Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Final Fantasy compilation albums

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 User:The Rambling Man 06:51, 10 July 2008 [1].

List of Final Fantasy compilation albums edit

I am nominating this list for FLC because, well, obviously I think it meets the criteria. A few things first, however.

  • First, there is a lot of text. Despite this, I believe that it is clearly set up as a list, and not as an article, and should go to FLC and not FAC.
  • Second, there are quite a few images, which is becoming rather unpopular. They are, however, in infoboxes. In an article about one album, a fair-use image is allowed in the infobox- in fact, there's a whole separate section for them when you upload a file. By extenuation, in an article about several albums, each album-section should be able to have it's own, given (and this is important) that there is no sub-article about that album that also has the image. This is not a discography article- the albums which have images do not have their own articles. The ones that do, down at the bottom, do not have images in the infobox for just that reason.

This is my first time at FLC, so don't kill me if I've overlooked anything, please. --PresN (talk) 21:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • There are a number of MOS issues which I will run down.
  • Remove the bold formatting because of the linked text, per WP:BOLDTITLE.
  • Numerical ranges use en dashes per WP:DASH; example: "Fantasy 1987-1994, an" → "Fantasy 1987–1994, an"

Gary King (talk) 22:29, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Bolding removed.
  • I'm not sure what you mean by the en dashes, I copied the dash from WP:DASH, but it looks identical to the dash I make with the keyboard, ie keyboard(-) looks the same as (–). At any rate, isn't there a script that will fix those? I thought I saw it once at FAC, and that would be quicker than doing it by hand. Thank you for commenting! --PresN (talk) 23:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, but only in the editing box, not the actual page. Right, I'll get to work then. --PresN (talk) 23:39, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That was faster than I'd though it would be, done. At least, I think so... --PresN (talk) 23:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - A long time in the making, it combines about a million stub articles and put them into this extremely well crafted list. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • The first sentence may be slightly confusing for general readers. It says "Since the series' inception" but a person that don't know anything about the subject might wonder what series that actually refers to. Also, see if the repetition "produced"/"producer" can be avoided.
  • Actually, the lead currently amounts to 20% of the whole article (not counting infoboxes and tracklists); it's very long. I believe lead sections of lists are meant to summarize general and important facts about the entries rather than literally introducing every one of them individually.
  • The lead has now been completely reworked, and is much smaller. Please look over it to see if it's more to what you were thinking. --PresN (talk) 18:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Album titles should be italicized per MOS:TITLE, even in headings.
  • The CD doesn't have an album cover, it was just a cd which came with the game. I suppose that the fair-use rationale is incorrect in that case, as you state. Is there a better one that you know of? --PresN (talk) 16:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Final Fantasy Finest Box is missing a tracklist. 183 is a lot, but the FFIV tracks that were not in the original OST should be listed, at least.
  • "New tracks" tracklist added. --PresN (talk) 16:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's bizzare, I did it, not sure when it got reverted. Put in again. --PresN (talk) 12:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is the difference between the "Outside groups" and the first section? Why is Distant Worlds not considered an outside group for instance? I think this should be explained more clearly.
  • The list makes a distinction between Square Enix the producer and Square Enix the owner of the music. The first section is albums that Square Enix paid someone to take the music that they owned the rights to and create an album of either it or arrangements of it. Sometimes this person was Nobuo Uematsu, sometimes it was an orchestra group. The second section is composed of outside independant groups which produced their own albums, either with an official license, such as The Black Mages or Project Majestic Mix, or without an official license, such as Voices of the Lifestream. The "concert" disks are fuzzier, and I'm going to go now and look closer at the relationship between the performers and Square Enix as to which section they should be in. --PresN (talk) 18:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Difficult one but: could any Japanese reviews be included for comprehensiveness and per WP:BIAS? Perhaps Japanese reviewers didn't have any problem with the cheesy lyrics of Final Fantasy: Pray, unlike Patrick Gann of RPGFan.
  • I'll ask at the FF wikiproject, but I don't read or speak japanese, so I wouldn't be able to find anything. --PresN (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Square Haven, VGMdb, and Destructoid sources removed, and since they were superfluous to begin with (thankfully), not replaced. As to the ffmusic ones... I'm using them mainly as a translation for the japanese titles...though I suppose that means I should remove them for the other sources. I'm going to go ahead and remove them all, on the assumption that direct translations don't really need cites, as words mean what they mean, but I just had them because I thought it was a nice thing for people (like me) who don't know Japanese. --PresN (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The last two references are not exactly reliable either (FFWorld and Kotaku). Yeah, I was the one to add these two refs, but I didn't know the list was going to go to FLC before the release of the lattest album. It's still unreleased, but if reliable sources can be found I think it would definitely be okay. Kariteh (talk) 08:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replaced refs with the Japanese sources they were based on, Square Enix and Famitsu (A reliable japanese gaming off/online publication). --PresN (talk) 18:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • First, this one is a good example of how the sea of bright blue in the text damages the readability and appearance of the prose, and dilutes the high-value links. I boldly implemented a removal of the most trivial form of linking: the autoformatting of full dates, since there were more than a hundred scattered throughout. Autoformatting is no longer mandatory and is the subject of a head of steam building up at MOSNUM, with calls to even disable it. I wouldn't go that far, but I strongly suggest that the appearance is now considerably improved and the real links more visible to the reader. No one minds reading US formatting, I can assure you, and 99% of readers don't see a preferred format anyway, because they're just visitors: they still put up with the bright blue, though.
  • Is there a special dispensation for the NFC rules when it comes to album covers? If not, I wonder whether there are too many (NFCC#3, miminal usage). Pity: they're pretty, but I don't think they significantly add to readers' understanding of the text. I'll ask Black Kite to drop in.
  • There are eight audio clips, all with fair-use justification. Minimal use and significant improvement in readers' understanding doesn't appear to justify so many. I don't see much attempt to explain exactly what each clip is demonstrating in terms of musical style, texture, instrumentation, lyrics, etc, preferably features that show how the series evolved or is distinctive for (or even characteristic, in some cases, of) its period. This should appear in the main text. On the info pages, your justification says "A more detailed fair use rationale may be provided by the user who uploaded this recording." "May"? It has always been "must" or "is". The justification must be specific to each location its used on. Again, I'll seek Black Kite's advice on this. TONY (talk) 16:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • PS en dashes required for timing ranges on info pages. TONY (talk) 16:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, can't say I'm sad to see the sea of blue leave. It's much easier to read now, thank you. I will wait on Black Kite's answer as to the images, as I've given my justification above. As to the sound files, they are left-overs from the individual pages that I originally took to make this article. I'll go through and reduce the number, and mess with the Fair Use justifications to them, I didn't write those. --PresN (talk) 19:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are now 3 audio samples- one of the first album, one of the first vocal album, and one of an orchestral album. Hopefully that's a bit more reasonable. Also- if you have a problem with the "may" in the info pages, I suggest you take it up with whoever made the template, as it's the wording that comes with {{Non-free audio sample}}. You're right, it probably shouldn't say that, given that a FUR is mandatory. --PresN (talk) 19:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I have to agree that there is still too much non-free use on this page. Basically, this is a discography, supporting the existing Music of Final Fantasy article. This parent article (and the various Music of (specific FF game) articles) is where a more critical discussion of the works is present, and valid justification for the sound clips can be made, but not here. The images for the albums, given that this is a discography, should be removed per the previous decisions that such lists do not merit images (they are only being used as decoration here, and thus not needed). --MASEM 20:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • "F.F. Mix is an arranged, remixed and previously unreleased tracks album of music from the first Final Fantasy IV, V, and VI, remixed and performed primarily by Nobuo Uematsu." what is that supposed to mean??
  • That and other similar statements fixed. --PresN (talk) 16:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why the heck are all the catalogue numbers italicized?
  • For some reason, I thought they were supposed to be- checking the MOS now. --PresN (talk) 16:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure why I thought that, removed. --PresN (talk) 16:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think Masem makes a relevant point regarding music clips.

Circeus (talk) 21:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're welcome, Pres. Glad you like it. Sadly, Black Kite, one of our most talented copyright people, has walked out in a storm after a nasty ANI yesterday. This is terrible. I'll try to find advice elsewhere. Thanks for your advice re template. And three audio clips sounds much more acceptable to Cr 3. Great! TONY (talk) 03:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC) PS Didn't see Masem's comments: excellent that s/he's dropped in. TONY (talk) 03:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, Sephiroth. Sandy's jealous of her reviewers, but I'll see if we can sneak her over for an opinion about the album covers; I'm inclined to think that Masem's right, but it's a great pity. I wonder whether one album cover would get through WP:NFCC#8. TONY (talk) 07:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • One is probably fine, but outside the context of an infobox - as a top, right-aligned image, with a good descriptive caption to show an example of a compilation album (the most visually interesting one). But I stand by that this is a discography, and while free/commons images can be used to help out, non-free covers on a per-entry are definitely not allowed. --MASEM 12:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's not just a normal list-style article. It's of the "merged articles" variety, and as such gets a bit more leeway in using non-free content in each individual section (as opposed to treated the whole as a list) because each section is an article of its own that could not survive independently, yet it has/requires enough details that the usual list format just won't do. (a normal discography would no even have the room for the images) Circeus (talk) 15:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I encourage you to read [2] and [3] where similar arguments were used, but not successfully. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I can't say that I agree with the consensus on album covers- I don't understand how they're tacitly allowed if the article is only about one album, but as soon as you merge multiple albums/articles together, it's a violation of fair use with no increase in the number of images. However, clearly I would be one man against the tide, so to speak, so I'll be removing the images from this article. --PresN (talk) 14:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • If an album is significant enough to have its own article, then we have an album cover for it on the article. If it isn't significant enough, and is listed only on a discography, we don't. Go through Category:Discographies. There's not a single article there with album covers on them, and if there were they'd have their covers removed. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • These FF albums are all notable enough to have their own articles technically. They weren't merged per a lack of notability but because it might be the only way to make them go above the Start- or B-classes. Kariteh (talk) 15:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article will not have album covers on it. If you want to change that, you're going to have to get a new consensus to allow album covers on discographies. This is unlikely to happen, but you're welcome to try. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was just a clarification. I don't "want to change that", and there's no need to act exactly like Black Kite you know. Kariteh (talk) 15:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • :( Well, down they go. Poor article, all ripped apart. --PresN (talk) 16:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I edited the guideline page to make it clear that the paragraph about images in discographies also pertains to audio (and video) clips. Kariteh (talk) 16:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will say that you can likely justify a few of those samples over at Music of Final Fantasy (the general series); however, as this article does not have discussion of the music style and just basically presents a list of compilation albums, there's no support for NFC#8 in here. --MASEM 17:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Let's look on the bright side: It got rid of ugly white space. The Prince (talk) 17:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - all points raised by above reviewers have been addressed. I would ask that the editors involved (Gary King, Kariteh, Masem, Circeus, Tony, and Hammersoft) please return for another pass or !vote. --PresN (talk) 18:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Final Fantasy Finest Box is still missing a tracklist for its extra tracks and the outside/not outside group distinction is still not clearly established. Japanese reviews are also still absent, though I agree it may not be an issue if there really isn't any to begin with (they don't seem to have major sites like RPGFan, etc.). Kariteh (talk) 07:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also the headings should refer to a similar aspect in terms of organization per Wikipedia:List#Organization. "Albums" and "Outside groups" are not similar concepts. "Albums by..." and "Albums by outside groups" would be, for instance, but these aren't the best headings. Kariteh (talk) 15:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • You know what? Screw it. Those divisions were a bad idea and have caused nothing but headaches. All albums are now in one section, sorted by release date. This only leaves your point about Japanese reviews, which I'll try for, but am not holding my breath. --PresN (talk) 16:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support—Admirable responses by nominator. Good page. Can you make the units clear for durations? "duration of 14:22" --> "14.22 s"? Oops, no, its 14 minutes 22 seconds, is it? TONY (talk) 02:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Dates not linked for autoformating. Rmhermen (talk) 14:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please read above, links were removed by tony as excessive, and no longer mandatory. --PresN (talk) 16:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with PresN. I'd like Rmhermen to explain his vote; it's kind of curious considering Tony1's comments above. Kariteh (talk) 15:04, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - looks pretty good. One image in the lead though to demonstrate the appearance of a compilation album is in line with fair use concerns though. Up to you whether you want to add one in. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 05:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I went in and did just that. I'm not sure about the result, if anybody want wants to modify it, or even remove it, that's fine by me. If it stays, will someone please remove the orphaned fair use tag on the image? happypal (Talk | contribs) 06:03, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Imho, the whole page should be deleted and the albums mentioned/listed in Music of the Final Fantasy series. Then again, I'm a mere wiki-n00b (outside simple use of Wikipedia) and my opinion hardly counts. Maelkoch (talk) 15:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you're going to plagiarize [6] (at the bottom), then at least source it, 'cause it's funny. The article's also shorter then when that article was written. --PresN (talk) 18:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not plagiarizing anyone or anything - I am quite capable to form my own thoughts and have my own opinions, after all. I've read the article (and found it quite amusing, too), but I really couldn't care less which article is longer than which, but rather if an invidual article is as long as it should be (or not) to my mind, or if a page should be created (or should not exist at all, as in this case). Meh. Good that you linked to the article, though. Maelkoch (talk) 14:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, sorry for accusing you of plagiarism, but if your only concern about the article is that you don't think it should exist in the first place, then that's not really an actionable oppose, since it doesn't look like anyone else here agrees with you. --PresN (talk) 16:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, that website article uses flawed logic, compiles incorrect data, and just overall reeks of bias and illogical reasoning. Ongoing projects require a different and much higher level of analysis. I'd go on, but this is not the place for that. — Deckiller 23:45, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is now up to FA standards. Kariteh (talk) 15:04, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support—the Final Fantasy WikiProject continues to be the vanguard of proper video game coverage on Wikipedia. — Deckiller 23:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment "Many of the Final Fantasy compilation albums feature minimalist covers, as opposed to the more varied covers of the individual games' soundtracks." -> Source? Kariteh (talk) 20:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I still think that one non-free image is appropriate, but it is not needed; everything else is fine about this, though I recommended adding the same navbox template at the bottom of the main Music of FF page to here. --MASEM 20:45, 7 July 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/List_of_Final_Fantasy_compilation_albums&oldid=1138482071"