Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/AC/DC discography/archive1

AC/DC discography

Self nomination another discography FLC. Comments are appreciated. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 19:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Would it be possible to make the columns sortable? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't make sortable columns because none of the other featured discographies have them =) No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 19:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

So? I tried to find what their highest charting song was, but it was difficult because I had to search through the table. Sortability would make it easier. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know, not a single FL discog does this. So, to be fair to the nominator, I think this would be a topic better discussed at WP:DISCOG, since it would be kind of a discography-wide proposal/change/discussion type thing. Drewcifer (talk) 00:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose for now. Good start, but alot of finer details still need to be ironed out. A few examples:

Resolved stuff from Drewcifer

• A few of the sections are bullet-point lists, where tables are generally preferred. But, I would argue that the Remasters section is most appropriate as it is now.

OK, I'll make a table for the videography later. I think the Box Sets section will be more difficult to read in a table. What do you think?

Done.

I could go either way. Whatever you think is best.

OK, it's fixed now.

• The references need to be cleaned up a bit. Take a look at nearly any FL discog to see how to format the actual references section, with general and specific references being seperate. Also, the genreal references need to provide full attribution, just like the specific ones.

Done.

Still kind of messy, namely the two general references.

Fixed, using the cite web template.

• The year column is bigger than it needs to be. In general, I recommend not using width percentages, because you can't guarantee how it's going to look on various monitors. I'd definitely recommend set pixel widths (33px usually does the trick for the year column).

Done.

The reason I suggested 33px is because that's all a 4 digit number needs. More then that, and there's a bunch of space off to one side. This is partly due to the in-line citation in the last upcoming studio album, which should be in the album details column, not the year. I stil recommend 33px, as well as putting

Two more things, then that's it, I promise! The singles in the single table shouldn't mention the B-sides, only the actual single track name. Also in the singles table, the certifications should be left-aligned. Drewcifer (talk) 04:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 03:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Matthew

Comments

• The sections could do with being rearranged to something like:

1 Albums

1.1 Remasters

1.2 Boxsets

2 Singles

3 Videography

4 Soundtrack contributions

5 References

6 Further Reading

7 EL

Done.

• Do not wikilink the bold title in the lead, per Bold title

Fixed.

• "Their last album to date, Stiff Upper Lip was released in 2000, and a new album was announced in 2005[3] and confirmed in 2008.[4]" Reads better when a full stop is used instead of a comma-and-an-and after "2000". Also, all references should follow punctuation, and reference 3 doesn't

Fixed.

• Why is the Australian chart position the last one, when it's an Australian band?

Fixed.

• Per WP:MOS#Acronyms and abbreviations and MOS:ABBR, "U.S." shouldn't be used with "UK". It should be "US" and "UK"

Fixed.

• Alphabetise the other countries' chart postitions columns

Fixed.

• Other FL discogs include music videos in/as the videography, and list commercially available videos and DVDs under a VHS and DVD section

AC/DC released a lot of music videos, I won't be able to source them or even list them. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 00:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

-- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 02:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

• No chart positions for New Zealand, Canada, Japan, or any other country?

So?

So is that right? Seems odd for a big group like ACDC, especially in NZ, their neighbouring country. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 01:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I added charts for Austria, Norway, New Zealand, Sweden and Switzerland. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 22:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

That looks better. Can charts for these territories be found for the singles, too? -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

One other thing, is that the infobox header seems to be formatted wrong with AC/DC wikilinked. It's all squashed together. In an edit preview without the link, it looks fine. Not sure what the problem is though, sorry. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

That's weird, I see the infobox just fine. I'll add the charts to the singles table later this morning. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 03:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

• Numbers below ten should be written in text.

Within a context or a list, style should be consistent (either 5 cats and 32 dogs or five cats and thirty-two dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs). WP:DATE#Numbers

• "the band have released 16 studio albums, plus 4 albums issued in Australia" - yuck - the "plus" is confusing, and also, the infobox says 17 studio albums...

The band have released 16 studio albums. There's one studio album confirmed to be released later this year. Fixed the "plus" thing.

• You should link AC/DC in the lead (obviously not in the bold lead in but as soon as possible afterwards).

Fixed.

• "released over the years" - too familiar for me - write encyclopaedically.

Fixed.

• "are about as close as" ditto. Plus this is a little WP:OR for my taste.

That statement is referenced.

• "internatioal" typo.

Fixed.

• Image caption is a fragment and thus doesn't require a full stop.

Fixed.

• Shouldn't the album titles in the table be bold as well as italic?

Fixed.

• " weren't re-released " - were not. Avoid contractions.

Fixed.

• Be consistent with WP:DATE linking.

Fixed.

• What does (Aus.) mean?

Fixed. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 13:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

That's enough from me. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)