Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Featured log/October 2013: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
update
Promote 4
Line 1: Line 1:
{{-}}
{{-}}
{{TOClimit|3}}
{{TOClimit|3}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Pakistan national cricket team record by opponent/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of National Natural Landmarks in Alaska/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Mikhail Youzhny career statistics/archive2}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of nature reserves in Barnet/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2009 Women's Cricket World Cup squads/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2009 Women's Cricket World Cup squads/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Ashley Tisdale/archive1}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Ashley Tisdale/archive1}}

Revision as of 20:06, 13 October 2013

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 Giants2008 10:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Pakistan national cricket team record by opponent

Nominator(s): Zia Khan 11:30, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After a black day for Pakistan cricket, now they have 105 lost to their name in Test cricket. But no worries, they have defeated others 116 times in the same format. In ODIs Pakistan have a reasonable result in term of winning percentage. Pakistan have won more matches than any other team. This list comprise Pakistan's record against the other teams in the three formats.The list is ready to go for a FL status becuse, in my opinion, meets the standards. Comments/suggestions appreciated, as always! Zia Khan 11:30, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment

Additional comments

  • In the same series, Pakistan recorded their first Test win against the same team. same team redundant
  • Link England, Australia, New Zealand in the lead
  • As of technique should be used to quote stats in the lead instead on FN.

—Vensatry (Ping me) 11:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
*Comments from Crisco
inning - Everyone tells me the singular of innings in cricket is innings.
You're right. Zia Khan 01:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
They have played 71 T20I matches and won 44 of them; 25 were lost and two being tied. - Why the switch from the active to passive voice?
Chek this now. Zia Khan 01:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Second sentence is still passive. Should be active.
Perhaps make it clear that the records are records at the end
Added a note. Zia Khan
Check my copyedit. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:19, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments! Zia Khan 01:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
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 Giants2008 10:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC) [2].[reply]

List of National Natural Landmarks in Alaska

Nominator(s): Dana boomer (talk) 19:15, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This list follows the format of my previous NNL nomination (the Michigan list last year). I believe it is close to featured status, and look forward to comments regarding any issues. Thanks! Dana boomer (talk) 19:15, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Dudley Miles
;Comments:
  • "16 of the almost 600 United States National Natural Landmarks" sounds clumsy to me. I would prefer something like "16 National Landmarks out of a total of almost 600 in the United States".
  • Reworked this a bit. Better?
  • I do not understand "unorganized boroughs".
  • "makes nomination recommendations after an owner notification process" also sounds to me clumsy. Perhaps re-word.
  • Attempted reword. Better?
  • I would prefer "integrity of the sites" to "of the properties".
  • Except that throughout the rest of the lead they are referred to as properties...
  • Under Malaspina, what is an ice-cap region?
  • Under McNeil, what is nears fishing?
  • LOL, I looked at this and went "huh?". Then realized it was a typo. Supposed to be "bears fishing" :)
  • Unga. "The remnants give environmental and climactic evidence of pre-human contact Alaska." This took me two or three readings to understand. How about something like: The forest provides evidence of the environment and climate of Alaska before humans reached the area.
  • OK, replaced.
Replies above. Thanks for the comments! Dana boomer (talk) 00:48, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A good list well presented. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:55, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from RadioKAOS: Right off the bat, the biggest issue I see: since these designations were made decades ago, how much of this information is presently outdated?

  • I had previously pipe-linked "Clarence Rhode National Wildlife Refuge" to Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, but that doesn't quite tell the whole story. From Who's Who in Alaskan Politics:

    RHODE, Clarence J.<...>reg. dir., U.S. Fish & Wildlife, Juneau, 1948–58; killed in plane crash, Brooks Range, Aug. 21, 1958, accompanied by s. Jack and another passenger.<...>Kuskokwim Nat. Wildlife Refuge near Bethel renamed in his honor, 1960.

    While that explains that, it isn't explained that the name "Clarence Rhode National Wildlife Refuge" and accompanying land designation were both deprecated by the passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act in 1980.
  • Except that the "Clarence Rhode National Wildlife Refuge" was and still is designated as a National Natural Landmark, and is considered as such by the federal government. The name of the area before its designation doesn't matter. Dana boomer (talk) 14:37, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Similiarly, the statement about which landmarks are in or not in organized boroughs is false. The boundaries of Alaska's earliest borough's weren't finalized until the mid 1970s, so once again, you may be simply parroting information which is decades out of date. Lake George is within the corporate limits of the Municipality of Anchorage, an organized borough, although it's certainly a world away from Anchorage proper. Malaspina Glacier is within the City and Borough of Yakutat, also an organized borough. The thing is so freaking huge, though, that it quite possibly spills over into the Unorganized Borough (specifically, the Valdez–Cordova Census Area). Whenever I've looked up a feature on GNIS, it tells me which borough or census area the feature is located in. Little or none of this has been incorporated into the list.
  • I've added borough information where boroughs have been created since the landmarks were designated. Where landmarks are located in wholly or partially in the Unorganized Borough (which is true for six of them), I've left the table alone. Dana boomer (talk) 14:37, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Godot13
;Comments:
Comments from Godot13
  • For consistency I would probably get rid of the "November" in the date column.
  • Done.
  • In the Borough column, again for consistency, I would not use "Alaska" in place of the Unorganized Borough.
  • Done.
"Alaska" is still in the last row. What I was suggesting, however, is that you put the Unorganized Borough in the column in place of Alaska. The dash could work, but you do actually have the info to fill in the cell.-Godot13 (talk) 19:02, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Done. Dana boomer (talk) 19:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • See if you can find some representative images for the missing ones, the blank space is unfortunate. These are not great examples, but they're better than white space: [Unga Islands] and [Walker Lake]. Also, this list was translated on the [German Wikipedia] a few months after it was started on English Wikipedia, perhaps there are some images that can be used.
  • Found images for all but one, so quite a bit of white space is gone. I thought I had looked for images for these previously, but my search skills had obviously deserted me that day.
  • References - Each description probably could take one or more, but should have at least one.
  • All of the descriptions are sourced to the general reference. I've now added an in-line ref in the header to make this more clear.
  • Done.
Nice work, very easily readable lead.-Godot13 (talk) 03:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review! Replies above. Dana boomer (talk) 17:18, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
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 Giants2008 10:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC) [3].[reply]

Mikhail Youzhny career statistics

Nominator(s): --TIAYN (talk) 13:23, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whats the point of nominating a list if no one reviews it??? Please review it the second time around. --TIAYN (talk) 13:23, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 22:03, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments -
  • Done The opening of "This is a list of" is of a boring style that has been discouraged for some time now at FLC. You wouldn't start a regular article with "This is an article about", and lists deserve the same respect. This could start by saying who Youzhny is and then going into his stats, like the second sentence does.
  • Done Bold links like the one in the opening are discouraged by the Manual of Style.
  • DoneIn the first sentence, the comma after "player" should be removed. Maybe if these issues weren't at the start, more people would have reviewed this the first time.
  • Done "He is one of the few active players on the ATP tour who has reached the reached the quarterfinals of all Grand Slams." First, there's a double "reached the" that needs fixing. Second, it would be nice to clarify that there are four Grand Slams.
  • Done I see "US Open" and "U.S. Open" in the lead. Which is it?
  • 'Done "Currently, Youzhny has won 424 matches". This is going to become outdated quickly, which is why we normally use "As of (date)" for statements like this.
  • Rewrote it (isn't it normal to always state these facts?) Second word of "trailing behind" isn't needed. And what is the point of including this? If he has the third-most wins among Russians, that sounds notable enough to be worth a mention.
  • Done (but whats the point, I'm never able to read Alt texts...) The lead image needs alt text. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:22, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm on this. :) --TIAYN (talk) 15:04, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Harrias
;Comments from Harrias talk

Firstly, I would suggest that as you don't appear to have reviewed anyone else's nominations in the last six months, a less aggressive attitude would be in order. No-one here is getting paid to do these reviews, it is all voluntary, so it might be worth being nice to those you want to do something for you.

  • Done "The career statistics of Russian professional tennis player Mikhail Youzhny features, to date, nine ATP singles titles, and nine ATP doubles titles." As an introduction this sounds a little bit too much like "This is a list of..." I would suggest rewriting it to something like: "Mikhail Youzhny is a Russian professional tennis player who has won nine ATP singles titles, and nine ATP doubles titles in his career to date."
  • Done "Youzhny had a fairly successful junior career, reaching a career high junior ranking of world no. 20 in early 2000." Fairly successful according to who? The reference is merely a statistic page, which implies the article is providing editorial comment. For one thing, what one person considers fairly successful, another might consider unsuccessful. I would suggest sticking to the facts, unless there is an article which comments on his junior career.
  • Done Four sentences in the second paragraph state "in 1999"; I would suggest trying to merge these, and vary the prose by using phrases such as "in the same year".
  • done "and would go on to win" can be simply written as "and he won". Similarly later, "Youzhny would go on to win his first" should be "Youzhny won his first"
  • done "He is one of the few active players..." While the source does state that he has reached the QF of all the grand slams, I can't see where it mentions that it has been achieved by very few active players? I might be missing it though?
  • done "While chiefly a single player, .." I'm not an expert on tennis, but should this be "singles player" rather than "single player"?
  • done "Currently, Youzhny has won over 400 matches, trailing Russian players Nikolay Davydenko and Yevgeny Kafelnikov in match wins." While I'm pretty sure that I know you mean he has the third most wins of a Russian player, behind those two, this could be read as meaning he has the third most wins of any player, behind those two Russians, so it would be worth tightening the language to make the meaning clear.
  • done Why is there a full-stop after all the numbers in the "No." and "Rank" column: this seems unnecessary to me, as none of the other columns have full-stops.
  • The partner and opponent columns should sort by the players surname, not by the flag and then the first name. Also, MOS:FLAG suggests that "In lists or tables, flag icons may be relevant when the nationality of different subjects is pertinent to the purpose of the list or table itself." In this case, I don't think the nationality of the player is at all relevant to the overall list. Similarly, is a flag does have to be used, the section on "Accompany flags with country names" is relevant, and should be adhered to.
      • Its organized, and the name order is the exact same one found at the ATP.. When It comes to the removal of flags, I think this should be discussed at the Tennis WikiProject, this career statistics list controversial enough already... --TIAYN (talk) 10:44, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Simply put, those columns must be sortable by the player's surname. How that is achieved, I don't mind. As to the flags, I know Wikipedia seems to be obsessed with them, and most moves to adhere to the MOS are fought against, but at the end of the day, this is a review to achieve featured status, and so the article has to adhere to the MOS. Harrias talk 12:53, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (removed sortability) In the "Top 10 wins" the use of merged rows for the years breaks the sortability. Harrias talk 10:21, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He is not responding. --TIAYN (talk) 11:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He has a wife who is 38 weeks pregnant, a job interview next week and a sprained ankle. He will get back to this when he can. Harrias talk 12:38, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may have misunderstood me, I've responded at you're talk page. --TIAYN (talk) 12:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, no offence taken really, I'm quite tired at the moment, and snapped a little. I'll try and have a good look at this tomorrow morning. Feel free to keep nudging me about it if I don't! Take care, Harrias talk 15:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Godot13
Comments from Godot13
A few observations just looking at the sorting features of the various lists:
ITF Junior Circuit-Singles: 2 (1 title, 1 runner-up)
  • Done Not sure if you need a sortable table for only two entries.
  • Done I don’t do sports lists, but how is sorting score by the first digit of the first set useful? (I won’t repeat this, but it goes for each sortable list). Not done.

ITF Men's Circuit-Singles: 4 (4 titles)

  • (Done: added to the abbreviation table) The 4 Oct 1999 match (vs. Tom Spinks), does “Hard(i)” stand for indoors?
  • Done You may not need to sort columns like outcome or category where there is only one option. (Applies to a few tables, won’t repeat).

ITF Men's Circuit-Doubles 1 (1 title)

  • Done Probably doesn’t need to be sortable.

Top 10 wins

  • Done Only two rows, probably doesn’t need to be sortable.

Singles

  • Done Sorting problems – any sort brings all the year headers to the top, so the resulting sort contains no anchor for the year. Probably year needs to go on the left hand side and span the entries which it encompasses. Also, the round column correctly orders 1R, 2R, 3R, 4R, but then goes alphabetically (F, QF, SF) when it should be sorted QF, SF, F.

Doubles

The new sorting/table style for the doubles matches is actually somewhat confusing.-Godot13 (talk) 06:15, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Let me clarify - the prior version (with both members of the doubles team in a single box) is more visually appealing and organized. The problem with the list in the earlier format was the sort feature by team rank wasn't sorting properly. It would be preferable to keep the first version, but fix the rank sorting (or, since it is a team, simply do away with the sort feature for that one column).-Godot13 (talk) 00:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
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 Giants2008 10:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC) [4].[reply]

List of nature reserves in Barnet

Nominator(s): Dudley Miles (talk) 16:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it was a failed FLC and I think have now covered the objections raised. I have also put it through peer review. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: This is a well-prepared list, neatly presented with pleasing illustrations. I was somewhat surprised to find that there are over 60 nature reserves in an area so close to London. I looked at the list during its peer review stage and could find little wrong with it then. I note also that a lot of work has been done since the last foray into FLC. I only have a handful of further observations:

London is well provided with green areas, and it is surprising how far the boroughs extend into the countryside. The list could easily be extended.
  • Did the railways really "arrive in Barnet" only in the early 20th century? Pretty well all of the country was covered well before then
I was not thinking when I cited this. I assume the author was referring to the development of the Northern Line, but I have deleted it.
  • 39% seems a rather low "positive conservation management" figure. It appears to indicate that over 60% of the sites were not being managed "positively" – whatever that means in practice. Is this a point of concern, and if so should the concern be indicated?
I do not have anything I can cite on this. My impression is that pretty well all the conservation work in Barnet was done in the 1990s, and since then the borough has lost interest, but Wikipedia is not the place for my impressions!
  • Ref 9 seems formatted differently from the other Hewlett citations
I am not sure of the best way to cite the whole work as opposed to specific pages. Perhaps I should give the full details of the book?

Otherwise, the list seems to be well worthy of featured status. Brianboulton (talk) 08:19, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your support. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:52, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I need to withdraw this nomination. My most important source, Greenspace Information for London, has refurbished its site barely a year after it went live and many of my references are now dead links. I have emailed them about this and I was told that the lack of redirects to the new pages was an oversight which they are rectifying, so I may be able to re-nominate in the future.Dudley Miles (talk) 09:15, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
GiGL has pointed out a - fairly - easy way to update links, which I have now done. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:03, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:59, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Quick comments
  • Don't start with "This is a list..."
Done.
  • No need to link common geographical terms (like London).
Done.
  • Do all our readers know what "green space" means?
I don't think this is a problem and would prefer to keep it, but I can change it to open space if required.
  • You use "Green Belt" and "green belt" interchangeably, I'd opt for a consistent format.
Done.
  • If the LEU are worth listening to, why don't they have an article? i.e. why aren't they notable?
I have moved the note explaining the LEU to make it clearer. I assume that the LEU has no article because it was absorbed into the Greater London Authority in 2000 and information is not easily available. Update: I have now created an article on the London Ecology Unit.
  • " Its objects include" I don't understand "its objects".
Clarified and moved to note.
  • Given the last sentence of the lead, is this list "as of 2011"?
The list in the 1997 Nature Conservation in Barnet is still current. I have added a sentence to note C clarifying this.
  • Not your problem I suppose but the LNR link leads an uncapitalised version of the name, i.e. "local nature reserve", while you capitalise it here.
I have been meaning to deal with this for ages. I have now requested deletion of the redirect page Local Nature Reserve so that the article can be moved.

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:08, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Area column doesn't sort correctly.
This is because another editor suggested adding conversion to acres. Would it be best to revert to a heading of hectares and just a figure without conversion?
It would be best to get it to sort correctly! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be consistent with decimal places please? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:45, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer not to. I have followed the source which is not consistent and generally shows larger areas (and a few small ones) as a whole number. If I show figures to one decimal place, then 11 in the source becomes 11.0 in the article, which would be misleading, but if I round to the nearest whole number then I would have to round 0.6 up to 1, which significantly exaggerates its size, and 1.5 in the source as 1 or 2, guessing which is more accurate. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:54, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A couple of very minor tweaks made, but this is certainly of featured standard. - SchroCat (talk) 12:13, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:54, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:08, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
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 Hahc21 10:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC) [5].[reply]

2009 Women's Cricket World Cup squads

Nominator(s): Harrias talk 15:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A list based upon the featured list 2013 Women's Cricket World Cup squads. As always, all thoughts, comments and criticisms are welcome! Harrias talk 15:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – my only concern is those redlinks, especially in the last two tables. Zia Khan 14:05, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Crisco 1492 (talk)
*Comments from Crisco
Not sure if File:Holly Colvin 2.jpg is properly free or not. Web resolution, from a user with very few uploads, rings alarm bells for me. File:Haidee Tiffen.jpg seems to have something funky going on too.
I have removed the Holly Colvin image, but left the Haidee Tiffin one; the latter was uploaded by a user who uploaded many pictures from the 2009 World Cup, and all are on flickr with the appropriate license as fair as I can tell: if you could expand on your concerns, I might be better able to judge the image myself? Harrias talk 07:45, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No concerns over redlinks, as they are not part of the criteria.
See my copyedit
New Zealand is not sorting by name properly
What's with 07, 02, etc. in the birth dates?
Nothing particularly intentional, just because it is within coding, I automatically did it that way; should be fixed now. Harrias talk 07:45, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Check sorting. I'm seeing a lot more mistakes (birth dates in Sri Lanka, bowl in South Africa, etc.) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't looked properly at the New Zealand list, but I think it revolves around Aimee Mason getting married to a Mr Watkins, and whether "Mc" should sort as "Mc" or "Mac", something I need to check. For the Sri Lankan and South African lists, I can't see any problem; the withdrawn player is set not to sort, so I guess it might be that which is making it appear odd? Harrias talk 07:16, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
New Zealand list should now sort appropriately by name. South Africa, Sri Lanka and the West Indies all had a withdrawn player, which does not sort with the rest of the players, is this what is causing the apparent error? I have added a note in the key that the withdrawn players do not sort. Harrias talk 07:48, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from —Vensatry (Ping me)

—Vensatry (Ping me) 08:36, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Leave Inns, but bowl avg. is definitely a significant parameter in these lists. The "stumpings" column hasn't got any significance here as it remains a null for most of the teams except Aus, Ind and Eng. You could merge both catches and stumpings in a single column and rename it accordingly and add a note. —Vensatry (Ping me) 16:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Simply put, I disagree. Merging catches and stumpings would mean the table wouldn't be sortable on stumpings, and while it may be a relatively minor statistic it is a very relevant one for wicket-keepers, and if the statistic is in the table, it should be sortable by. Bowling average in one-day cricket is actually, in my opinion, an unimportant statistic, economy and wickets taken give a much better summary of a bowler's performance. Harrias talk 16:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I never thought that way! you're right merging them would be a bad idea. List looks very fine.
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

The Rambling Man (talk) 20:36, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
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 Hahc21 10:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC) [6].[reply]

List of songs recorded by Ashley Tisdale

Nominator(s): Decodet (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because after some hard work - and based on another list of songs that have been nominated to Featured list status - I feel this article now meets tne desired criteria and therefore should be promoted to Featured list. Decodet (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Underneath-it-All
* Add Time Inc. as the publisher in ref 1
  • Don't over wikilink items. Ex: Walt Disney Records
  • Ref 13: iTunes Store (US). Apple → [[iTunes Store]] (US). [[Apple Inc.|Apple]]
  • I would change the table "Album" header to "Releases"
  • Degree → [[Rexona|Degree]]
  • The lead needs a copy-edit. Many sentences sound awkward.
    • A complete list of songs by the American actress, singer and songwriter Ashley Tisdale. She has recorded material for two studio albums, six soundtrack albums and promotional campaigns. → American actress, singer and songwriter Ashley Tisdale has recorded material for two studio albums, six soundtracks and promotional campaigns.
    • signed her for a recording contract in July 2006 and she started working on her debut album. Following that, Tisdale released her debut album, Headstrong in February, 2007. → signed her for a recording contract in July 2006. Tisdale then began to work on her debut studio album Headstrong, which was released in February 2007.
    • Tisdale teamed with Degree in 2008 and to promote a deorodant, she recorded and released four covers of '80s hits and one from 1990 → In 2008, Tisdale recorded covers of popular songs from the 1980s and 90s to promote a deodorant produced by Degree.
  • The following year, Tisdale released her second studio album Guilty Pleasure, which had the tracks "It's Alright, It's OK" and "Crank It Up" released as singles. → The following year, Tisdale released her second studio album Guilty Pleasure. The tracks "It's Alright, It's OK" and "Crank It Up" were released as singles. She also worked as a co-writer on the album, contributing to the promotional...

– Underneath-it-All (talk) 19:00, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed everything! Thanks for your review. Decodet (talk) 22:53, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dates should be consistent in the refs section. April 16, 2009 or 2009-04-16.
The dates in ref. 2 still need to be fixed – Underneath-it-All (talk) 22:33, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I missed that one, thanks.  Done Decodet (talk) 23:20, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Lightlowemon
Just out of curiosity this list would only include songs released on records/sound tracks right? It just seems odd since there are a fair few Phineas and Ferb songs missing from the list sung by Tisdale which would have had to obviously been recorded to be put into the episode. Just seems like something that stuck out to me. Since this is an unusual circumstance I'm not sure if there is any standard and I couldn't see any question of it on the talk page or not. --Lightlowemon (talk) 03:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed she recorded a lot more songs for Phineas and Ferb but shouldn't a list of songs include only released material? Those tracks listed from P&B are the only ones that had any kind of official release if I'm not mistaken. Decodet (talk) 16:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily, I've frequently seen lists like this (albeit I'm not sure they were featured) contain unreleased material, whether they be officially unreleased or just not on an album. Coming to mind includes List of songs recorded by Beyoncé Knowles and List of songs recorded by Westlife. Like I said, this is an unusual circumstance and I think warrants more input. I would personally like to see them included. I think there are 8 Phineas and Ferb CD's released + 1 karaoke CD (so anything wouldn't count). Might be worth double checking. I swear Candace Party was on one of them. I also noticed that A Dream Is a Wish Your Heart Makes is missing when Ashley Tisdale was a part of the Disney Channel Circle of Stars, this should definitely be included. --Lightlowemon (talk) 00:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I can't believe I missed "A dream", thanks for letting me know. I've searched Walmart and I found two more Phineas soundtrack albums: The Movie and the Holiday Especial so I've added Tisdale's songs off these albums. Later tonight I'm going to search on iTunes and see if there is any digital-only release that may have a Candance song included. If there is, I'm adding it as well. Decodet (talk) 19:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Added a couple more songs from the other soundtracks released on iTunes. Thanks for your comment! Decodet (talk) 23:51, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a comment on the articles talk page, I still think the non soundtrack songs should be included, but if no one else things otherwise, don't feel obliged to, the list I put on the talk page can be used should they be released in the future. --Lightlowemon (talk) 15:10, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. They are sourced now. I didn't do it before because I've read some other featured list of songs like Katy Perry, Adele and Rihanna and any of them had the singles releases sourced and I was like "Well, maybe we don't need it because discographies don't source the singles either", that's why. But it's OK, it's done now. Decodet (talk) 23:29, 22 August 2013 (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/Featured_log/October_2013&oldid=577033897"