Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Pearl Jam discography

< 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:Scorpion0422 20:34, 19 June 2008 [1].

Pearl Jam discography edit

I am nominating the discography because I believe it meets the criteria to be a Featured List. A lot of work has gone in to the article and I believe it to be complete and well-referenced. If there are any issues I will make sure to address them.-5- (talk) 03:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "9.5 million + (US)[21]" – What's the + for? "More than 9.5 million?" Just put 9.5 million since that would be the maximum that has been verified; this goes for all of them.

Gary King (talk) 04:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support I copy-edited the lead and cleaned up anything I could find a while back. This is great work by -5-, just like his effort with all Pearl Jam-related articles. I just have two questions for the reviewers as I'm unclear what MOS:DISCOG has to say about them:

  • Should Tribute albums be included in a band's discography (since its technically not by the band)?
  • Is it alright to list the total number of live albums including the official bootlegs in the template or should just the major Live albums be counted there (ie, 6)? indopug (talk) 14:11, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looks good. Drewcifer (talk) 09:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved stuff from Drewcifer

Comments Looks really really good! I only have a couple minor suggestions:

  • I'd like to see the certifications re-arranged slightly. Mainly I think it would work better if country abbreviations come before the actual certification rather then after, to avoid parentheses. IE "US: Gold" or something like that. Also, the first time a country is mentioned in the certification column(s), wikilink it to the certifying body (RIAA, BPI, etc), or if the certifying body doesn't have a page, then the country. Lastly, I think it's only necessary to wikilnk certifications in the first table.
  • I see that most of the certifications have {{nowrap}} on them, which is good, but not some of the singles.
  • Why do all of the miscellaneous tracks have a bullet point to their left?
  • It appears that some of the Misc. tracks have already appeared on other Pearl Jam releases. In general, it's not necessary to mention these, since they've already been released. In tables like this, we're only concerned with original, previously-unreleased material.
  • The tribute albums are also unnecessary, since Pearl Jam aren't the one's that made them. For this and the previous point, see MOS:DISCOG.
  • Citation #21 needs a publisher.
  • The dash in "rearviewmirror: Greatest Hits 1991-2003" should be an en-dash (–) not a hyphen (-).
  • Why is are tracks that were never released as a single in the singles table?
  • This also relates to the singles tallies in the lead and infobox. If they aren't actually singles, they probably shouldn't be mentioned in the tallies of singles, right? Maybe you could just move those to a different table? I've never come across a situation like this, so I don't know if I have the perfect solution, but as it is it's kind of confusing.
  • At one time it looked like this. Perhaps we could try it this way again?-5- (talk) 21:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In citation #14, All Music Guide is now Allmusic. And it should be wikilinked at least in the first citation.
  • Same with #35.
  • I'm not sure what "Accreditations. aria.com.au." is doing in citation#25.
  • Citation #30 needs to be formatted properly. Drewcifer (talk) 16:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    1. 30's publisher value doesn't match #9, #31, and #32. ("Billboard.com") And some are wikilinked some aren't.
  • "with Irons being replaced by former Matt Cameron" what does former mean here?
  • There's not need for the two hearers in the single chart column in the Videos table. Drewcifer (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I know this might become a nightmare, but should the discography at least list the "official bootlegs" that were commercially released? A few of them charted on Billboard. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:05, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Here's what I have to say:

  • "Love, Reign o'er Me" should have a note as to where it comes from (i.e which album/CD)
    • It doesn't come from an album. It was only released as a single.-5- (talk) 03:11, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Miscellaneous songs should only be songs that have never appeared on anyway PJ albums/singles etc. "Go" from Riding Giants: Soundtrack is an example of something that shouldn't be listed. Anything that's live (apart from live songs that have appeared on PJ albums/singles) can be included.
  • Is bootleg really the correct term. It's a bit of a misnomer; describing officially endorsed/released music recordings as bootlegs. Do any official sources actually ever describe these recordings as "bootleg"?
    • They have always been referred to as "bootlegs" by the band itself. Check Pearl Jam's official website , for instance.-5- (talk) 03:11, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Music video directors need to be cited. The self-referential argument does not apply here as some of the music videos were not released. Would it be prudent to note why these weren't released?
mvdbase is generally not considered reliable. Try to use individual magazine articles (like you did with Chris Cuffaro). indopug (talk) 21:36, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Official bootlegs will be available for the band's 2008 U.S. Tour in FLAC, MP3, and CD formats." statement isn't cited.

That's me. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 15:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
  • Ref 44 needs proper completion.
  • 72 "live albums" but the infobox doesn't agree, perhaps the infobox ignores these releases? Maybe something for DISCOG to discuss - 72 is a significant number of releases not to be included in the infobox...

The Rambling Man (talk) 21:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 72 are not called "Live albums" per se, but "Official bootlegs". I wonder if the template can accommodate an new header for them. indopug (talk) 21:36, 15 June 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/Pearl_Jam_discography&oldid=1126722105"