Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Selena albums discography/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 NapHit 18:01, 21 October 2012 [1].

Selena albums discography[edit]

Selena albums discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Jonatalk to me 20:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because...it received copy-editing from two users (one from GOCE) and two PRs. I believe it is now ready to be a FL =). Best, Jonatalk to me 20:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from ΛΧΣ21™ 23:07, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
;Sources comments
  • FN#11 is missing most parameters, which would be these: Billboard, Nielsen Business Media/Prometheus Global Media, Issue N°1, ISSN 0006-2510.
  • I see several Billboard references without the publisher, and other with it. (e.g. refs 21 to 23)
  • FN#16 work? publisher? something?
  • I see several Allmusic works wikilinked and other not. Same for its publishers.
  • FN#41 is missing the accessdate, publisher, year and ISBN. All of them are available at the link.
  • Try not to mix both types of references, as they may seem confusing.

— ΛΧΣ21™ 21:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have fixed them all. Best, Jonatalk to me 22:43, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • FN#28 has no accessdate
  • FN#7 to 10 have a different date format.

— ΛΧΣ21™ 23:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Thanks again for the review. Best, Jonatalk to me 01:20, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from TBrandley (talk) 02:05, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • No image?
  • Uses or stuff inside the table should by used with scope="row", rather than col
  • "List of albums, with selected chart positions, sales and certifications" missing something? This applies to all, (eg: the one in the studio albums section, needs "studio" in the caption)
  • Allmusic should be AllMusic
  • Why do some references have publishers and some don't? Use the same method for each please.
  • Don't use double quotes in quotes/references, per WP:MOS, as in ref. 40, 44, etc.
  • Those don't have periods that were manually added. Jonatalk to me 01:53, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Categories should be sorted in alphabetical order
  • Any external links?
  • More

TBrandley 00:07, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 19:11, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Lead is a it big per WP:LEAD, i would expect three paragraphs for a discography, certainly not four fairly chunky paragraphs, I would try and cut down on this as best you can
As TRM states below, the lead is too long, lengths of other articles is not relevant here, we are talking about this one. For the size of the list it is simply too big. NapHit (talk) 13:51, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Jonatalk to me 18:46, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am really not a fan of sentences starting "In..." try and re-jig the sentences where this prefix is used.
  • "In 1989, Selena began recording music for her self-titled debut album, which was released in October 1989." This a prime example of where that prefix is not needed. Remove it altogether as the sentence works without as you state when it was released, having two mentions of 1989 is redundant.
  • "Dreaming of You sold 175,000 copies its first day of release, a record for a pop singer." Firstly, its first day of release is port grammar. Secondly, is the claim it is a record for a pop singer correct? I'm not convinced surely more recent releases will have sold more? The fact the source says making her THEN one of makes me question this even more
  • I'm only going what Billboard and other high-quality reliable sources tells me. Most music fans already know that record has been beaten but at the time Selena held the record and I do not know who holds this record. Jonatalk to me 23:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A quick google search led me ot our Britney Spears article, which states that Baby One More Time sold 500,000 copies on its first day, so I think this proves it is no longer a record. NapHit (talk) 13:51, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Changed the content to "then-record for a pop singer." Jonatalk to me 17:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "largest-selling album to bow at number one..." that is not encyclopaedic writing, never seen bow used in this context before
  • "top twenty" -> top 20
  • You don't need to include the page ranges in the Bibliography, especially as just one page is used for each book

NapHit (talk) 22:03, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

  • I really don't understand the significance of adding the Blue in the Face soundtrack. If her only contribution is a song, then it should be under Guest appearances under the singles discography, but not here. Erick (talk) 04:57, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Lead is too long, the list isn't actually that big, a large portion of the page length is contributed by the refs, so I would expect to see only three paras. Whether or not other lists have a lead that's also too big is not relevant here.
Ok, so can you kindly point to me which sentences are irrelevant to the page? Then I would be more than happy to remove them. Jonatalk to me 17:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can point you to our guideline on how to write a lead - WP:LEAD. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:11, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Jonatalk to me 18:46, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remix albums aren't in the infobox.
  • Most discog infoboxes link to the relevant sections (e.g. studio albums is "hashlinked" to the Studio albums section).
  • Why are chart headings left aligned (e.g. the US TLA heading)?
  • What territory are the release dates relevant to? Where are the release dates cited?
  • How can you use the US release dates if the albums didn't chart in the US? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • They were all released in the US regardless the fact that they didn't chart in that country. Jonatalk to me 18:28, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, so where in ref 21 does it cite that Selena was released on 17 October 1989? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:47, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Jonatalk to me 19:11, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm still not seeing precisely which references are citing which release dates and which release territories. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:16, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All information gathered from AllMusic.com would you like me to add a ref to every album here? Also, AllMusic does not specify which country these albums were released so I removed (US). Best, Jonatalk to me 19:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, have a look at current FLC discogs, I expect them to reference the release date and the territory relevant to that release. If AllMusic is lacking, then you need to find the info from somewhere else. 19:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Was the soundtrack album released by EMI or EMI Latin?
  • Same for Unforgettable? I would check all these as the articles for these don't say EMI Latin...
  • Not my problem if vandals change the distributors, only relaying on AllMusic. Jonatalk to me 17:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is your problem if I oppose this nomination because the labels are uncertain. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:11, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done Jonatalk to me 19:11, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So now it's "EMI Music Distribution" for every release? Redlinked? This needs to be addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:17, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Mis Mejores Canciones – 17 Super Exitos" sold six times platinum but didn't chart anywhere?!
  • According to RIAA yes and no it never shared a position on Billboard. Jonatalk to me 17:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need for "List of best-selling Latin albums in the United States" in the See also since you've already linked it in the lead.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:16, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are my remaining points going to be addressed? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:45, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST is not a valid reason on why I need to add a source to verify the release dates of these albums. I checked others and did not see that they had a source for a release date. Jonatalk to me 12:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, oppose until you can show me where the dates are verified. I've questioned the fact so you need to demonstrate how I can verify it. How does anyone know you haven't just made them up? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:37, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why would I waste my time on making up release dates, if your so critical about it go and check AllMusic yourself and not have me wasting my time on adding a source to something so ridiculous. Jonatalk to me 12:39, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I understand why you're so hostile about me asking for something that I've asked for on all currently running FLCs and will continue to do so in future. Where did you get the information from? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:57, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If someone is coming at me and judging hatefully on the work that I dedicated then damn right I'm going to be hostile. Secondly, all information was retrieved from AllMusic.com. Just because you *now* are asking all current FLCs for a source on release dates doesn't do nothing on me, I follow models not amateur articles. Jonatalk to me 13:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not judging hatefully, I'm not sure where you get that, but I am asking the same from you as I have everyone else. Unfortunately, we expect the featured material to be of the highest standard, and that includes referencing dates which, it appears, have no references. And quite what makes you think the DISCOGSTYLE is the "model" and not "amateur" I have no clue.... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:20, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you are, shall we reminisce? (a) "lead is too long" first of all how are you not going to bring up this "issue" to this discography? this?, this?. I had to remove all record titles Selena had broken and some she currently holds the title to after 17+ years just to make you and that other complainer happy, yet I see other record titles in these discographies, a fan much? I bet if there were a freely licensed photo of her there wouldn't be a problem. (b) "What territory are the release dates relevant to? Where are the release dates cited?" is another one (though I do see you asking for all 2012 nominees) I don't see why you waited until now to bring up this minor issue, but yet have seen you comment on FLCs for the past several years ("but I am asking the same from you as I have everyone else") I just denounced this. Just because these recently promoted lists nominators did as you say, doesn't mean I need to follow the leader and could care less of an oppose from you, I can always renominate again. Lastly, WP:BESTNP was a reference to older promoted lists like Mariah Carey albums discography and Madonna albums discography not the style guidelines that you and other "delegates" have come up with. Jonatalk to me 13:45, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(a) I was not alone in suggesting the lead was too long. Train lead (490 words), Arjona lead (528 words), Usher (621 words), this discog lead originally (826 words) and now (429). Much better. If you think you need a records page for Selena, by all means create one. What do you mean "a fan much?"? Asking for a good summary-style lead is not hateful. (b) asking for references for specific information you have added is not hateful, it is asking for information in the list to be verified. And (c) OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good argument to use when claiming that the Carey and Madonna discogs are "best". They need work! (d) By now, you probably could have added those references in, instead of which we've had a quite pointless discussion going in circles which basically can be summed up by (e) "Standards change". We never used to insist on WP:ACCESS-compliant tables, but we do now, for example. If you threaten to disrupt this process to prove a point, I'm afraid you will not be welcomed to participate in the process in future. There's no need to do that, I would just reference the release dates, so much easier. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yea because there is no photo of her so of course the complainer was going to be critical about the lead and then you followed. Nope, I'm not going to follow you, I don't do Twitter. Secondly, the lead was better off how it was when I started this nomination but yet haters up in here just didn't like that Selena has a lot of records she broke and wanted me to remove them. You are a fan of those artist(s) I have brought up in this lovely discussion, you didn't complain about the lead on their respective discographies and have been complaining about how the lead is too big on here. Exactly, OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good argument either TRM, don't come at me asking me to go and look at other lists and see how they have their references on release dates, again, just because they bark when you command don't expect all users to bow down. I'm sticking to what I believe how the list should be, and you could go and comment on others and do something productive today instead of arguing with me about this stuff rule you made up. Jonatalk to me 14:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't read anyone else's review before I made my own, so please don't suggest I did. The lead was too long. I am not a fan of any music in particular besides Lemon Jelly, please don't make unfounded accusations that I may somehow favour one artist's discography over another. As I mentioned above, their leads were all considerably shorter than the original lead here. I'm not "commanding" and I don't expect anyone to "bark", so please don't make that unfounded accusation. I simply asked you to verify the release dates. I don't "expect all users to bow down", so please don't make that unfounded accusation. If you checked my edit history, I have certainly commented at other FLCs today, so please don't ask me to "do something productive today instead". Finally I entirely refute that this a "rule [I] made up". Please check WP:V. It's a policy of Wikipedia, which I certainly didn't "make up". In that policy, you'll read "... any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable published source using an inline citation..." I challenged the material, so either you'd like to follow a Wikipedia policy by providing verifiable information via an inline citation or you don't want your list to be the best work on Wikipedia. My oppose stands, and I won't be returning to this FLC, the closing director/delegate can determine whether my concerns have been adequately addressed. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:40, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Selena_albums_discography/archive2&oldid=1138488904"