Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Christian rock bands/archive1

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 The Rambling Man 09:57, 5 September 2009 [1].

List of Christian rock bands

Nominator(s): Darchaf (talk) 01:45, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Featured list candidates/List of Christian rock bands/archive1

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe the information is now completely acurate, and neatly arranged, adequately sourced, and meets the criteria set out for a featured lists. Darchaf (talk) 01:45, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support I completely support this nomination. I believe that this article is a well organized list of information, a complete list that is really helpful for people (like me) who want to find christian rock bands quickly. I think that this list is in great condition, is greatly organized, and is a great asset to the Wikipedia site.Edwied (talk) 01:54, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This list still has a ways to go; I'm not sure that it is ready for FLC. Wikipedia is definitely not a reliable source, and what makes http://www.drindustrial.com/bandList.php and http://www.musicfaith.com/Artists reliable? The lead is nearly nonexistent (see leads of recently promoted FLs), and there is no mention of the inclusion criteria. The list also seems heavily systematically biased with regard to US bands. I strongly suggest withdrawing and submitting for peer review. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (edit conflict, agree entirely with Dabomb). I appreciate the newly-acquired enthusiasm for Wikipedia that both of you have, but this is some distance from being an example of Wikipedia's finest work. At a quick glance, compared to the criteria:

"Prose. It features professional standards of writing." There's no prose at all, and there should be.
"Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria." Featured lists don't start "This is a list of Christian rock bands. Only add names here if the band has their own article on Wikipedia - anything else will be removed." And as that's the entire lead, it falls significantly short of what's expected.
Content: "where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items." Genres are given, but without sources. We are not told, for instance, which bands are active and which are defunct, or perhaps date of first album (which could then be a sortable column if it was presented in a sortable table - not saying it should be, just a passing thought).
No proper references - three general links, one of which is a WikiProject page, and I'm not sure about the reliability of the other links.
Lots of overlinking of genres, none of which appear to be sourced in any case (I shouldn't have to go to the article about the band to find citations).
Inappropriate use of flags - see MOS:FLAG. Some are bizarre - why does Liberation Suite get an EU flag for touring parts of Europe?

It's unfortunate that Edwied didn't take heed of the (earlier) views of Dabomb87, a very experienced contributor in featured content, that this list was not of featured quality. Take a look over recently-promoted lists for inspiration and ideas for improvement; consider withdrawing this nomination, working on the list then taking it to Peer Review before renominating it. This list can get much better. Bencherlite ^Talk 02:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - sorry guys, but clearly doesn't meet FL requirements -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cool idea for a list, and I'd like to see this back here at some point, but I also feel it has a long way to go. The comments above pretty much hit the nail on the head. My main concerns would be around MOS-type stuff (all the flags, over-linking, poor lead, disproportionately large images, etc), and the obvious neutrality issues with having so many American bands and so few from anywhere else. Drewcifer (talk) 02:37, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm speedy failing this list. Please address the numerous concerns above and take it to peer review before returning it here. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:59, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.