Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Gaon Album Chart number ones of 2011/archive1

< 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 Crisco 1492 00:51, 4 July 2015 [1].

List of Gaon Album Chart number ones of 2011 edit

List of Gaon Album Chart number ones of 2011 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox


Nominator(s): HĐ (talk) 10:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because this is a short but comprehensive and well-sourced list. HĐ (talk) 10:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support The article looks good to me, with everything being referenced properly.--TerryAlex (talk) 16:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Lists of number-one albums by (category) are always interesting. Korean music is rising in the mainstream. Why 2011? This article more complete and better referenced than the articles for later years.Listmeister (talk) 16:33, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The article is well-referenced, but references to Gaon should always include an archive url since the site changes so often. Random86 (talk) 19:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have added archived urls for some. Thanks! HĐ (talk) 01:38, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It looks great and very well-sourced. --Carioca (talk) 22:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Cowlibob (talk) 09:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
*Comment Bit surprised at how quick the supports are rolling in. Lead needs a good copyedit which I'll try and do later. Tables are not accessible, need rowscopes and colscopes. As nearly all the sources are in Korean, I can't comment on it being verified but as they're from the official site I presume it's accurate. Would be nice if there were some secondary sources which shouldn't be hard to find as this is a list of numbers ones. Why do some of the albums have alternate Korean titles and others not? Images need alttext. Cowlibob (talk) 20:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I haven't checked all the albums on this list, but many Korean albums actually don't have Korean titles, like Fiction and Fact (as can be seen on Melon: [2]). Random86 (talk) 21:40, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most Korean albums in this list are originally titled in English. The original titles for Korean-titled albums have already been noted. Simon (talk) 05:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have added colscopes and rowscopes as well as alttexts for images. Thanks for your comment! Simon (talk) 05:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@HĐ: I'm confused by the "one of which..." sentence. If Into The New World topped the chart in Week 2 of 2011, what topped the album in Week 1 of 2011 as the table starts with Into the New World. Could be useful to sort the artist column so e.g. All of SNSD's number ones would be lined up. Ideas for expanding the lead, you could mention the top three best selling albums, did the albums that sold well win any notable awards/ recognition or break any records? Were any of the albums the best selling album ever for that particular act? Cowlibob (talk) 02:53, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Cowlibob: The first week of 2011 counted by Gaon is December 19–25, 2010. I'm rather confused whether this should be added. Simon (talk) 08:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
From which date till which date does the 2011 chart cover? Ideally you should have week 1 to week 52 if Gaon use December 19-25, 2010 as week 1 then you should include it as week 1 of the 2011 chart which you can clarify with a note. After all this is a list about what Gaon classifies as 2011 not whether it is actually in 2011. Cowlibob (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done with this. Thanks! Simon (talk) 09:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Comments I've got serious issues with this list as it currently is.

  • Like Cowlibob, I'm also concerned by the lack of secondary sources. Of the 67 references in this article, only one is not a primary source, and, since it's dated 2010, one can't really claim that it's actually about the subject in particular.
  • I'm still looking for third-pary sources. Simon (talk) 09:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two third-party sources have been added. Simon (talk) 02:44, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Adding in more secondary sources would also help to beef up the lead, which to me looks rather sparse. Currently clocking in at under 1500 characters, it wouldn't even pass DYK in its current state. Is there nothing else that can be said about the number ones on this chart from this year?
  • The lead has been expanded. Simon (talk) 02:44, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Understandable. I have moved the page. Simon (talk) 05:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The prose shifts between present tense and past tense rather awkwardly in places, e.g. "albums claimed" and "peaked atop", but then "are three acts" and "is the longest-running". You're mainly discussing past events in the second paragraph; MOS:TENSE therefore suggests using the past tense.
  • Fixed the tense. Thanks for your comments! Simon (talk) 09:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article still needs a lot of work doing to it, and I wish all the participating editors the best of luck in improving it. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 21:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've addressed all of your concerns. Simon (talk) 02:44, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:40, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose another set of dubious instant supports here.
  • "Sony Music Korea" is pipelinked to Sony Music which redirects to Sony Music Entertainment which has no mention of Korea at all. Is there actually such an entity as "Sony Music Korea"?
  • Yes, Sony Music Korea does exist. Simon (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Similar comment for Universal. And do avoid pipelinking to redirects, it's very clusmy.
  • Our article calls the band CNBLUE.
  • "both spent four " -> "both of which spent four" or put a semi-colon in there.
  • "a reissue of the album titled A-CHA sold 129,894 copies" whose album?
  • "Album of the Year at the Mnet Asian Music Awards in 2011" if these awards don't even have an article, are they notable enough to be mentioned in the lead of this article?
  • "T.O.P." is a redirect to a disambiguation page.
  • U-Kiss is referred to as U-KISS by our own article.
  • Sortable table so links should be linked every time.
  • "Commencing date" should sort chronologically, not alphabetically.
  • I don't know how to sort date chronologically. Simon (talk) 10:19, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It should probably also say something like "Week starting"
  • Repackage or Reissue? You use both terms for A-CHA.
  • Sung Si Kyung -> Sung Si-kyung.

Enough at this point. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: All of your concerns have been addressed. (the Mnet Asian Music Awards has its own article and therefore it is a notable award) Simon (talk) 08:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not all of my concerns have been addressed. Please check them individually. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: The date sorting has been fixed. Thanks! Simon (talk) 11:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where are all the links in the monthly chart table? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:45, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: done now. Thanks1 Simon (talk) 04:06, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: Are there any concerns from you? Simon (talk) 04:36, 6 June 2015 (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_Gaon_Album_Chart_number_ones_of_2011/archive1&oldid=669900708"