Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Grammy Award for Best New Age Album/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Dabomb87 21:54, 14 April 2011 [1].

Grammy Award for Best New Age Album[edit]

Grammy Award for Best New Age Album (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Another Believer (Talk) 18:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this list meets all FL criteria, and may be one of the best Grammy lists to date! Thanks, as always, to reviewers. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support as long as you fix the reference to "the Ireland" in the lead -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:40, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
the Done. Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 17:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 21:58, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Would prefer to see "Ref." as "Ref(s)" for there are sometimes multiple references, but no major deal.
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 21:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ackerman's nationality of German/American, is that cited somewhere?
Done. Added Allmusic biography as source. --Another Believer (Talk) 21:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it "Will" or "William" Ackerman? Be consistent.
Well, I went with what the source indicated. Even Allmusic's biography is inconsistent. Is it up to me/us to decide one or the other for the sake of consistency, or for us to reiterate what reliable sources tell us? (That is a serious question, by the way.) I am not bothered by the inconsistency, but if it is necessary to be consistent I will change all Wills to Williams since that is the article title. --Another Believer (Talk) 21:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)\[reply]
I'm not bothered what he's called, but ideally, we should be consistent within a single article. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:49, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"William" it is! Thanks. --Another Believer (Talk) 21:53, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not too keen on the "See also" links, Grammy cats are linked in the infobox at the bottom of the article, list of new age music artists is interesting but not directly relevant (imho), new age topics isn't relevant, and "neoclassical" is a little incongruous too, what's the direct relevance to the Grammys?
I removed List of Grammy categories and Neoclassical, but left the artists and New Age topics links. I think these are relevant, especially to people unfamiliar with anything "New Age". I will remove other links if additional reviewers find one or both unnecessary. --Another Believer (Talk) 21:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 20:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you much! --Another Believer (Talk) 21:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support as usual, a consistently good list, and a consistently appreciate nominator who wants nothing but the best for our lists here. Great work. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:58, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
*Comments
  • Just a general thing - right now I'm on a laptop and all of the images render before the table itself. Not sure if this is a widespread issue or just my computer....
Hmm. Do you encounter the same problem when viewing other Grammy lists? The list format is the same, as far as I can tell. --Another Believer (Talk) 15:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My issue; I suppose I should change my preferences. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:43, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead seems very long. I can appreciate that the award has been around for longer than other categories, but a small trim wouldn't hurt. Nationalities, for example, are a bit trivial.
I would prefer not to remove information. The nationality details are included in every other Grammy list with FL status, so it might be best to leave the sentence for the sake of consistency. I am trying to think of a way to re-organize the information so that the lead is not so long... perhaps something similar to Grammy Award for Best Dance Recording. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add publisher for Allmusic refs (#10/#30)
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 15:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • [2] seems dodgy to me. The '89 awards are already well-cited, so I suggest removing this source.
But this is the only source currently being used to verify 'Down in Belgorod'. --Another Believer (Talk) 15:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't strike me as "high-quality" and reliable. This newspaper article could be a replacement. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:43, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 14:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:40, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I'm still not stoked over the length of the lead, but I can see that it's for the sake of consistency. Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Grammy_Award_for_Best_New_Age_Album/archive1&oldid=1038039279"