Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Failed log/April 2011: Difference between revisions
Giants2008 (talk | contribs) Create FLC fail log for April 2011 and fail 2 |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 20:26, 2 April 2011
- 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 Giants2008 20:26, 2 April 2011 [1].
- Nominator(s): Pantera5FDP (talk) 02:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it now meets FL criteria. Pantera5FDP (talk) 02:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- Bad start in the lead; don't write in boldface, don't start with sentences like "This is a list" or "The discography of"; instead start like this: "Five Finger Death Punch is an American heavy metal band formed in California. Its discography currently consists of two studio albums, one extended play, nine singles and five music videos."
- Music videos: "Never Enough" unreferenced
- Other appearances: "Hard to See", TNA Reaction unreferenced
- The band's follow-up album War Is the Answer, was released on September 22, 2009 selling 44,000 copies in its first week debuting at #7 on the Billboard 200. — wrong punctuation: The band's follow-up album War Is the Answer was released on September 22, 2009, selling 44,000 copies in its first week, debuting at #7 on the Billboard 200.
- War Is the Answer has gone on to sell over 340,000 copies in the United states. — United States
More comments later.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 10:27, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Pantera5FDP (talk) 02:23, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The major issues is that the lead is unreferenced, even if some items should be referenced, most notably the sales.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 07:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- I agree with GreatOrangePumpkin. Many facts, like sales and band formation, are unsourced.
- Please do not use "#" to denote number.
- Begin with something like "The discography of Five Finger Death Punch, an American heavy metal band, consists of..."
—Novice7 (talk) 10:00, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. Pantera5FDP (talk) 00:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Third one not done. It's okay though. More comments:
- Many online sources are italicized. They should not be. Only print sources must be italicized.
- For MTV references it should be MTV. MTV Networks (Viacom) and not MTV.com
- Back to tables, can you expand CD and DI on its first occurrence?
- If possible, add a column to the studio albums table (maybe "Sales and certifications"). Add the certifications from RIAA. If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
- Third one not done. It's okay though. More comments:
- Fixed. Pantera5FDP (talk) 00:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
—Novice7 (talk) 05:52, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment OK, nicely done, but peak positions should not be referenced in the lead, as they are already below. Ref 1 needs
format=video
.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 10:07, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, fixed. Pantera5FDP (talk) 00:12, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:48, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Mild oppose
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:53, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Oppose CFORK. It has 2 albums, 1 ep, and 9 singles. How can this not be easily merged into the parent article? Two albums does not make a stand-alone article. Nergaal (talk) 04:48, 19 March 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.
- 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 Giants2008 20:26, 2 April 2011 [2].
- Nominator(s): A Thousand Doors (talk) 03:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is my first attempt at writing a FL, so please forgive me if I am making loads of elementary mistakes. I am nominating this for featured list because I have checked it against the criteria and one or two other FLs on similar subjects, and I believe that it currently meets them. The UK Indie Chart receives far less commentary than the singles and albums charts, so there isn't quite as much to say about it, but I have tried to make the lead as informative and engaging as possible. I have also tried to use as many online refs as I can find, but quite a lot of the number ones are cited using back issues of the the magazine ChartsPlus as offline refs. I hope that this is okay. A Thousand Doors (talk) 03:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 15:22, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments firstly, welcome to FLC, nice to see you here.
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
|
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments –
|
- Oppose CFORK. The list has no other information than dates, name and artist. Being such a bare list, I see no reason not to merge it into List of number-one indie hits of 2000s (UK). The product would have somewhere between 100 and 200 entries, without any extra details => completely manageable. Nergaal (talk) 04:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- That's fair enough, but why is that not also true for, say, Hot 100 number-one singles of 2008 (U.S.), Number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 2003 or Hot 100 number-one singles of 2007 (Canada)? To be honest, I actually think that combining all the charts into one huge chart could conceivably work well, but I've got no information about what singles were number one 2000–2005, so the list could be largely incomplete. A Thousand Doors (talk) 14:26, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I will go ahead and nominate those for FLRC. If there are no reliable sources for 2000-2005, then simply get an article for 2006-2010 or something like that, and say that no sources are available before then. Nergaal (talk) 16:57, 28 March 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.