Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Grammy Award for Best Bluegrass Album/archive1: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 18:47, 19 October 2010

Grammy Award for Best Bluegrass Album

Featured list candidates/Grammy Award for Best Bluegrass Album/archive1

Nominator(s): Another Believer _(Talk) 17:15, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets all FL criteria and resembles the other Grammy-related featured lists I have produced (see profile for a complete list). As always, a huge thank you to reviewers for taking the time to look over the list and offer suggestions if needed. Another Believer _(Talk) 17:15, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment—no dab links, ~~but the external link to http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=f0gOAAAAIBAJ&sjid=5n4DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6904,613679&dq is dead.~~ Ucucha 21:51, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just saw this myself (bot update on watchlist). However, this may be a temporary problem, as I noticed several other pages on my watchlist were updated with the "dead link" template. All of them involve Google News links, so either there is a temporary glitch with Google News links, or by coincidence several links have "died" very recently (I access many of these links often since they can be repeated on the other Grammy-related lists I work on). I will be sure to keep an eye on the pages recently updated by the bot. --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Well, the link is still dead, so I went ahead and replaced it with another reference. Hopefully the problem will correct itself, because a bunch of articles on my watchlist were just marked by the same bot for dead links. --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Ucucha 18:48, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Courcelles 02:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Comments

"From 1990 to 1991 the name of the category was changed to Best Bluegrass Recording, and in 1990 the award was reserved for singles rather than albums. Since 1992, the award has been presented under the category Best Bluegrass Album. Beginning in 1993, award recipients often included the producers, engineers, and/or mixers associated with the nominated work in addition to the recording artists. In 1995 and 1997, producers of compilation albums were the only award recipients." Wow, that's a lot of text that needs sourced there.

All of the information in that paragraph can be verified by the single General source. When viewing the list of recipients on the Grammy Awards site, you will see the award name changes and the additional recipients apart from the artists. However, if you feel the General source should also be used as a specific source at the end of the paragraph, I'd be happy to add it. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this needs doing. Pulling this information out of that general source isn't the easiest thing in the world to do. A source directly saying all this would be even better. Courcelles 01:05, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added the Grammy Award site as a reference to the most specific claim in the paragraph. The other claims can be verified by visiting the same source, by simply looking at the table, or by visiting the source in the Ref column for that particular ceremony. --Another Believer _(Talk) 02:39, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As of 2010, Alison Krauss and Ricky Skaggs and Kentucky Thunder share the record" This needs something to indicate the last two items are a singular unit.

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I have to do it. Refs 3 and 11 need the publisher.

Ah! I thought I was way ahead of you on this one, but you found reference inconsistencies nonetheless. Well done! --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Courcelles 05:43, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, as always, for your suggestions. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Courcelles 02:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:50, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments (way, way minor)

"From 1990 to 1991 " Prefer "In 1990 and 1991..."

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"the name of the category was changed to " -> "the category was renamed" (tighter)

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick check, every member of the Various artists originate from the US? Wanted to be clear that your "The award has been presented to artists or groups originating from the United States each year to date" was actually definitely true!

Well, I am not sure that every participating musician on the compilations are American, but the award recipients (Jerry Douglas, Tut Taylor, Todd Phillips) are. --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, it may give undue weight, but when I read that "Steve Martin" had won it in 2010, I immediately assumed it wasn't comedian Steve Martin. Maybe, just maybe, worth a sneaky mention in the lead in the guise of "...most recent winner was..."?

Done. Once a new winner is announced for the 2011 awards, I'd be happy to update Martin's caption to include "comedian". --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 4 could have page=W7 added.

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 6 is page 6B.

Done. --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps check other Google newspaper references to add this additional info.

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you much! --Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support no worries from me. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:50, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - all looks good to me. You're doing well with the Grammy lists, you can't have more than another 297 to go ;-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:50, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

oppose, the table(s) in this article do not meet the requirements of WP:MOS. If you look at WP:Wikitable you'll see that tables are required to use ! scope="row"| and ! scope="col"| Also the use of lots of small text fails the principles of WP:ACCESS -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 18:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 *'''Support''' no worries from me. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 18:50, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 *'''Support''' - all looks good to me.  You're doing well with the Grammy lists, you can't have more than another 297 to go ;-) -- [[User:ChrisTheDude|ChrisTheDude]] ([[User talk:ChrisTheDude|talk]]) 19:50, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
+*'''oppose''', the table(s) in this article do not meet the requirements of [[WP:MOS]]. If you look at [[WP:Wikitable]] you'll see that tables are required to use <code>! scope="row"| and ! scope="col"| </code> Also the use of lots of small text fails the principles of [[WP:ACCESS]] -- [[User:Lil-unique1|<font color="SteelBlue">'''Lil_℧niquℇ №1</font>]] <font color="black"> &#124;</font> [[User talk: Lil-unique1|<font color="OrangeRed">talk2me</font>''']] 18:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)