Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Basshunter videography/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 archived by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 29 February 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Basshunter videography[edit]

Nominator(s): Eurohunter (talk) 13:46, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After successful nomination of Basshunter discography I'm nominating his videography. According to sources, videography is complete it meets the criteria for a featured list and passed GOCE. Structure is after similar featured lists. Eurohunter (talk) 13:46, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose citing to the primary source (youtube) instead of a secondary source is suspect. --In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 23:28, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose YouTube is not a reliable source. Yes, it proves the videos exist. But where are the sources to show WP:LISTN? Seems to me that the handful of entries which actually have coverage in independent sources could be covered at Basshunter main page. b uidhe 03:49, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Official channels at YouTube should be reliable. There is no diffference between linking to official upload on YouTube and official CD release. I'm not sure if it is even possible to have every entry in the list covereted in independent media (I mean even best selling artists). Eurohunter (talk) 22:34, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - YouTube never was reliable source but official channel were. Eurohunter (talk) 20:14, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Buidhe. Apart from the Swedish sources, which I can't read, nothing in the refs supports LISTN. - Dank (push to talk) 02:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Dank: Did you noticed answer above? Otherwise I would say vote is incorrect. Eurohunter (talk) 20:05, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing for now, multiple opposes with no action taken to counter. I agree with them, incidentally- there's so much online journalism out there now that finding someone actually talking about these videos (and therefore showing that the topic is notable), beyond the bare proof that they exist, should be doable. No prejudice against re-nominating once that's done. --Pres N 02:41, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN: I had no answer so I couldn't do anything. Once again there is no difference between linking to official videos on YouTube and official CD release which are commonly accepted. Eurohunter (talk) 20:15, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eurohunter: Are they, though? The last videography list to be promoted appears to be Jimi Hendrix videography in May 2018. While it does cite a few DVD covers for credits, it mostly uses books and review sites. The ones before it were from 2016 (Taylor Swift videography, Katy Perry videography), and again, mostly cited to music websites/magazines. You're right, there's nothing different between citing a music video on youtube and a music video on a dvd. Neither one proves notability of the subject, only verifies the facts. Please read WP:LISTN, as mentioned above- you need to prove that the subject of "Basshunter videography" is a notable one by showing that non-primary reliable sources talk about it. It's not enough to just prove that the videos exist in the first place. --Pres N 22:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN: If you look at cite number 44 or 50 in Jimi Hendrix videography it is artificial because what is the point of cite review for technical details included in the table? In addition it links to page in AllMusic instead of review in AllMusic so author and date provided are only for review. Summarizing review data (author and date of review) should be removed from cites as they only cite technical data from AllMusic, not review. Eurohunter (talk) 22:55, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eurohunter: Look, I'm not going to argue with you any more about this. All three opposers and I said the same thing; you are free to disagree all you want but that doesn't make it pass LISTN or FLC. As all 4 editors have told you, citing almost only self-published sources (the first references that aren't to the video/appearance being referenced itself are refs 44-48... out of 48) means that you haven't shown that this topic is notable. I have no doubt that every bit of this list is true. And sure, the video itself proves that truth more clearly than a secondary source. But that's not the point- you also have to prove that it's notable. This is true for every single article on wikipedia; I don't understand how you have been here for a decade without understanding that. Literally all you have to do is add citations to secondary sources (feel free to leave in the primary sources!) and renominate. I'm not going to respond any more to this discussion. --Pres N 23:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, 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.