Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/77th Primetime Emmy 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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 15:05 26 November 2025 FACBot (talk) 23:25, 26 November 2025 (UTC).[reply]

77th Primetime Emmy Awards

Nominator(s): Birdienest81talk and RunningTiger123 09:57, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We are nominating the 2025 Primetime Emmys because we believe it has great potential to become a Featured List. I followed how the 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 were written and structured. Note: RunningTiger123 is also listed as a co-nominator since he made considerable and significant contributions to this list. Birdienest81talk 09:57, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

For the tables before the Bob Hope award section: The information isn't really a table (the columns have nothing to do with every row). To indicate that it isn't a "data" table but a "presentation" table see MOS:LTAB. You add role=presentation to the table, drop the caption, change all '!' to '|' and you're good.
For the tables after the Bob Hope award section: tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | ''Severance'' becomes !scope=row | ''Severance'' (on its own line). If the cell spans multiple rows with a rowspan, then use !scope=rowgroup instead.
Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear.
(please mention me on reply) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:33, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MPGuy2824: Done - I read your comments and made the necessary adjustments based off of them. Hope this helps.

--Birdienest81talk 09:17, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to mention the upright param in images when you aren't setting a value for it. -MPGuy2824 (talk)

Support on table and image accessibility. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:47, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

" behind Alan Arkin, who was nominated in that category in 2020 for his work on The Kominsky Method." - maybe say how old he was?
"breaking a record previously held by Scott Jacoby who won Outstanding Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role in a Drama in 1973 for That Certain Summer" - and here?
Presenters table should sort based on surname, not forename
"In an effort to shorten winner's acceptance speeches" => "In an effort to shorten winners' acceptance speeches" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:41, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisTheDude: Done - I have read your comments, and have made the appropriate corrections and adjustments based off of them. Thanks for your help.

--Birdienest81talk 09:54, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:56, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

Refs 2, 22, 25, 37 I'd mark these as press releases
Ref 19, "POLL" should be lowercase
Ref 27, when citing multiple sources I think the procedure is typically to use an EFN saying "Attributed to multiple sources:" and have the sources be separately listed under References
Ref 44, the title appears to be "Emmys: 77th Emmys Reviews" not just "Emmys: 77th Emmys"
Ref 54, I'd link YouTube
Optional but I'd run IA bot
Linking is consistent
Dates are consistently formatted
Not part of the source review but Saturday Night Live 50th Anniversary Special is italicized on the page, but on its article its listed as the "Saturday Night Live 50th Anniversary Special" with only the Saturday Night Live part being italicized. In my experience TV specials are typically formatted the same way episodes are as opposed to being fully italicized

Thats what I found ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 01:55, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Olliefant: Done - I have read your comments and have made corrections and adjustments based of of them. I do have two sticking points, though

For ref 27, I chose to have just one ref number bundled with several links rather than using the efn template since none of the bundled websites aren't being used as a citation for another statement or sentence within the article, and it looks cleaner and organized since these refs are only just providing support for the presenters table. This is allowed according to Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Bundling citations. An example where I felt that efn was necessary was in 97th Academy Awards. Since refs 26 and 28 in that article are being used to support statements in both the presenters table and facts stated under the Ceremony information section, I felt that the efn template was necessary to use. There's not any right or wrong way to bundle sources.
Ref 37 is not a press release, but rather it a PDF or digital version of the official ceremony program that is distributed to attendees at the gala.

Anyways, thanks for the feedback.

--Birdienest81talk 09:37, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Olliefant (she/her) 13:12, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting. --Pres N 15:05, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.