Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Bloc Party discography
- 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 21:49, 2 May 2008.
Bloc Party discography edit
previous FLC (15:50, 14 April 2008)
Resubmitted as all of the previous concerns have been addressed. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 11:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
- Avoid bold links in the lead per WP:LEAD#Bold title.
- Done. You might want to see Indoplug's argument in the previous FLC though.
- "Listed are songs that were never released by Bloc Party commercially as singles." vs "This is a listing of official releases by Bloc Party"...
- Reworded.
- One reference uses www.bbc.co.uk as its publisher - why not just BBC?
- I assume you mean blocparty.net, and fixed.
That's about it for now, I'll take a closer look later. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I took care of all my minor concerns myself. One question though; you might want check those music videos again, because mvdbase (from where I presume you got them from) lists even live recordings of songs as videos, not just official music videos. Further, the different versions listed are often minor edits/cuts to a video, hence do not really merit listing. If you can cross-check with the official website or something for the definitive list. Also, BlocParty.net is a fansite and is not reliable; remove all their references. For misc. releases, try to source to allmusic or Amazon.com. indopug (talk) 03:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Where did you get chart info for singles that charted worse than #40 in the UK? everyhit lists only top 40 AFAIK. indopug (talk) 06:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I am addressing the misc. section, but I'll have to get back to it tomorrow as it's getting late. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 22:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done now.
- I am addressing the misc. section, but I'll have to get back to it tomorrow as it's getting late. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 22:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support looks good! Drewcifer (talk) 00:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments Rateyourmusic and discogs are not reliable sources. Also, "Chart positions" should be "Chart peak positions" or "Peak chart positions". Also what indopug said above. Drewcifer (talk) 06:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I removed those sources. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 22:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Cool. A few more: numbers under 10 should be written out, numbers over ten should be numerical (fourteen=14). The first four sentences of the second paragraph all have the word EP in them. Try and mix up the prose a little bit. I'm not so hot on the note in the EPs section. Seems unnecessary. The Gaurdian should be italicized in citation #1. Drewcifer (talk) 05:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Cool. A few more: numbers under 10 should be written out, numbers over ten should be numerical (fourteen=14). The first four sentences of the second paragraph all have the word EP in them. Try and mix up the prose a little bit. I'm not so hot on the note in the EPs section. Seems unnecessary. The Gaurdian should be italicized in citation #1. Drewcifer (talk) 05:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose:You haven't cited the album peak chart positions properly. The all refer to the Australian charts. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 14:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, the compilation has charted in other countries. eg France You should mention these. I will be happy to support if you can clear these points. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 15:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Thanks, weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. All concerns addressed. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 17:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Thanks, weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- As this is the English Wikipedia, I'd like to see the charts for English speaking countries grouped before those for non-English speaking countries, in this order:
- Home country (UK)
- All English speaking countries (alphabetised)
- All non-English speaking countries (alphabetised)
- World chart (if available)
- I'm not going to do anything with this, due to consensus as stated by kollision.
- Did none of the singles chart in Europe, despite the albums doing okay?
- Wow, did I really miss that? Fixed.
- The references for the Miscellaneous section should be in the Comments column
- Done.
- What's with the extra thick line in the table for the Miscellaneous section between "The Marshalls Are Dead" and "Like Eating Glass"?
- What line? Renders fine on my PC, anyone else have this problem?
- Any references for the music video directors?
- Yep, added.
That's all I got -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 04:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC) Comment to Matthewedwards I think UK/US should come before all other English-speaking countries in the charts. These are the two most important markets in terms of marketing, sales, promotion, media coverage etc. indopug (talk) 07:09, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see my argument to the contrary at the Sonic Youth FLC. Drewcifer (talk) 07:41, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The general consensus at WP:CHART (a MoS guideline) is that the home country comes first followed by all other charts in alphabetical order. I think this is the way it should be as it is not only clearer to follow but also more NPOV. - kollision (talk) 18:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I do agree with that theory, although I think it should be refined to alphabetise all English language charts before listing foreign language charts (alphabetically again) -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, but wouldn't that be slightly biased toward English speaking countries? weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 16:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I do agree with that theory, although I think it should be refined to alphabetise all English language charts before listing foreign language charts (alphabetically again) -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The general consensus at WP:CHART (a MoS guideline) is that the home country comes first followed by all other charts in alphabetical order. I think this is the way it should be as it is not only clearer to follow but also more NPOV. - kollision (talk) 18:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral as I will be unable to see the nomination out to the end. Sorry. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok then. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment mvdbase is unreliable, linking to them is not allowed. Directors' names are normally displayed at tstart and end of the video, so its not controversial/disputable information. Mvdbase sometimes includes minor edits as separate videos, could you check with the official website? Eg: the "Banquet" article says there are two, not three, videos. indopug (talk) 15:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- ok, addressed. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 16:23, 27 April 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.