Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Silverchair discography

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 promoted 04:51, 19 March 2008.

Silverchair discography[edit]

I've worked over this for the last week or so, basing it mostly on the Powderfinger discography. Here's hoping this FLC is a little shorter than that one! Happy to act on suggestions. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 06:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: needs some work.
Note: I have contacted him several times, but RaNdOm26 is yet to strike this oppose or comment on what else needs to be done. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The abbreviations in Charts are very misleading. "IND" looks like it was charted in India, "TH" looks more like Thailand. Also, I question the list's accuracy as the Canadian Hot 100 is a chart for singles and not albums.
    • I changed the abbreviations and fixed the Canada wlink. dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 06:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • The abbre could still be better. It's better to mention which country. "BB200" is basically U.S. Albums Chart, so use "U.S." The next charts, "HEAT" and "IDP", are also U.S. charts. Same with singles. Use "U.S. Main" and "U.S. Mod". RaNdOm26 (talk) 07:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Singles released" isn't needed as the "Singles" Section below already states what singles appear on each album, making one of them redundant. See also Natasha Bedingfield discography.
  • No need for links to years.
  • The box sets should be expanded further (labels, charts, etc) and use a table like the others.
    • The label information is already there. There is no chart figures, and none of them were certified...do you think I should? dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 06:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oops, I overlooked the labels. The Box Sets looks rather bare without the additional info. Is there an exact release date? Good to research this if possible. If it was released in Oz, a chart section is still necessary, and show that it did not chart in ARIA. Without it, it looks like its unknown whether it did chart or not. By the way, is it supposed to be "Sony" or "Sony Music"? In Frogstomp, it says its "Sony Music". RaNdOm26 (talk) 07:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The B-sides and Other appearances are way too different in terms of format. Why bold the years? Why are they in smaller font. Why are the references in a separate column?.... No need for this. RaNdOm26 (talk) 06:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've made the formatting consisted in terms of colours etc. The references are in a separate column as they reference the entire row, as opposed to only some data (I could do this in the video section if you like). dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 06:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • MUCHHHHHH better! Still unsure about the ref column, but it will be better if the video section does this to be consistent. Could you also finish off the directors section? This source says music director for Tomorrow.
Resolved stuff from Drewcifer

Comment Looks pretty good, though I do have some concerns:

  • Discogs is not considered a reliable source. Neither is IMDB of MVDBase. And I'm not so sure about metallicafans.co.uk either.
    • I removed IMDB and MVDBase as they're not critical there. For Discogs, I can't find much else in most cases...I dunno, I'll try some more searches. dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 09:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only the first instance of a publisher in the in-line ciationsshould be wikilinked (ARIA, RIAA, and AMG are wikilinked every time, I believe).
    • I disagree; the wikilinking loses usefulness if you have to search through the entire ref section to find which article it should be pointing to. dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 09:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, try and avoid abbreviations in the publisher values (RIAA/ARIA, etc.)
  • "Charts" is too vague. It should be "Chart peak positions" or "Peak chart positions" or something like that.
  • I'm not too hot on the "Singles released" column of the albums table, since that's already covered more than adequately in the Singles table.
  • I'm also not sure about putting the certifications in the Notes column. Since it's somewhat similar to the chart positions, certifications are usually given their own column (which you'd have room for without the "Singles released" column). That way you can also consolidate all the instances of ref #11. Check out Nine Inch Nails discography for an example.
  • The multi-platinum numbers should use "×" not "x" for the multiplier.
  • Saying "Second studio album", "Third studio album", etc is a little redundant. I think you only need to have that with the debut album.
  • Could you make the various tables in the Albums section more uniform? ie the width of the various columns?
  • Since neither box set charted, there's really not much reason to have the charts columns.
  • Also, is that table even necessary? Couldn't that info be added to the notes section of the studio albums table fairly easily?
  • The singles table needs the "Chart peak positions" sub header thingie.
  • According to WaveAid, it shouldn't italicized. Same with Edgefest.
  • I think it's worth noting that the track on the Spawn soundtrack is actually a duet with Vitro.
  • "Silverchair's first single, "Tomorrow", was highly successful upon release in 1994, which provided the band an opportunity to release the song" don't you mean re-release the song? Drewcifer (talk) 08:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Replied to some stuff; the rest is done. Thanks heaps for the review. dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 09:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looking better, here's a few last concerns/suggestions:
  • Charts usually come before the Certifications columns. So it would be nice to be consistent.
  • Yea, I did notice that another user suggested the box sets be in their own table. It just seems redundant to me: there's no new information provided whatsoever, other than the fact that they're box sets. They could both easily be incorporated into the main albums table with a single sentence/bullet point, thus avoiding an unnecessary table altogether.
  • I've merged this box set section into the "live recordings & compilations" table. Does it look better now? Only two tables left, one for the main albums, and one for all other main releases. By the way, is the main heading too long? Should I change to "Other albums"? 134.7.248.130 (talk) 01:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • That looks better, and "other albums" would be good IMO. Thanks heaps for your help! dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 02:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • As for the multiple wikilinks in the citations, I agree that not wikilinking every time reduces sheer usability, but I still stand by WP:MOSLINK, which argues that links are only necessary the first time per major subject/topic/section, since the user is most likely to require additional information the first time a term comes up. This applies equally to citations too.
  • The discogs thing is definitely an big issue. Hopefully you can find different sources.
  • The Charts columns of live recordings still needs to be renamed for clarity's sake.
  • As for the width values and what not, check this out: diff. There's not excessive white space, is there? Just an aesthetics suggestion.
  • Also, it might also be worth nothign that "Spawn" was also included on Neon Ballroom as "Spawn Again". Though space might be an issue.
Drewcifer (talk) 23:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Looking good! Drewcifer (talk) 11:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is a very well put together list. —Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 18:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support well organized and referenced, seems enough. igordebraga ≠ 17:18, 17 March 2008 (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/Silverchair_discography&oldid=1126722160"