Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Vietnamese submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film/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) 22:02:33 2 June 2019 (UTC) [1].

List of Vietnamese submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film

Featured list candidates (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/List of Vietnamese submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film/archive1

Nominator(s): Damian Vo (talk) 02:50, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A list covers the Vietnamese submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film. I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets all of the FL criteria. Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Damian Vo (talk) 02:50, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Allied45

• "Note A" could be condensed to "The category is set to be renamed as the Best International Feature Film, beginning at the 92nd Academy Awards in 2020."
• "It is the only Vietnamese film to have secured a nomination and the first nomination received by a Southeast Asian country in the category" --> add a comma after "secured a nomination" and add "was" before "the first nomination"
• "It was, however, failed to included on the final list, announced by the AMPAS in October." --> "It was not, however, included on the final list announced by the AMPAS in October."
• "Vietnam began to receive AMPAS' invitation to participate in the competition in 2006, after they require films to be released at least seven consecutive days in a commercial movie theater in their respective country during the eligibility period." --> "Vietnam began to receive AMPAS' invitation to participate in the competition in 2006, when a requirement was introduced that films needed to be commercially-released for at least seven consecutive days in a movie theater in its respective country during the eligibility period."
• Ref(s). --> Ref(s). [include the (s)]

Great work, overall! Allied45 (talk) 08:48, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Thank you for the review. Damian Vo (talk) 14:46, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support — Allied45 (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from HĐ

• For sources from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences only the first reference should include the full name of the organization; for the followups just set the publisher to simply "AMPAS" (with wikilink removed).
• I'm not sure if press releases qualify for reliable sources; I have encountered contrary opinions previously. If possible I'd recommend finding other reports from secondary sources instead of press releases. They're fine to me, but I'm not sure if other reviewers will point this out as an issue
• Unlink "United States" in the lead and shorten it to "US"

Given the triviality of my concerns, I support this list for promotion, fantastic list content-wise and format-wise. HĐ (talk) 01:47, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your support :) Damian Vo (talk) 13:40, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Lirim.Z

• The scope should be the first column of the table. You could either add ! scope="row" to the year column or swap the Film and Year column. Other than that great article.--
  Talk 08:43, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Added. Thank you for your review. Damian Vo (talk) 13:40, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support—

Talk 15:14, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

All done. Thank you so much! Damian Vo (talk) 02:15, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for addressing everything. I support this for promotion. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any comments for my

Aoba47 (talk) 04:15, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

• Support – everyone else's comments have taken care of everything. Great job to you! – zmbro _(talk) 16:50, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) Damian Vo (talk) 02:15, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:56, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Source review – The formatting of the sources and their reliability looks good, and the link-checker tool reveals no problems. Spot-checks of refs 30, 41, and 48 showed no issues. Overall, this source review looks like a pass. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:20, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This
  WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:02, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]