Wikipedia:Peer review/29th Golden Raspberry Awards/archive1

29th Golden Raspberry Awards

This peer review discussion has been closed.

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this page for peer review because I've never done a featured list before and recently did some work on this page, I'd like to get some feedback before trying to bring it to WP:FLC. Thank you for your time, Cirt (talk) 03:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Notified Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards and prizes. Cirt (talk) 03:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

"It received three" "three" whats? Awards?
"and as part of Worst Screen Couple for her performance" I think it would be convenient for the readers to know who Hilton's #spouse" was.
"Hilton matched a record set in the previous year by actor Eddie Murphy, who received three acting awards in different categories or the multiple characters he played in Norbit." It's not clear what the record is for.
Any images of the winners and/or nominees?
"Agence France-Presse" Shouldn't be italicized; it's a news agency.
The dabfinder reveals one dab link.
I take it "Worst Picture" is the most auspicious award? It's the only award listed in the infobox. You might want to explain that it is the primary award.
Last row in "Worst Screen Couple": ""Eddie Murphy in Eddie Murphy" in Meet Dave"—I'm afraid I don't follow.
"Worst Career Achievement" should be pipe linked to the appropriate section in the main article about the Golden Raspberry Awards.
Can you trim the External links section? Some of the links, especially the IMDb ones, seem redundant.
You use the Cite XXX style in the notes but the {{citation}} template in the references.
There needs to be some sort of indication and symbol for the color in the table. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responses to Dabomb87

Done.
Done.
Done.
Done.
Done.
Done.
The infobox was modeled after {{Infobox Academy Awards}}. I have not come across any WP:RS sources explicitly stating that the "Worst Picture" is the "primary award" of the ceremony, but sources do indeed state that the Golden Raspberry Awards are a spoof of the Academy Awards, so this should be self-evident.
Done.
Done.
Done. Cirt (talk) 04:53, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Wildhartlivie (talk · contribs) I don't have as many comments, mine are mostly stylistic observations rather than overt recommendations (except for the award category bolding).

Each award category should probably be bolded to emphasize the category.
Similarly, I think it would help for the winner row to be bolded.
My own personal preference would be either no color in the winner row or something a little less bold. I can't speak for every reader who has vision issues, but I've always found this particular use of color a bit uncomfortable. (See here for something a bit more discomforting.) Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:34, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responses to Wildhartlivie

Done.
Done.
I personally like this color and layout. I modeled it after Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Animated Program (for Programming Less Than One Hour) - because that was done by Scorpion0422 (talk · contribs) [1], who I gather knows a bit more about featured lists than I do. Cirt (talk) 04:58, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well, as I said, it's a personal preference. I think the bolding enhances the table quite well and I really do like the addition of the images. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:53, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, me too! Cirt (talk) 05:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]