Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Queens of the Stone Age discography

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 User:The Rambling Man 07:15, 1 August 2008 [1].

---

Queens of the Stone Age discography

Nomiated again. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 18:19, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

That's a novel way to do some canvassing. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

• Support Good work. Cannibaloki 22:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Resolved stuff from Cannibaloki

• Comments:
  • Remove the link to Gamma Ray; (DONE)
  • The references on certifications are just for search data, then you should explain to the reader how it should proceed to look for results; (DONE)
    • See Garbage discography;
  • In the CRIA website there is nothing written about GOLD for Era Vulgaris. Then remove it; (DONE)
  • Change the area of 4em to 3em on the singles table, that's very deformed. (DONE)
  • Other appearances table all albums have the same reference, then leave only a reference to the side of Song [28], since it does not need to repeat them. (DONE)
  • Remove the links to yyyy in music; (DONE)

Cannibaloki 19:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments - Other appearances should list original material not released on any QOTSA albums singles etc. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 16:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Does that include unreleased tracks not present on any released CD? As there was a huge list of them which was deleted a week or so ago. Red157(talk • contribs) 18:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

If it isn't released then it isn't discography. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 19:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comments
  • Image could use an informative caption.(DONE)
  • The E of Extended play can just be e. It's not a proper noun.(DONE)
  • You use ref 1 8 times in a row in the lead. This is overeferencing in the extreme. One per para if you're 100% sure everything in each para is cited in the reference.(DONE)
  • "Queens of the Stone Age found itself amidst the sudden popularity and attention" poor grammar and somewhat peacock.(DONE)
  • " The band's next album was Lullabies to Paralyze, released in 2005, peaked at number five on the Billboard 200 and launched several successful singles, including "Little Sister" and "In My Head"." copyedit please.(DONE)
  • "emulate the precedent " what precedent? It's not clear.(DONE)
  • Ref 1 has incorrect title. And it doesn't back up most of the claims in the lead (like the precedent comment, "Kyuss/Queens of the Stone Age EP in 1997.[1]" , Interscope isn't mentioned in this article at all, Rated R first album to chart isn't mentioned at all, "new level of commercial success", "popularity and attention" not mentioned at all in the ref)(DONE)
  • Ref 1 also refers to the label as Loosegroove, not Loose Groove.(DONE)
  • Ref 2 does not have any singles information at all so you can't use it for the Singles table.(DONE)
  • Ref 3 does not have any singles information at all so you can't use it for the Singles table.(DONE)
  • In fact, refs 4 to 9 and 12 to 18 are album charts only so you can't use them to references the singles.(DONE)
  • Ref 16 has a typo.(DONE)
  • Burn One Up isn't in ref 32, The Hard + the Heavy, Vol. 1 is in ref 32 but not in this list.(DONE)
  • In fact, ref 32 and your table using ref 32 only don't match up at all really.(DONE)
  • Ref 27 does not have any director information whatsoever.(DONE)
• Please ensure you have checked all references are accurate and correctly defined. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Many of the referencing issues were ones Be Black Hole Sun had on the Mark Lanegan discography as well. Trying to fix them... Red157(talk • contribs) 10:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, which is why I prefer people to not nominate many of the same type of list at once, the same problems exist across them all. Good luck with the fixes. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

• When you say (DONE) please make sure you really have done it. I'll give you one example - where is "The Hard + the Heavy, vol 1" in your list? I will not chase all the other issues, but right now this list will not be promoted. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I've done that. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 17:42, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Refs 30 and 31 point to the same URL. So does 35. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

"didn't sell as much as its predecessor." prove it, and don't use contractions - "did not"... The Rambling Man (talk) 09:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hard and the Heavy was 1999, not 1997 according to your source. Why is "Blair Witch 2: Book of Shadows [Soundtrack] " in the reference but not in the list? Check all the relevant entries in the reference are also included in this list. This list is currently incomplete. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Added two reliable sources. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 10:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Ref 32 = Ref 36. Other appearances still is not the same as the reference, there are works missing. Fix the year for Hard and the Heavy (second time I've asked). The Rambling Man (talk) 10:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

"Loose Groove " in the lead - the refs called it "Loosegroove" The Rambling Man (talk) 10:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Fixed it, all the missing other appearances and the other stuff. I'm sure of it. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 10:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Please read my comments carefully. Ref 32 is the same as Ref 36. You need to check that you have fixed every one of the issues I've told you before you tell me you've done them all. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Fixed it. Sometimes i suprise myself. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 10:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

"In 2007, the band released its fifth studio album, Era Vulgaris which, the album sold more copies then its predecessor in the United States and sold approximately 149,000 copies worldwide in its first week, while Lullabies to Paralyze sold approximately 97,000 in its first week.[3]" - not English - copyedit please. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I've fixed it.--Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 10:59, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

"released Era Vulgaris the album sold more approximately 149,000 copies " is not much better. Please get a native English speaker to copyedit it for you. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Tried one more time, if it doesn't work i'll get an english user okay. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 11:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

It's still missing punctuation and, more importantly, missing the point that it more successful than the previous album. But was the most successful of their career? I know the figures are there but without some kind of context they are a little bland. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:59, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

And really, saying " fifth effort " isn't wise - they've had plenty more efforts than that, state the fact, it was their fifth studio album. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:02, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I've now changed it to fifth studio effort if its okay and added more about the Era Vulgaris chart positions. Another thing whats does punctuation mean, never in my life heard that word.--Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 12:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Read punctuation. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:33, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Fixed it. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 23:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Support As one of the editors who brought Era Vulgaris to GA, I feel qualified to say that this article is both comprehensive and accurate in its listings of releases. One minor suggestion is to include the track names in the "Other appearances" section, as the tracks are common knowledge. Regards, Skomorokh 11:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Skomorokh. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 19:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

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