Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Kids and Family Programming/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, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [1].

---

GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Kids and Family Programming

GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Kids and Family Programming (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Kids and Family Programming/archive1

Nominator(s): PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:15, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Surprising nobody, I've worked on another GLAAD-related list. A much more recent addition to the GLAAD Media Awards, this category focuses on programmes made for younger audiences that feature LGBT themes and topics. PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:15, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude Comments

• "Concerning the invention of this category" - I think maybe "creation" rather than "invention" here
  • Done.
• "arguing about the importance of younger indiviausl" - last word is a bit jumbled :-)
  • "jumbled". It was a straight up crime scene.
• "in 2020 where Hulu's The Bravest Knight and Disney+'s won" - something missing after "Disney+'s"
  • Added.
• "and again the following year in 20221" - good to get a prediction of what will win 18000 years in the future :-) But, in seriousness, given that you said "the following year" I don't think you need to state the year at all
  • I'm sorry, but I couldn't stop laughing for almost 1 minute; XD. Fixed it.
• "the award was split into an Animated and Live Action category" => "the award was split into Animated and Live Action categories"
  • Done. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 18:08, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
• "GLAAD monitors mainstream media to identify which documentaries will be nominated" - sudden mention of documentaries? Copy and paste issue?
  • Oops. Me? Copypaste from my previous work? Naur, I'd never do that...
• "Since its inception, the award has been given to 9 programmes" => "Since its inception, the award has been given to nine programmes" Also, I may be wrong, being British, but isn't it spelt "programs" in the States?
  • Yeah, I think it's only when you have something like 20 and higher that digits rather than words are used for numbers. I'm a non-native speaker, so I often mix different spelling, but yes, you're right. Changed it.
• "The following networks received" - I would say "The following networks have received" so it doesn't read like the awards have ended
  • @ChrisTheDude: Done. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 18:18, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
• That's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:43, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:29, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

EN-Jungwon

• Use a consistent date format in the references
  • Done.
• Add a short description. I went through some of your other nominations related to GLAAD and noticed that some lists have no short description (no {{Short description}} template), some have intentionally no description ({{Short description|none}}) and some lists have short descriptions.
  • Done. Hopefully the description is acceptable.
• Is there a need for the "Networks" subsection heading? I suggest removing the heading for now and in the future if a program receives more than one award then create two sections for "Networks" and "Programs".
  • Yeah, I guess when there's not even 1 show to have won twice, it's somewhat unnecessary.
• Ref 1 and 5 redirect to the same page. Merge them. Or maybe the url status can be changed to dead?
  • @EN-Jungwon: Done. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 18:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

That's all. -- EN-Jungwon 07:39, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

I think there has been a misunderstanding with the third point. I was asking for the heading to be removed. Not the whole section. Was this intentional? -- EN-Jungwon 06:07, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I think I realize. Still, as no shows have won twice or more, it seems a bit odd to have the section just for the networks. PanagiotisZois (talk) 10:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Support -- EN-Jungwon 10:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Pseud 14

Great work with this list, as you always do with the GLAAD Awards series. I do not have any comments as I did not notice anything that required further improvement. I support the FLC for promotion based on the prose. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Source review (pass)

Version reviewed

Formatting

• Fn 7 - doesn't include a publisher parameter, as you did with other citations i.e. Deadline and Hollywood Reporter. As a matter of consistency, worth adding Penske Media too.

• Done.

• Fn 12 - Worth linking Dotdash Meredith, since you've linked every instance of the publisher with a wiki article.

• Done.

• Per MOS:CONFORMTITLE, titles should be written in either sentence or title case regardless of how they appear in the article. This should be consistent, since it looks like you've wrote them in Title Case. Fn 2 and Fn 12 should be written similar then.

• Done.

Reliability

• The citations seem to be of high quality with such information on the subject. The news sources in question seems to be professional and well-circulated sites/publications.

Verifiability

• Fn 2 - checks out
• Fn 5 - I can't seem to find any mention of Shareholders Circle members, are they considered GLAAD board or members?

• @Pseud 14: Thank you for the comments and support. Regarding this issue, it turns out the source was updated recently. The archived link does reference the shareholders circle, so I've changed the url status to "dead". --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:57, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

• Ah that makes sense to me now, and I can confirm from the archive link that it checks out.

• Fn 9 - checks out
• Fn 13 - checks out
• Fn 17 - checks out

Overall, mostly very minor concerns. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing my comments and making the formatting changes. This passes source review. On a separate note, If you have spare time, I was wondering if you'd be willing to provide some feedback on my current FAC. It's a short BLP article, and hopefully not too long to read. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Support by Chompy Ace

Support. This is an excellent list! Also, If you have time would you care for reviewing the List of accolades received by The Martian (film) regarding its featured list nomination? Chompy Ace 21:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 20:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

• 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.