Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Seili (album)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Ucucha 16:46, 7 March 2012 [1].

Seili (album) edit

Featured article candidates/Seili (album)/archive1

Nominator(s): Frous (talk) 19:41, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I think it has what it takes to be considered one. Frous (talk) 19:41, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commments about linking: No dabs, but it looks like there's one dead link on the page, and a little bit of repeated wikilinking. Also, I don't think countries are generally wikilinked per WP:OVERLINK. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done: Dead link fixed. -- Frous (talk) 21:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmmmm. About overlinking, is this version ok?[2] -- Frous (talk) 21:44, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, overlinking seems to be cleared up. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Please do not use "done" (or other) templates, per FAC instructions. Brianboulton (talk) 22:12, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources minus spotchecks.

The lead does not require citations unless there are direct quotations or information that is not in the body of the article.
Please make sure reference numbers are ordered numerically. For example, [15][16][11].
I question how these are high quality reliable sources: technodisco.net, lyrics.com, soundi.fi. I'm not necessarily saying they are unreliable, but an explanation as to how they are reliable would be nice.
Likewise Stara and Iskelma.fi? The FN 17 iskelma.fi link also does not seem to return any text and it is hard to verify whether it supports the cited statements.
FN 1 is MTV3 and its publisher is Bonnier Group. Be consistent as to whether both the work and publisher for MTV3 references are provided. Same with the Rovi Co. ref, the work of which is AllRovi.
First charts table must be formatted per WP:ACCESS.

That's about it. Spotchecks pending. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 00:40, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Soundi is Finnish music periodical. According to Finnish Periodical Publishers' Association,[3] Soundi's circulation is 25,000 and the association describes it as "by far the most popular rock periodical in Finland".[4] -- Frous (talk) 00:41, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please be more specific with the charts table, what do I have to do to it? -- Frous (talk) 00:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The first reference is MTV3 Store Download, a music shop owned by MTV3. So, I guess the proper "publisher" is there MTV3 Store Download, but by convenience it links to MTV3 because that hasn't any article yet. -- Frous (talk) 01:08, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

S*it, Iskelmä seems to have deleted the article. Anyway, I found a somewhat similar description of Seili's polarized nature from one Rumba article. -- Frous (talk) 01:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by ordering reference numbers numerically? Many of those sources provide information that is relevant in different spots of the text, so they get mixed. I don't see any common sense in putting the same source in several cite web templates, if that's what you're asking for. -- Frous (talk) 01:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've formatted the table. As for the reference numbers, that's the way it's always been done. I'm not asking you put the same source in multiple citation templates. Just re-order the "<ref></ref>" and "<ref name=/>"s. It works. I'll give other replies soon. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 11:00, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I'm not very familiar with all the referencing details, I still don't get what you mean. How can I even put the refs [15][16][11] in numerical order, with the source no. 11 being used earlier in the text, before the refs no. 15 and 16? -- Frous (talk) 16:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can see where you're coming from. However, this will really never be an issue. Try it and revert if it does not work, although I do not understand why it shouldn't. By text, you mean the whole article right? If, by text, you mean just the sentence that is being cited, don't worry. This has always been encouraged and done. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:00, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I mean the whole text. I really have NO idea of how to put those [15][16][11] in numerical order, without using the cite web template twice with the same source. Can you explain to me what I have to do, in simple English? Thanks. -- Frous (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:16, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - sorry. The prose is poor and unintelligible in places. Many sentences lack logical flow and ramble on. I am not giving specific examples because experience has shown that nominators often address these only, and do not realise that the whole text is problematic. The article reads like a poor translation in need of attention from a native speaker and good writer. The article needs to be rewritten from top to bottom. Graham Colm (talk) 11:19, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.