Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Young Divas discography/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 not promoted by The Rambling Man 17:23, 25 July 2009 [1].

Young Divas discography

edit
Nominator(s): Alex Douglas (talk) 08:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets the featured list criteria. Please note that Young Divas has only charted in Australia. I'm willing to address all concerns and will check this candidacy several times a day. The music video director's name(s) have not been found in reliable sources. They are not on the liner notes to the singles or any of her subsequent releases. Unless, consensus has changed, a previous precedent made in the successful featured list candidacy of Paul Kelly discography and upheld recently in the successful featured list candidacy of Paulini Curuenavuli discography stands that a list can become featured, if it does not contain the music video director's name(s) for up to two music videos, by using a footnote stating that the "Director name for these music videos has not been found in reliable sources." The most recent reliable sources have been referenced in regard to members working on upcoming solo studio albums. The only source that cites that DeAraugo is working on her second studio album is a YouTube video. The only source that cites that Williams is working on her debut studio album is used. I ask you to consider, all of the above, before reviewing this discography. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 08:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A couple of the images need alternative text per criterion 5b. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is only one image in the article. To my knowledge, no other discography has alternative text on the image placed within the infobox. I would be more than happy to include alternative text, however, ("The Young Divas' 2006 line-up, from right to left: Kate DeAraugo, Ricki-Lee Coulter, Emily Williams and Paulini Curuenavuli performing live." for example) but I cannot find a way to include it in the image, perhaps because of the limitations of Template:Infobox artist discography. Please help me sort this out. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 00:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, alt text has always been in the FL criteria, but nobody ever paid attention to it until recently. The infobox has been updated to support alt text, see Template:Infobox artist discography. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I always knew alt text was part of the criteria, but I couldn't include it until today when Template:Infobox artist discography was updated to include the field. I have happily added alt text to the image, which reads "The Young Divas' 2006 line-up, from right to left: Kate DeAraugo, Ricki-Lee Coulter, Emily Williams and Paulini Curuenavuli performing live." Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 09:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed alt text to the image, it now reads "Color photograph of four women standing upright, with the rightmost woman singing into a microphone. In the background children wearing santa hats back-up the woman's singing." I hope this is more appropriate? Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 09:10, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
Comments from Truco (talk · contribs)
General
  • Dabs and external links check out fine with the checker tools.
Great.
Lead
  • They have released two cover albums and four singles, in addition to four music videos on Sony BMG. -- I would add to the sentence to state the Sony BMG is a record label, (in addition to four music videos on the Sony BMG label)
Changed to "in addition to four music videos on record label Sony BMG."
  • Coulter placed seventh on the second season and released two studio albums, her eponymous debut album in 2005 and Brand New Day, in 2007. --> Coulter placed seventh on the second season and released two studio albums: her eponymous debut album in 2005 and Brand New Day in 2007.
I had trouble wording this; I strongly prefer your wording. :)
  • Curuenavuli placed fourth on the first season and released two studio albums, One Determined Heart, in 2004 and Superwoman, in 2006. --> Curuenavuli placed fourth on the first season and released two studio albums: One Determined Heart in 2004 and Superwoman in 2006.
I had trouble wording this; I strongly prefer your wording. :)
  • The group released their eponymous debut album on Sony BMG, in 2006. -- Its redundant to state that they released it on Sony BMG when you state above that all their work has been on this label. Would be better stated as The group released their eponymous debut album in 2006.
That's true about Sony BMG. Fixed.
  • In 2007, Coulter left the group and was replaced by Jessica Mauboy, who placed second on the fourth season. -- you're going to need to state that this is Australian Idol again
Understandable, changed to "second on the fourth season of Australian Idol".
  • Later that year, the group released their second cover album, New Attitude on Sony BMG. -- Same thing like I said about above the label, reword to Later that year, the group released their second cover album New Attitude.
Fixed.
List
  • Did their work not chart on any other charts but the Australian one?--Truco 503 01:42, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, none of their releases charted on any other notable or national chart. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 12:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- Previous issues resolved/clarified; list now meets WP:WIAFL.Truco 503 19:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Oppose A decently constructed list, but I have some issues with it. Namely, it's size is borderline, I think. Technically there are 12 distinct items, but 4 of those are music videos, which are basically just repackaging of the singles. It's no coincidence that the singles table has the exact same four items as the music videos table. So, what we really have here is 8 items, below the rule-of-thumb 10. Granted, the total is based on how you look at it, whether you count the music videos or not, but it is definitely borderline. Such a small list could easily be merged into the main Young Divas page, especially since the massive lead would no longer be necessary. And since it seems the group is currently on hiatus, it doesn't look like the list is going to grow anytime soon.

    • I count the music videos, you do not. It's a difference of views and so I cannot resolve this issue, for a difference of views in editors creates consensus. Alex Douglas (talk) 09:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fair enough, though look at it this way: the whole point of a list on Wikipedia is to provide an organized list of links to other articles, ie, the items of the list, so that the viewer can view these items within context of each other (in the list), and find out more if they want (via the link). Music videos do no have their own pages, they are usually relegated to a section of the single page. Thus, they are a product of the single, and not really an item in and of themselves. Like has already been said, it's a matter of perspective, but this seems to fail the basic functionality of a list. Drewcifer (talk) 16:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I understand your reasoning, but I do not agree with it. Alex Douglas (talk) 06:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of which, the lead is huge, especially compared to the small list following it. I could see such a huge lead fitting the Metallica discog or something like that, but 6 paragraphs for a group that has released two albums within a year's time is overkill.

    • Agreed. I have removed two paragraphs that refer to the member's solo releases. Alex Douglas (talk) 09:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond that, I also have an issue with the un-sourced music video directors. Previous examples of FLCs getting by or not (see WP:WAX), that does not make a set-in-stone rule/allowance that all other FL candidates can also get away with. A true consensus would be something that is, say, brought up at MOS:DISCOG and discussed amongst the greater DISCOG community, rather than isolated to a few FLCs, which may or may not get everyone's attention. (I was absent from both of those FLCs, for example, and I surely would have contested such omissions). Unsourced information is still unsourced information.

    • I assume this is in regard to 3(a) of the FL criteria.. hmm how would you suggest that I practically find references to the music video director(s) name? Alex Douglas (talk) 09:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, I'm not sure if I have any fool-proof solutions for you. A suggestion would be to find out the director's name even if via a unreliable source. Just to get a lead. Then search for that name, say the director's website or even the production company. May or may not work, but it's worth a shot. It's got to be out there somewhere. Drewcifer (talk) 16:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Have you considered emailing a reliable website that might have this information? Dabomb87 (talk) 17:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • I have not been able to find out the director's name even if via a unreliable source. I have emailed Sony BMG numerous times in the last few weeks and am yet without response. I will attempt phone calling them now. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 06:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
            • I have just called Sony BMG now, on the weekend, outside business hours, I will need to wait until Monday to call them back in operating hours. I would like to request that this candidacy remains "open" atleast until I can get into contact with Sony BMG to find the name(s) of the music video director(s), and try to find out if the Young Divas have made other appearances or released any other music, promotionally or otherwise for inclusion in the discography, as this will increase the size of the list, hopefully resolving length objections, aswell. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 07:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have some other smaller content/style issues, but I'll wait on those until the above is resolved/adressed.Drewcifer (talk) 17:13, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • Thankyou very much for your concerns, please get back to me. Alex Douglas (talk) 09:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

  • Regarding the alt text, just putting the names isn't sufficient. Readers wouldn't be able to identify the people by name alone. Physical descriptions would go a long way. It's harder than it looks!
    • I have changed the alt text to the image, it now reads "Color photograph of four women standing upright, with the rightmost woman singing into a microphone. In the background children wearing santa hats back-up the woman's singing." I hope this is more appropriate? I think I need some help. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 09:10, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The album failed to achieve the commercial success of their first album, despite peaking at number 10 and receiving gold certification."-->Despite its peaking at number 10 and receiving gold certification, the album failed to achieve the commercial success of their first album
  • "concentrate on their respective solo careers." "respective" is redundant, I think.

Dabomb87 (talk) 17:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Oppose since the list is extremely short. I strongly suggest merging this with the band's article which is really short anyways. Nergaal (talk) 00:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • Thankyou for expressing your opinion. Alex Douglas (talk) 06:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have just called Sony BMG to try to find out if the Young Divas have made other appearances or released any other music, promotionally or otherwise for inclusion in the discography, as this will increase the size of the list, hopefully resolving your objection. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 07:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose fails the 3b criterion. This page is not long enough to be a stand-alone list.--Crzycheetah 23:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose
  • Having seen the dismissive way comments about the size are dealt with I must however still make a comment about the size of this, feel free to address it or not like before.. First of all 10 is a "guideline", it does not mean "ding! 10 it meets the requirement", it means generally "don't even think about it before there are 10 items in the list". This is very short, it's a list of lists really, lists with a maximum of 4 entries, a list of 4 lists.
  • Put the abbriviation ARIA after Australian Recording Industry Association, makes it clear what the table refers to.
  • The lists are so short they're not even sortable, makes you wonder.
  • I'm sorry but it's just really not long enough IMO to fullfill the criteria. MPJ-DK (talk) 14:06, 23 July 2009 (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/Young_Divas_discography/archive1&oldid=1146673403"