153:
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to know what needs to be done to make it a FL. This is a first time I'm trying for any non-sport article, and honestly I'm not much aware of the subject. This award is like Oscar or BAFTA of Indian film industry. All feedback and suggestions are
220:
For those years where an actor won for two films, I would make it clearer what the two films were - on my browser the column for the film titles is fairly narrow so that the names are often on two or three lines. Conversely the actors names have lots of extra space (and the overall table is not 100%
227:
The three years where there were two joint winners are especially confusing as the names of the actors are right on top of each other, as are the titles of their films. I would see if a line or space could be added between the two better separate them. So for example on my monitor "Adaminte Makan"
171:
For the PDF citations, I would put the name of the particular award ceremony that it is referencing in order to remove redundancy and make it clearer. For example, instead of "Award for Best Actor" as the citation title, I would put something like, "31st
National Film Festival (June 1984).
213:. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way.
216:
I would explain how an actor can win for two films in a single year (1968, 1990, 1994) and also how two actors can share the award in a single year (1998, 1999, 2011). As someone used to the Oscars, where neither of these can happen, I thought this was interesting /
199:
203:
195:
126:
122:
107:
99:
247:
194:
A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. Since you compared this to the Oscars or BAFTAs, there are some FLs that may be useful models.
76:
246:
Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see
258:(which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours,
115:
287:
92:
273:
181:
165:
69:
44:
237:
The many PDFs with the same title are incorrect - when you look at the PDF itself, the title is customized (in this example)
255:
234:
Almost all of the sources are to the award's own websites - aren't there any histories of Indian film that could be cited?
250:. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)
190:: Thanks for your work on this interesting article. Here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to FLC.
62:
158:
50:
224:
The column for titles is labeled "Film" - since more than one is listed in six cases, shouldn't it be "Film(s)"?
254:
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at
17:
177:
263:
238:
228:
are one line and "Abu" are on another line, so I was not sure if it was for one film or two.
221:
wide on my monitor). I would make the column for titles wider to better accommodate these.
173:
243:
If there are articles on the overall awards each year, those could be linked via the year
259:
210:
281:
200:
List of actors nominated for
Academy Awards for foreign language performances
204:
List of
Academy Award winners and nominees for Best Foreign Language Film
206:
may be useful as it lists all nominees and winners in a category.
196:
List of actors nominated for two
Academy Awards in the same year
141:
134:
103:
248:Knowledge:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches
202:are lists of actors nominated for Oscars, while
231:Are nominees announced, or just the winner(s)?
70:
8:
150:This peer review discussion has been closed.
209:The lead is too short and does not follow
77:
63:
32:
35:
7:
28:National Film Award for Best Actor
24:
274:03:59, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
239:52nd National Film Awards 2005
1:
256:Knowledge:Peer review/backlog
182:00:02, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
166:14:46, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
304:
288:October 2011 peer reviews
161:— Bill william compton
18:Knowledge:Peer review
188:Ruhrfisch comments
270:
142:Watch peer review
87:
86:
295:
268:
163:
162:
139:
130:
111:
79:
72:
65:
47:
33:
303:
302:
298:
297:
296:
294:
293:
292:
278:
277:
267:
160:
159:
154:welcomed!.
145:
120:
97:
91:
83:
51:Manual of Style
43:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
301:
299:
291:
290:
280:
279:
264:
252:
251:
244:
241:
235:
232:
229:
225:
222:
218:
214:
207:
185:
184:
152:
147:
146:
144:
90:
85:
84:
82:
81:
74:
67:
59:
56:
55:
54:
53:
48:
38:
37:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
300:
289:
286:
285:
283:
276:
275:
272:
271:
261:
257:
249:
245:
242:
240:
236:
233:
230:
226:
223:
219:
215:
212:
208:
205:
201:
197:
193:
192:
191:
189:
183:
179:
175:
170:
169:
168:
167:
164:
155:
151:
143:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
89:
88:
80:
75:
73:
68:
66:
61:
60:
58:
57:
52:
49:
46:
45:Copying check
42:
41:
40:
39:
34:
29:
26:
19:
262:
253:
187:
186:
156:
149:
148:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
27:
104:visual edit
174:DrNegative
266:<: -->
260:Ruhrfisch
282:Category
217:unusual.
157:Thanks,
211:WP:LEAD
127:history
108:history
94:Article
36:Toolbox
265:: -->
136:Watch
16:<
198:and
178:talk
123:edit
100:edit
284::
180:)
140:•
125:|
106:|
102:|
269:°
176:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
78:e
71:t
64:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.