Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Telecaster players/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal 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 removed by Dabomb87 23:42, 25 February 2011 [1].

List of Telecaster players

Featured list removal candidates/List of Telecaster players/archive1

Notified: Aguerriero, WikiProject Guitarists

I am nominating this for featured list removal because it fails criteria 4 and 5a as the article does not have any tables in it. GamerPro64 (talk) 17:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delist it fails 3a, too. This list is very likely incomplete; I don't think this list includes all telecast players, only notable. -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 19:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - not so quick to jump on the delist bandwagon, sure, it's not tabulated, but neither are our timelines. So that's not an issue really. As for incompleteness, perhaps this is a {{dynamic list}} like all the other "List of .... people" we have. So, now I'm past that, some comments.

Bad start "This is an alphabeticized list..." we don't do that any more.
Avoid bold links in the lead per WP:MOSBOLD.
Inclusion criteria seems a little, well, POV, "they are players with long careers who have a history of faithful Telecaster use, or the particular guitar they used was unique or of historical importance, or their use of the Telecaster contributed significantly to the popularization of the instrument." - how do the references back this up?
"psychedelic icon " not quite encyclopedic ready, needs references.
Use of en-dash for year ranges is required by WP:MOS.
Don't necessarily like the subdivision into surname ranges, an initially alphabetical list would be better (without subdivision).
" Of equal notability, " quotes like this are nonsense. If they're not nonsense, they need a comprehensive reference.
References need work on their formatting, predominantly mixes of date formats, references completely surrounded in parentheses...)

Now then, my advice:

Look at List of brain tumor patients as a way of presenting a list of folks. I wouldn't unnecessarily break this list into "genres" or similar, but no reason why you can't make a single table of the contents.
Look for floral language in this list "famously used", "his famous...", "a faithful Tele player", "
Reduce the advertising for Fender (e.g. this link).

The Rambling Man (talk) 20:59, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: The list is "incomplete" because it is selective by design. A complete list of all musicians who have ever played Telecasters would be massively long, not very useful, and unencyclopedic. Instead, the list focuses on players whose Telecaster use is notable, not just notable players who happened to have used the guitar. Notability has been determined by the coverage such use has received in books and articles concerned with the history of the instrument. There is inevitably some exercise of judgment employed by editors in determining notability, but this determination is closely linked with the contents of reliable sources. Rambling Man asks how references back up whether those listed "are players with long careers who have a history of faithful Telecaster use, or the particular guitar they used was unique or of historical importance, or their use of the Telecaster contributed significantly to the popularization of the instrument." Well, the references back this up by making statements to that effect. For example, when Tony Bacon's Telecaster book quotes George Fullerton, who says that giving Jimmy Bryant a Tele was like "starting a prairie fire," and that " pretty soon [Fender] couldn't make enough of those guitars," we can justifiably conclude from the source that Bryant's Telecaster use contributed significantly to the popularization of the instrument. No doubt, there is room for improvement of the list, and perhaps standards have been raised since this list was promoted, but let's not be hasty in delisting. The list is of much better quality than most other lists of its type, so it still serves as a good example for improving those, and it shouldn't be too hard to polish this list up, keeping the above advice in mind. Nick Graves (talk) 14:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment no changes since the nomination for delisting. I agree in part with Nick Graves' perspective but the technical issues I raised haven't been addressed at all in two weeks, so I'm afraid I'd have to advocate delisting this list. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:17, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctant delist Dynamic lists are very welcome at FLC, and this certainly is one. Nonetheless, "they are players with long careers who have a history of faithful Telecaster use, or the particular guitar they used was unique or of historical importance, or their use of the Telecaster contributed significantly to the popularization of the instrument." is too vague I'm afraid. I accept that this will be a tough one to come up with, but will be very happy to give the list a proper review (either here, or in preparation for a future FLC if it's demoted), once that is sorted out. —W F C— 13:22, 24 February 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.