Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Coldplay/archive2

< 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 Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 13 December 2021 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of awards and nominations received by Coldplay edit

List of awards and nominations received by Coldplay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): GustavoCza (talk) 02:18, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because as boring as it sounds, I do think it meets the criteria. All the awards, listicles and world records have sources attached to them now and my editions for it were based on lists that are already featured, such as Taylor Swift's. The makeover to a current template was done almost completely by myself, meaning that the list is not subject to edit wars either. I have also found over 100 lost awards and made sure to verify that everything is an actual physical accolade in order to avoid credibility problems. I believe without a doubt that this is the best version of Coldplay's awards and nomination list, so it would be very nice to have my contributions recognized!

P.S. I'm not really into Wikipedia that much so please be patient with me. GustavoCza (talk) 02:18, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:54, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
;Comments
  • The lead jumps around between referring to the band in the singular and the plural. As they are a British band, British English should be used, which always treats band names a plural
  • For the same reason, "honored" should be "honoured"
  • "all time" should not have a hyphen
  • "Around 2014, Fuse ranked them as the 28th most awarded act of all-time" - was it "around" 2014, or was it in 2014?
  • Sorting on the nominee/work field needs looking at. Anything that starts with a " should ignore that and sort based on the next word. And anything that starts with "A" or "The" should ignore that too. So, for example, "The Scientist" should sort under S.
  • None of the entries against Official Chart Company or The Official Big Top 40 should be on this list. Reaching number one on the charts is not an award
  • Several of the awarding bodies do not have WP articles. Are they non-notable? And if they are, should their awards even be listed here?
  • Check that references include all the relevant fields. Just at a quick glance, 13 has no publisher, neither does 105 or 278. Ref 444 has no publisher or access date
  • The publisher of 124, 125, etc should be whoever originally published it, not web.archive.org.
  • There is inconsistency in how publishers are shown - I can see both Rolling Stone and rollingstone.com
  • Ref 467 is a a forum on bravenet - not a reliable source. Spiceheart Forums doesn't sound very reliable either..........
  • That's what I got on a first pass...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:58, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Answer
  • Can you help me with the sorting on the Nominee / Work field? I'm not really good into coding, I usually make my edits on the visual template.
    • You need to use a sort template. So, for example, "The Scientist" would be {{sort|Scientist|"[[The Scientist (song)|The Scientist]]}}". That will make it sort under S. Hope that helps! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:05, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • The sorting is still not right on the nominee column - all of the entries starting with a quote mark still sort at the top. All of these need to sort based on the first actual word of the entry.
    • Solved, please tell me if you need anything more -- GustavoCza (talk) 18:54, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead still has examples of "the band has" and "Coldplay has", which is not British English
    • I need to replace "has" with "have" right? English is not my first language, sorry. -- GustavoCza (talk) 13:24, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Make sure the band name or the words "the band" are always treated as plural -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:44, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are still refs which do not list a publisher eg 10, 110, 193, 194, 195, 272
  • There is still inconsistency in how publishers are shown in the refs eg ref 277 has "news.bbc.co.uk" but 278 has "BBC". Ref 407 has "NME" but 410 has "NME : Music, Film, TV, Gaming & Pop Culture News"
  • Ref 383 is a forum on a boxing website, of all things - definitely not a reliable source -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:46, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:36, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
;Comments

In addition to any remaining comments from ChrisTheDude, particularly regarding citation formatting, here's what I've got.

  • Use Template:Infobox awards list for the infobox instead of building a custom infobox; this ensures there are no accessibility issues and creates a standardized appearance.
    • Solved. I won't be able to show how many awards are pending anymore though :( -- GustavoCza (talk) 21:02, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and the US and 'Paradise'" → "and the US; and 'Paradise'"
  • Citation needed for "Paradise"'s number one chart listings.
  • Per MOS:NUMERAL, in general, single-digit numbers should be written as words (i.e., nine instead of 9), double-digit numbers can be either words or figures so long as whichever format you pick is used consistently (i.e., twenty-eight or 28), and larger numbers should be figures.
    • Also, if you choose to write two-digit numbers as words, use hyphens (i.e., "twenty-one MTV Awards" instead of "twenty one MTV Awards").
  • "the second-most in history for a British group after the Beatles' nine wins" – currently WP:OR (you cite how many awards the Beatles won, but that doesn't prove there are no other groups to win more awards)
  • "The music video for 'The Scientist' received all the awards" – quantify how many it won
  • "They received four World Music Awards" → "They have received four World Music Awards"
  • Tables need captions at the top using either |+ your caption or |+ {{sronly|your caption}}
  • References columns should be unsortable
  • If an awards ceremony has an article about it, the year should link to it (i.e., link 44th Annual Grammy Awards to the 2002 cell for the Grammy Awards)
  • "June 15–19th 2016" → "15–19 June 2016"
  • In regard to footnote c, don't change the category names to their current equivalents. Instead, write the categories as they were titled then, and wikilink to the current category names.
  • The Listicles section says "This section is under construction." Regardless of whether or not this is still true, it should be removed – this type of information should be on talk pages. — RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:58, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Solved, just removed the sentence and I'll create a section on the talk page later. -- GustavoCza (talk) 19:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • So is this section complete or not? RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:07, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • Technically yes, what I meant with "under construction" is that I'm still expanding it. -- GustavoCza (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
          • Sorry for the slow reply – if you're still expanding the section, I'd prefer to wait until that section is done before I support this. Do you know when it'll be finished? RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:46, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's pretty much finished already, like, when I found new stuff I add to it, but it's more of an occasional thing, just as when I found the Pollstar nominations months after finishing their awards list. -- GustavoCza (talk) 02:52, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay then, in that case I'm good with my comments and will support. Though it doesn't affect my vote, I also agree with ChrisTheDude above that the "awards" for reaching number 1 on a chart should be removed. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • I talked to them today and though about moving it to the "Other Accolades" section, so it can still be at exhibition but not couting as actual awards. What do you think? (And sorry for how bad my formating looks in a computer, I'm writing from my phone). --GustavoCza (talk) 03:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm still leaning against it. The awards are similar to receiving plaques for RIAA certifications and other sales records. The accomplishments are notable, but they're not really in the scope of this article; the information is already covered in Coldplay discography. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:36, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
          • Solved. I removed them. Will keep it in my sandbox though. --GustavoCza (talk) 00:11, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from TRM edit

First pass done.The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 13:18, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have to oppose until the inclusion of awards considered non-notable by Wikipedia standards are removed. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 21:38, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll come back to discuss this. I don't have an issue with including awards that lack Wikipedia articles, but those awards should generally be sourced using reliable secondary sources instead of primary sources in order to demonstrate some degree of notability. So, for example, the Phoenix Film Critics Society Award in this list is notable enough for inclusion because the listed award is sourced to a local news source. On the other hand, things like the Žebřík Music Awards are currently sourced to primary sources such as this, which fails to demonstrate notability, and these awards should therefore be removed. I won't change my vote, but I can see why TRM might be concerned. Just my two cents. RunningTiger123 (talk) 19:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What if the awards show in question gained notability over the years though? The BreakTudo Awards for example is covered by secondary sources nowadays but it's hard to find publications about older editions.
The Live UK Music Business Awards is another example, they are notable to be covered by Complete Music Update, but I had a hard time looking for Coldplay's nominations: https://completemusicupdate.com/article/live-uk-music-business-awards-nominees-announced/
As for the Nordic Music Awards sources are from Verdens Gang, the most read online newspaper in Norway, with about 2 million daily readers.
–GustavoCza (talk) 19:39, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a problem for me personally, but I suppose I'm not the one who needs to be convinced. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this nomination certainly stalled out... I'm going to have to second the oppose, though. The general guideline for "awards" lists is that every award needs to be notable to be included, because otherwise you could fill out any popular band's list with hundreds of minor awards, and the way this is done is that an award is notable if it can support its own article (thereby meeting notability policies). I don't think that using a secondary source (re: RunningTiger123) is good enough- a local paper covering a local award doesn't cut it. Please remove the non-notable awards or else we'll need to drop the nomination, sorry. --PresN 13:31, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. GustavoCza (talk) 00:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: Does this address your concerns, or are you still opposed? --PresN 01:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose struck. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 08:12, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: Could you wrap up your comments in a box like the others? Thank you! -- GustavoCza (talk) 05:50, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's not necessary. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 07:18, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review edit

Okay, I was just going to clean up some of the references myself and then promote, but I'm seeing some concerns in the sourcing that need to be cleared up first, so:

  • The "website" parameter of references should be the name of the website, not the actual url- so not acclaimedmusic.net, but Acclaimed Music (you have this correct sometimes, but not consistently). Same goes for GRAMMY.com, fonogram.hu (and www.fonogram.hu), www.flare.com, etc.
  • If a title is in a non-English language (e.g. 第23回日本ゴールドディスク大賞), then add a |trans-title parameter (e.g. |trans-title=The 23rd Japan Gold Disc Award). Additionally, if a title is using non-latin characters (again e.g. 第23回日本ゴールドディスク大賞), then instead of |title=第23回日本ゴールドディスク大賞 do |script-title=ja:第23回日本ゴールドディスク大賞.
  • This is the one I tripped on: what makes www.amiannoying.com a reliable source?
  • Spotchecks seem alright. --PresN 15:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @PresN: Is everything alright now? I only edited things yesterday because the notifications ended up buried in my emails. -- GustavoCza (talk) 4 December 2021
  • Image review – The one photo in the article has an acceptable license (CC BY-SA 4.0), and alt text has been included. No complaints here. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:17, 8 December 2021 (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_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Coldplay/archive2&oldid=1060015968"