it's only temporary.
Well, I too hope so. Lots of FLs (and even FAs) have references from filmfareawards.indiatimes.com. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 23:19, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added
  • What makes indiantelevision.com a reliable source?
Replaced
Working on Stardust.--Skr15081997 (talk) 08:00, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No awards or nominations found on IMDb, BH or other site.--Skr15081997 (talk) 10:33, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Per a BH source, he has received a Stardust nomination for Ishqiya. @Skr15081997: You can use this source. -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 11:56, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have added 2 more awards. Now there are 25 awards & noms; 2 Star Guild Awards, 3 BIG Star, 5 Filmfare, 2 GIFA, 5 IIFA, 1 ITA, 4 Screen, 1 Stardust and 2 Zee Cine Awards.--Skr15081997 (talk) 14:31, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The prose really needed a lot of work. I've given the lead a copy-edit. --Krimuk|90 (talk) 07:07, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Calvin999
  • In the references, you should only link a magazine, publication, TV show etc etc the first time it is used, then subsequent references should not be linked. But I can see that The Times of India and Bollywood Hungama, just to name two out of many examples, are repeatedly linked throughout the references. The Awards and nominations table should also have the shading for the Year column, so match the table and to comply with WP:ACCESS. These issues are quite easy to sort out. I think the lead reads fine, and the other tables are fine, too. As a result, I will Support this nomination given that you correct these couple of points. If you wouldn't mine looking at nomination, I'd appreciated it.  — Calvin999 17:00, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.