Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Latin Recording Academy Person of the Year/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 22:00, 8 February 2011 [1].

Latin Recording Academy Person of the Year[edit]

Latin Recording Academy Person of the Year (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Another Believer (Talk) 18:06, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets all criteria and closely resembles (and provides even more detail than) the MusiCares Person of the Year list, which has FL status. Thanks, reviewers, for your assistance! Another Believer (Talk) 18:06, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "Latin Recording Academy Person of the Year" (per the title) or "Latin Recording Academy's Person of the Year" per the lead and infobox?
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think most organisations refer to the week of Latin Grammy week with a capital W.
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • You say Gloria is Cuban American after mentioning her (also) Cuban American husband without referring to his nationality. Seems an odd way round.
Better? Must have been an odd lead construction process. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Gloria received the.." I think you could safely say "She (had previously) received.."?
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The .. award was presented to ..." starts two paras, a tiny bit repetitive.
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uber picky but I don't like the use of {{cite news}} for online references, especially as (for whatever stupid reason) it formats differently from the {{cite web}} parameters (e.g. publication date in parentheses...)
I, too, am bothered by the formatting differences sometimes, but I think those discrepancies should be discussed at the template talk pages. I have been asked several times to use "cite news" templates for news sources regardless of whether they are online or printed. For the sake of using the template one is probably supposed to use, I would prefer to leave the ref formatting as is for now. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. This wasn't intended to be a criticism of the list, more a despair over the inconsistent template formats. I wouldn't argue if you use {{cite web}} for all web-based resources, but if you've been told otherwise... ! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have been told otherwise. Also, I have noticed that the references display differently depending on the parameters entered. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, still not keen but not going to be opinionated about it! Good work on the list. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, TRM! Please let me know if there are any additional concerns that need to be addressed. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - the "recipient" column, on my screen at least, is enormously wide, about twice the width of any of the names. Is there any reason for this? Otherwise, all looks OK -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:59, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reduced column width by 100px. Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - got no issues with this list, good quick response (as ever) The Rambling Man (talk) 19:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Courcelles 20:23, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
*Comment My one concern is that the birth years aren't in the references, at least for the three I checked. Courcelles 19:30, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, true. I got lifetime details from the Wikipedia articles about the subjects. Let me know if you feel citing birth years is necessary. I included years so readers could get a general idea of age and whether or not the artist is still alive. Keep in mind, none of the Grammy lists have a reference specifically citing which nation the performing artists are from. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch, I think that may created another problem...!! If you take WP:REF to its letter, anything challenged (or challengeable) should be referenced, and here, Courcelles has challenged the birth years... Just putting it out there.. ! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be happy to add references for birth years. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's the best approach. Alternatively decide if birth years are really relevant to the list and skip the column altogether? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)I don't really doubt they're right, but I also know how often vandals have "fun" by changing folks DOB in their biographies, so trusting ourselves to be internally correct does concern me a bit. Courcelles 19:45, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 20:18, 7 February 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/Latin_Recording_Academy_Person_of_the_Year/archive1&oldid=1038039842"