Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Scissor Sisters/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 Hahc21 17:57, 6 March 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of awards and nominations received by Scissor Sisters

edit

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

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Another Believer (Talk) 18:40, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am thrilled to be back at FLC! I have decided to nominate this awards list, which was formerly promoted to FL status only to be downgraded a few months later. Since then, Scissor Sisters has received additional awards and nominations and I do not believe the same arguments for demotion apply. Happy to address concerns as they arise. Thank you. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:40, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment/Question: There are currently two dead links. Unfortunately, I am unable to find working links to verify these claims, which is unfortunate since I believe the claims are true and were verified during the previous FLC process. Should this information be removed until a working link can be found? --Another Believer (Talk) 22:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried retrieving the links through the Internet archive? NapHit (talk) 00:04, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, and I am not familiar with the archive. Perhaps if I do some investigating it will be self-explanatory. Thanks. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, forgot about the second link. Doing... --Another Believer (Talk) 18:24, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The archive will not work for the Blender link and I am unable to find the "500 Greatest Songs Since You Were Born" list elsewhere. Should I remove this recognition from the article? --Another Believer (Talk) 18:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think so. Unless we can verify it another way, it's not really suitable for inclusion.... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:30, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Removed claim and added a note on the article talk page explaining reason for content removal. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 15:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Dead links, just try "archive.org" and enter the URL of the dead link. It's not bad at all for most mainstream pages. E.g. ref 5 had a few archives, this worked fine, all you need to do is include the archiveurl and archivedate to the {{cite web}} template.
Thanks for the explanation. I included the archiveurl parameter, but I am not sure I understand the archivedate parameter. Any assistance with this concern, please? --Another Believer (Talk) 18:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you have a look at the top of the archive page, it says Jan 14 2010, that's the archive date. The other bar graph peaks indicate other archives by the way.... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Can I remove the dead link template then? --Another Believer (Talk) 18:22, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well hopefully if you've updated the template correctly, you can just click on the link and it'll take you to the archived page. If it works, it ain't dead! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. It's alive! --Another Believer (Talk) 18:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • " (Pink Floyd cover) " perhaps "(a Pink Floyd cover)".
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's an "electroclub"?
Done. Who knows. Changes to "nightclubs". --Another Believer (Talk) 18:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you like, while editing, check the redirects. We don't need to fix them on their own, but if you can do it while making more substantial edits, so much the better... e.g. We Are Scissor Sisters... And So Are You.
Corrected "We Are Scissor Sisters... And So Are You". --Another Believer (Talk) 18:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in the UK and through Universal Records in July 2004 in the United States" any reason why you abbreviate UK and not US?
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would it be impertinent of me to suggest that if an award/nomination is notable enough to be included in this list, it should be notable enough to have its own article? (e.g. O Music Award, UK VMAs?)
Sure, but I am interested in creating and expanding articles for these two award ceremonies at this time. I could create stubs or red links, if preferable? If articles are necessary, I will add them to do immediate "to do" list. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I guess my point is that if they're notable enough for you to include them, they should have an article here. That means either redlink, or stub! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:24, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Turns out there are articles for both ceremonies already! --Another Believer (Talk) 18:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome news! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:44, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Out magazine ranked Scissor Sisters #26" see WP:HASH to avoid using # as a substitute for "number" or similar.
Done. Changed # signs to "number". --Another Believer (Talk) 18:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:05, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe your initial concerns have been addressed. Thanks for reviewing the list. Please let me know if any other concerns need to be addressed. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:14, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Zia Khan 08:31, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • 2nd and 3rd paras need inline citations.
I added citations for singles in the second paragraph (Allmusic). The third paragraph does not need citations because no claims are made that are not referenced in the body of the list itself. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:34, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • could you enlarge the image.
Done. Now 300px wide. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:34, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image needs alt text.
Done. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:34, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise looks fine to me! Zia Khan 00:22, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

  • "The group gained prominence after signing with the independent record label A Touch of Class, during which...". There's no time period here that "during which" would be related to. This part needs a rewrite.
Better? Now reads: "The group gained prominence after signing with the independent record label A Touch of Class and their songs..." --Another Believer (Talk) 16:43, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do not own either book. I cannot find the Grammy book at my library, so I have replaced the reference with an online source verifying the same information. I have added the "1001 Albums" book to my library hold list and will update the page number ASAP. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Well, it turns out I cannot find the album listed in the book I picked up from the library. However, the library only has the "revised and updated" version. Accordingly, I have removed the book as a reference and included the Los Angeles Times link instead. --Another Believer (Talk) 21:52, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Sufur222

  • Ref 33 is dead, and thus needs replacing. Also, in the same reference, Billboard should probably be linked, and it is currently published by Prometheus Global Media (which should also be linked), taking over from Nielsen Business Media in 2009.

Apart from that, the list looks fine to me. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 13:02, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced dead link. Thank you. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:48, 3 March 2013 (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_Scissor_Sisters/archive2&oldid=1146031258"