Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Harlem Hit Parade number ones of 1944/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 promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:27, 29 January 2022 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of Harlem Hit Parade number ones of 1944[edit]

Featured list candidates/List of Harlem Hit Parade number ones of 1944/archive1

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the third nomination for a list of number ones on what Billboard considers to be the earliest iteration of its R&B chart. Interestingly, in this year the magazine launched what it considers to be the earliest iteration of its country chart, and two songs were both "R&B" and "country" number ones......75 years before "Old Town Road"! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Aoba47[edit]

For this part, an area noted for its African American population which has been called the "black capital of America", I would replace "which" with "and". I believe that "which" makes it sound like the population is being called this rather than the district.
Would it be beneficial to link Rhythm and blues in this part, the lineage of the magazine's multimetric R&B chart? Other genres are linked in the second and third paragraphs.
Shouldn't this part, which since 2005 has been published under the title Hot R&B/Hip Hop Songs, have a citation?

My comments are relatively minor. Once everything has been addressed, I will be more than happy to support this FLC for promotion. Just out of curiosity, are you planning on bringing all the lists of Billboard number-one rhythm and blues hits through the FLC process as you have done for all the lists of Billboard number-one country songs? Have a great rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 23:58, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: - all the above resolved. As for trying to get another 75+ articles to FLC........hmmmmmm, not sure. Let's wait and see :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:01, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That kind of project would be a lot of a lot for sure lol. Everything looks good to me. I support this FLC for promotion. Best of luck with this nomination! Aoba47 (talk) 23:45, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dank[edit]

Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
"Cow-Cow Boogie (Cuma-Ti-Yi-Yi-Ay)" redirects to Cow-Cow Boogie.
Checking the FLC criteria:
1. I couldn't find anything to fiddle with in the prose. The table coding seems fine. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table.
2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
4. It is navigable.
5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
6. It is stable.
Support. - Dank (push to talk) 21:11, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passed; fewer reviews than normal, but at this point this is a list factory so I'll let it keep chugging along and promote. --Pres N 02:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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