Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/November 2008: Difference between revisions
m Bot updating FLC archive links |
failing 3 nominations |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{featured list log}} |
{{featured list log}} |
||
{{TOClimit|limit=3}} |
{{TOClimit|limit=3}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/German football champions}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of One Piece video games}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Maryland hurricanes (1950–1979)}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of North Melbourne Football Club coaches/archive1}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of North Melbourne Football Club coaches/archive1}} |
||
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Australian Football League grounds/archive1}} |
{{Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Australian Football League grounds/archive1}} |
Revision as of 22:08, 8 November 2008
Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/German football champions
- 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 User:Scorpion0422 20:53, 22 November 2008 [1].
- First FLC ended with 0 Supports and 0 Opposes.
- Second FLC ended with 3 Supports and 0 Opposes.
-- Goodraise (talk) 10:16, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, per comments from last nomination. Why did it fail?Tintor2 (talk) 22:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. I couldn't tell from the edit summaries.-- Goodraise (talk) 23:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - the reason this FLC failed before was because of the concern based on the tables, as it was suggested that it be discussed at WT:VG to make a new table that can be sorted and more properly organized, I supported the previous 2 FLC's, but this problem needs to be resolved.--SRX 02:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - table issue is resolved from what I see below.--SRX 01:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support My issues were resolved from the previous FLC, and as long as the table issue is resolved, this list is ready for promotion. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:20, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments: The list looks like a good start and is close to FL status. Here are a few things that stood out to me.
- Lead
- The first sentence seems a bit miss leading to me; mainly because I associated "One Piece" to a manga/anime series. I would tweak it to say "The One Piece video games series is published by..."
- Done. -- Goodraise (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Another minor tweak. Feels redundant and just sounds weird to me: "The g
Gamesof the One Piece serieshave been released..."- Done. -- Goodraise (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- List
- I think I understand the comment about empty space now. However, I think this is a result of the content rather than the format. A sortable table won't use the space much better.
- Are there any other interesting tidbits about the specific games? Did one introduce something new and different to the series? Does one have any interesting fact about its development?
- I don't know. I didn't even play the games. Most of the games don't even have an article of their own. So there's no easy way of drawing information from. -- Goodraise (talk) 15:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, I think the publisher and developer comments can be combined into one statement. This will give the sentences more length and reduce some of the empty space to the right.
- Done. -- Goodraise (talk) 15:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If need be you can remove the {{-}} template to cut down on empty space too. Some editors don't like them, but I don't think they're a problem.
- Removed most of them. I only added them in the first place to mirror the appearance of List of Castlevania titles. -- Goodraise (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Are there any other interesting tidbits about the specific games? Did one introduce something new and different to the series? Does one have any interesting fact about its development?
- Why is Battle Stadium not just a "Related game"? I remember it featuring characters and elements in a basic manner like the Jump Star games.
- Hope these comments help. The list is looking good and I'll be happy to support once these issues are addressed. (Guyinblack25 talk 17:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- I don't know what you mean by "basic manner", but the "O." in "Battle Stadium D.O.N" stands for "One Piece", the "D." for "Dragon Ball", and the "N" for "Naruto". The playable characters and stages, like the title, are close to equally shared among the franchises. While Jump Ultimate Stars and Jump Super Stars feature characters from a wide variety of sources, like Super Smash Bros., Battle Stadium only draws from these three, more like X-Men vs. Street Fighter. However, that's just my subjective way of sorting the games and I wouldn't mind changing it, if this explaination is not convincing. -- Goodraise (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry for the late reply, I didn't notice your question. I guess I've just always looked at the games (D.O.N. and Jump Stars) as the same type. Mainly because they are games focused on Shonen Jump characters with no real plot elements from any one series. The main difference I see is that DON focuses on just three series instead of 20+. I think a combining them into a single section titled "Other titles" would simplify things. I would also add details in the notes sections about what specifically relates them. Maybe number of characters, mention there are stages based on the anime, etc. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- Done. (Don't worry about replying late. I did not expect a reply until I was done with the other issues. At that point I would have left you a message. Unfortunately, my hands are a bit fuller right now, than they were during the first two FLCs. This list has been up here for so long now...) -- Goodraise (talk) 15:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry for the late reply, I didn't notice your question. I guess I've just always looked at the games (D.O.N. and Jump Stars) as the same type. Mainly because they are games focused on Shonen Jump characters with no real plot elements from any one series. The main difference I see is that DON focuses on just three series instead of 20+. I think a combining them into a single section titled "Other titles" would simplify things. I would also add details in the notes sections about what specifically relates them. Maybe number of characters, mention there are stages based on the anime, etc. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- I don't know what you mean by "basic manner", but the "O." in "Battle Stadium D.O.N" stands for "One Piece", the "D." for "Dragon Ball", and the "N" for "Naruto". The playable characters and stages, like the title, are close to equally shared among the franchises. While Jump Ultimate Stars and Jump Super Stars feature characters from a wide variety of sources, like Super Smash Bros., Battle Stadium only draws from these three, more like X-Men vs. Street Fighter. However, that's just my subjective way of sorting the games and I wouldn't mind changing it, if this explaination is not convincing. -- Goodraise (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Further comments:
- Citations
- I noticed there are a good number of references for some non-controversial content. I'd say two refs are perfectly fine and that some of the first party sources don't add anything extra to the list.
- With the exception of reference [2] I used references I already had for everything they covered. That was in the early stages of that article. At that point I did not care about the visual appeal. Since then, as removing them is a lot easier than putting them back in, I left them where they are. Do you think I should remove excessive references? -- Goodraise (talk) 22:36, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I tweaked the placement of citations to cut down on some of the excess, specifically the publisher/developer info. I did about half of the article as an example.
- Done. (With 2 exceptions related to 2nd next issue.) -- Goodraise (talk) 23:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I would argue that if a game was released on a single platform, then a citation isn't that necessary; the citation of the release date normally has that info anyway. But that's just me and it is not a deal breaker by any means.
- Left it as is for the moment. As long as it's only one reviewer suggesting this, I'd rather not have to put it back later. -- Goodraise (talk) 23:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Content
- For One Piece: Pirates' Carnival, I think the discrepancy between the two publishers (Bandai and Namco Bandai) is because the game was released in North American after March 31, 2006 when Namco and Bandai merged. I think this should be clarified in the notes and the lead. Something like, "Most of the games were originally published by Bandai. Following the merger of Namco and Bandai in March 2006, the series has been published under the Namco Bandai name."
- Now, this is a bit tricky. I've carefully (maybe too carefully) tried not to do original research. Most of the games were released by Bandai Games, which was later renamed to Namco Bandai Games. The sources however don't refer to it under either name. They say Bandai (which still exists as a subsidiary of Namco Bandai Holdings) or Namco Bandai (which could mean either Namco Bandai Games or Namco Bandai Holdings). So instead of deciding which company a source is actually refering to, I only copied whatever name they used. - More generally speaking: In the opening sentence of the lead, I said the games were "published by subsidiaries of Namco Bandai Holdings". That way I don't have to use words such as "most", because all the companies: Bandai, Bandai Games, Namco Bandai Games, and even Banpresto fall into that category. I am not sure if the average reader of the list wants to be informed in such detail about the Namco Bandai Group's inner structure. But if it is desired, then I can elaborate, no problem. -- Goodraise (talk) 23:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Other than these small issues, I'd say the list has shaped up nicely. Keep up the good work. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- I think the extra refs amount to overkill and can be distracting. One Piece: Grand Battle! 3 for example. My eyes are drawn to the refs instead of the content.
- Now that you mention it, I think explaining the merger is unnecessary and may confuse more than it informs.
- Other than the refs issue, the list looks good. (Guyinblack25 talk 05:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- Fixed. I removed 30 citations from only 3 title entries. I suppose it was a bit much. -- Goodraise (talk) 06:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support: The list has definitely improved and my main concerns have been addressed. Though I think the article still has some minor room for improvement here and there. But I still believe it meets criteria in its current form. Good job. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Maryland hurricanes (1950–1979)
- 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 not promoted by User:Scorpion0422 16:20, 4 November 2008 [2].
I am nominating this page for FL status, I believe that it fully meets all FL criteria. Any problems, please let me know. C4v3m4n (talk) 12:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately, I'm going to have to oppose for now. I haven't read the article yet, but I notice quite a significant issue. Virtually the entire article relies on http://afl.allthestats.com/. My main concern is this statement at the bottom of that page: "No guarantee regarding the accuracy of the statistics on this site is given." Is there any way to prove that it is, in fact, reliable and accurate? Better yet, could you replace it? Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 23:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately, this is the only website available that records all of the VFL/AFL coaches. I, myself, was reluctant to put them in, put I had no choice. I hope you understand. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It can't be used. Use another one please, or find other reliable sources that consider this one reliable. Gary King (talk) 00:40, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. Looking at it, looks more of a blog type site, especially with that note that they have claiming that they don't guarantee the validity of the statistics deems it less reliable, please search either for more reliable sources or a general reliable source.--SRX 01:07, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It can't be used. Use another one please, or find other reliable sources that consider this one reliable. Gary King (talk) 00:40, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "just a few kms north of " – this is too colloquial, and it's too vague when it could be exact. Can't an exact distance be given? It's about five kilometers, isn't it? Provide a converted value for miles, too; you can use {{convert}} for that.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "1869 purportedly" – "1869. It was purportedly" – and do you have a reference for this information? Who claimed this, if it was purportedly?
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Gary King (talk) 23:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)
- The Kangaroos are based in North Melbourne, just a few kms north of Melbourne metropolitan area. - please spell out kilometers and use {{convert}} to convert it to miles as well.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The North Melbourne Football Club was formed in 1869 purportedly established to satisfy the needs of local cricketers who were keen to keep themselves fit over the winter months. - makes no sense, do you mean fit as in "health in exercise"?
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- They entered the VFL (Victorian Football League) in 1925 after 48 years in the VFA (Victorian Football Association). The name of the organization is first, than the acronym in parenthesis.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Wels Eicke became the first coach of the North Melbourne Kangaroos in 1925, serving for two seasons before retiring after the 1926 season. - after one mention "North Melbourne Kangaroos," you can say only Kangaroos or just Melbourne, switch throughout don't be repetitive.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In terms of tenure, Denis Pagan has coached more games (240) and seasons (10) than any other coach in the clubs history[2]. - citation should go after period.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The first three paragraphs need to be merged into one.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The parenthesis are really killing the flow of the prose, like In terms of successfullness, Ron Barassi has been more successful (65.91% win/lost record) than any other coach in the club's history[3]. - First of all "successfullness" is not a word, also would be better stated as "Barassi has been more successful, with a 65.91% win/loss record) [notice it's loss not lost]. Also, citation after period.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- IMO, the Term years should be linked to the respective seasons.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Need more variety of references, you mainly only use one, which I also question it's validity.--SRX 23:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- As mentioned above, this is the only website available that records all of the VFL/AFL coaches. Any suggestions? C4v3m4n (talk) 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Like those commenters before me, I dislike the reliance on one website with questionable reliability. However, I don't like the tone of some phrases in the lead, and I see MOS issues. This article would have greatly benefited from a peer review.
- "The Kangaroos are based in North Melbourne, just 2 kilometres (1.2 mi) north of Melbourne metropolitan area." "just"-->which is.
- "It was purportedly established" Sounds skeptical.
- "They entered the" The previous sentence referred to the team as "It", now it's called "they".
- "
In terms of tenure, Denis Pagan has coached more games (240) and seasons (10) than any other coach in the clubs history." - "He coached the Kangaroos to two AFL Premierships in the 1996 season and then again in the 1999 season." Colon or semicolon after "Premierships".
- "In terms of successfullness, Ron Barassi has been more successful" Repetition.
- "(65.91% win/loss record)" Is this level precision necessary?
- "7 coaches" Spell out numbers under 10.
- "He played
only21 games for the Kangaroos and coached 20 of those games." - Use symbols along with colors in the table per WP:COLORS.
- Use unspaced en dashes for the year ranges in the "Term" column.
- "Thomas coach the Kangaroos for a single match in 1926, while a replacement coach was found after the sacking of Gerry Donnelly." Wrong tense. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:03, 24 October 2008 (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 not promoted by User:Matthewedwards 20:13, 1 November 2008 [3].
I am nominating this page for FL status. The article is clearly written, heavily referenced, visual appealing; all which meet FL criteria. C4v3m4n (talk) 10:09, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- This List of Australian Football League grounds lists every ground upon which a senior VFL/AFL game has been played. Australian rules football is played on a grassed oval, according to the specifications in the Laws of Australian football, with an average length of between 135 and 185 metres and a width of between 110 and 155 metres.
- Featured lists are discouraged to begin with This is a list of _____
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Should be reworded to say that The Australian Football League has (# of grounds). Then continue with the other sentence.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You should you the {{convert}} template to convert metres into feet.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Featured lists are discouraged to begin with This is a list of _____
- Most Australian rules football grounds are also used for other sports, such as cricket, rugby, soccer or the the Olympic games, and for events such as rock concerts or exhibitions. - Reword to such as cricket, rugby, soccer, the Olympic games (see how the word "the" is not pipelinked), and for events such as concerts and exhibitions. (doubt they are only rock concerts.
- The lead needs to be expanded, say what was the first ground, what is the most recent ground built, which ground has the most capacity, which has the less.
- Fixed C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Table: Name of Ground should just be Ground
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Table: Year First Used how about Opened
- Fixed C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Table: The capacity needs to be in a {{sort}} template.
- Many of the grounds now serve as a training ovals for an AFL team, as it is highly unlikely any of them will be used in regular competition again. - violates WP:NPOV, reword.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Waverley Park, located in Mulgrave, Victoria is by far the highest capacity stadium in the list below, able to hold as many as 93,000 people. - the prose needs to be written in encyclopedic format, not as if you are talking to the reader and telling them about the list --> Waverley Park in Mulgrave Victoria held the highest capacity, at (total capacity) until it's closure in (when it closed).
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The stadium was closed due to a lack of public transport infrastructure (as the stadium was situated outside Melbourne), lack of parking, inadequate public and corporate facilities and, since the ground was unusually larger than normal AFL grounds, spectators felt they were too far away from the game. - many grammatical errors.
- Reworded. C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Princes Park (now known as Visy Park) was the most recent stadium to close, which occurred in 2005. With the construction of the new stadium, Telstra Dome, the AFL decided to cease all AFL matches from being played there as the ground's capacity wasn't adequate for the modern game. - same here.
- Reworded. C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The references need to be in {{cite}} template.
- References need to verify the information, not the existence of the stadiums.
- You'll find the websites used verify the stadiums capacity. C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- References should be before External links.
- Fixed C4v3m4n (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- After seeing the references and content, I
Quick-Failthis list, too many grammatical errors, MOS issues, and fails WP:WIAFL. Before FLC, the article should have been peer reviewed.--SRX 15:35, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply] - It looks like it's a work in progress, still some more issues.
- The first three paragraphs should be merged, they are two short.
- How about in the lead state what's the most recent stadium and which stadium has the lowest capacity.
- Did you use the {{sort}} template? The capacity isn't right when sorted.
- The current tenants IMO shouldn't be sortable because there are more than one entries in one box.
- The prose of the former grounds needs to be verified with reliable sources.
- There needs to be a note explaining why a ground's capacity has a ?.
- Prose of the former minor grounds also needs to be verified with a reliable source.
- Section title: Future or Proposed Grounds ---> Proposed grounds
- Same thing for pre season venues, the question marks.
- The years used for that table shouldn't be sortable either.
- The international venues table should be made sortable.--SRX 21:03, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose
- References need to be formatted.
- Fixed. C4v3m4n (talk) 23:39, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, since there are also the above issues that exist, I'm opposing for now.
Gary King (talk) 16:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose All references need to be formatted correctly. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 16:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Surely it can be a featured list. C4v3m4n (talk) 23:39, 20 October 2008 (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 not promoted by User:Matthewedwards 20:13, 1 November 2008 [4].
Nominating - A State Of Trance (talk) 02:55, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- Make "This is the discography of Daft Punk" more interesting
- "Paris-born musicians Guy-Manuel de Homem-Christo and Thomas Bangalter met in 1987." – perhaps mention the fact that they also formed Daft Punk?
- "album, Discovery was " – "album, Discovery, was "
- "Concurrently production" – "Concurrent production", and Concurrent probably isn't the best word, anyways
- "2001 also saw the" – don't begin sentences with numbers
Gary King (talk) 04:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All Done - A State Of Trance (talk) 05:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Just a side note: Daft Punk was not "formed" in 1987 - they simply met then, in school. just64helpin (talk) 14:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
"Material shot for an eventually-canceled video was reworked and expanded to create the feature film Daft Punk's Electroma." No hyphen after -ly adverbs."In the summer of 2006 the duo performed live for the first date of what would become their worldwide 2006 and 2007 tours." Comma after 2006.For albums that did not chart, use em dashes instead of hyphens and make a note of what they mean, like at Rachel Stevens discography.Why is there a section about the Grammy Awards? That should be in an article about the awards and nominations received.Reference 1 needs publisher info.In the Music videos section Daft Punk is overlinked.- "
While marketed and broadcast on television as music videos," "While"-->Although.Dabomb87 (talk) 14:27, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All Done - A State Of Trance (talk) 16:22, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"the duo performed live for the first date of" What does "first date" mean in this context?Dabomb87 (talk) 22:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Please allow your high-value links to stand out, and delink French
- de-linked French - A State Of Trance (talk) 02:59, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Where are the references for Peak Chart Positions?
- According to List of record charts, Finland, Sweden and Switzerland have articles about their album charts. Same for the singles table. It's inconsistent to link to the articles about the countries
- added sweden and switzerland articles, delinked Finland. - A State Of Trance (talk) 03:13, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge the singles certifications into the table, as it is with the albums one
- The tracks they remixed, do they have any official names, or are they all like "Take Me Out (Daft Punk Remix)"?
- I believe they are all simply "(Daft Punk Remix)" - A State Of Trance (talk) 03:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you provide years and possibly the releases the remixes appeared on?
- Do they have any songs that appear exclusively on any compilations or soundtracks?
Matthewedwards 21:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose:
- All chart positions need to be referenced by reliable sources
- Home video → Video albums
-
- The "Home video" section contains Daft Punk's Electroma, which is not a video album. just64helpin (talk) 03:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All music video directors should be referenced by reliable sources
- Place live albums & compilation albums in separate tables
- Add catalog numbers and release formats
- U.K. → UK
- U.S. → US
-
- I believe the practice is to use "U.S." or "USA" to disambiguate from the word "us".
- All remixes should be referenced
- Notes should be added to references that direct readers to a search engine (see Geri Halliwell discography#References)
-- Underneath-it-All (talk) 02:37, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Source comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- Ref 28 needs a publication date.
- IMBD is not a reliable source.
- removed - A State Of Trance (talk) 04:44, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- On ref 9, the words in the access date are running together.
- Links check out with link checker. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.