Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Lightning Bolt discography/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal 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 removed by Dabomb87 23:31, 13 February 2011 [1].
Lightning Bolt discography edit
Lightning Bolt discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
The list was promoted in 2007 and is clearly showing its age, clear lead issues and lack of referencing instantly spring to mind when looking at the list, there are also a pair of dead links Ref 4 and 9, the list obviously hasn't been maintained with current standards. Afro (Talk) 16:03, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - it's a borderline 3b anyway, lead would be inadequate, missing a bunch of references, a whole para on speculation dating back to 2007, badly formatted table, not good enough. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist Very little is right about this article; under referenced, under detailed, and it's debatable if we even need the article at all. Courcelles 05:04, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist As above DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 07:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist ultimately fails; I wonder who voted for support in the FLC?!-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 15:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, needs a lot of work to reach current discog FL standards (most notably the chart positions, which don't seem to exist). 狐 FOX 15:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist too short to not be wp:CFORK. Nergaal (talk) 18:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist Urrrrgh. Lacking quite a lot. A few dead ELs. Adabow (talk · contribs) 10:30, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - this article is depressing. Candyo32 - Happy New Year :) 16:21, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment While this article may not meet current standards, remember that this article predates WP:DISCOG, so I'm not sure I understand all the hate. And positions such as "this article is depressing" are, frankly, ridiculous. My specific objections to points raised here:
- Lack of chart positions—to quote the nominator of the FLC, "Unlike the many other FL discographies, statistics like Chart Performance aren't necessary or possible, since Lightning Bolt are by and large an independent band that has never come close to any album/singles charts." You cannot include chart positions if the band never charted.
- "Not sure if this article needs to exist at all"—OK, this article is a little small, but where would all this information go? If I found all this information in the band's article under a discography section, I would have requested for this info to be split off into a separate article. Note that there are more than 30 items in this discography, which, come to think of it, isn't that small.
- Dead links, cleanup needed—valid points, but surely not enough to warrant delisting before any effort to rectify the same.—indopug (talk) 06:02, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist Just 10 references, of which 4 are dead or redirects. A section is completely unsourced. Novice7 | Talk 14:21, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.